Criminal Behavior: Causes and Influences

The provided text presents a collection of research articles and book chapters focusing on various aspects of criminal behaviour. It delves into topics like official bias in intergenerational transmission of crime, risk-need-responsivity models for rehabilitation, cognitive and social simulation of criminal behavior, protective factors against youth crime, the role of mental health conditions (e.g., Asperger syndrome, psychosis) in violence, and the impact of addiction treatment on convictions. The text also touches upon theories like General Theory of Crime and Subculture of Violence. Overall, it offers a comprehensive overview of different perspectives and contributing factors to criminal behaviour.

Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................2
Theories of criminal behaviour..................................................................................................2
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................6
References..................................................................................................................................8
2 | P a g e

Introduction
The crime has been a part of civilised society since the dawn of civilization and there had
been justice systems to prevent crime from destroying the order and balance of the society.
However, the crime and criminal behaviour has not been given much importance until the last
century when the criminology became popular as not only a means to stop crime but analyse
the reasons behind each crime and criminal behaviour. The question that haunts most of the
criminologists is the “what makes a person commit crimes? Why are some more prone to
criminal behaviour than others?” there have been various approaches to define the cause of
criminal behaviour and the approaches are very different from one another so the theories are
as varied as they can be and do not give definitive answers to the questions asked (Walters,
2006). The study is often based on different real life events recorded by justice system so
there is credence to all of the approaches but nothing concrete has been proven to set one
approach towards criminal behaviour over the others.
The criminology is the most important factor in the society to prevent chaos from disrupting
the order and thus these approaches to define the reasons behind criminal behaviour acts as a
complement to the criminal justice system that is more of a reactive action where the
approaches that are supported by criminology are more pro active (Prins, 2015). The different
models that are used to define the causes of criminal behaviour are the psychological model
the sociological model and the biological model. All three of these models have their
followers but there is vast scope of argument both in favour and against the models.
Therefore, in this essay the criminological aspect of the reasons behind a crime are analysed
and their validity is given by examples of contemporary situations.
Theories of criminal behaviour
The theories of criminal behaviour are vast and over the last century, the different
criminologists have cited many. However, there is many similarities and dissimilarities
between the models of criminal behaviour and many have been discarded in favour of more
logical and modern concepts that can be supported by the research done on the general and
criminal population. The most popular theories are taken in this case which are the
psychological, sociological and biological aspect of the criminal behaviour is given more
credence over the other factors that criminal behaviour depends on. The major factors of
3 | P a g e

crimes can be classified in two major types namely environment as well as genetics. Besides
this financial crisis is also one of the major reasons behind criminal activities. Mental illness
also leads to criminal behaviour (Gottfredson, et al, 2010). Social factors also directly affect
the mental conditions of the individuals. Genetic factors also a major cause of concern for
criminal sociology. Mental disorder as well as aggressive behaviours is also one of the major
reasons of the criminal psychology (Gottfredson, et al, 2010). So, the major reasons of
criminal behaviours are classified in three major categories like biological factors,
psychological factors as well as sociological factors. Mental health and criminal psychology
has direct affect on each other (Tierney and O’Neill, 2013). In many cases, it has also
observed that the mentally sick people are also included in the criminal actions. To reduce the
risks of criminal psychology, proper counselling is needed.
Psychological theories support the notion that some people feel the need to commit some acts
that are criminal because of their psychological needs to commit these crimes and the needs
are defined as the individual’s personal needs for self-satisfaction in the psychological
theories. The psychological theories are based on the analysis of an individual and their
internal motivators for the crimes they commit and the need to commit crime is judged an
intrinsic personality trait of the individual (Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Personality is deemed
to be the most important motivator for crime that comes from within the person where the
need to commit some act that is criminal in the eyes of society. The supporters of these
theories are based on the factor that the crimes are defined by the contemporary social
consensus so the needs that some people felt are considered criminal in the society because
most people do not feel those needs. The criminal behaviour in this theory is regarded as the
other intrinsic needs of the person like need to be outside and need to eat some favourite
food. This theory makes sure that certain individuals feel certain needs and some of those
needs if fulfilled are deemed as criminal acts. These needs are not different from other needs
in any aspect other than the fact that most of the people in the society do not have those
needs. The factor of ignoring the urge that is felt is also considered in the theory also as the
criminal behaviour is not deemed to be judged by the intention of the person but the
committing those acts knowing the censure of the society they will face (Douglas, Guy &
Hart, 2009). This is not related only to violent crimes or the crimes that are caught and
punished. This focuses solely on the intention of the person in question and not the act itself.
The crimes in this theory is not only described as normal psychological patterns but the
4 | P a g e

different ,abnormal, dysfunctional and inappropriate mental processes that are not suited to
the standard of contemporary society. Therefore, the other external factors that might
promote criminal behaviour are ignored in this theory. This can be considered as one of the
most glaring weaknesses in the theory as it ignores the importance of the external factors that
might prompt a person to meet the needs of his or her psyche however absurd they might be
compared to standard of the society (Flynn, 2010). The different factors that have been
considered in the theory are al internal like the diseased mind that is judged to be one of the
most important causes of criminal behaviour. The inappropriate learning and conditioning ,
the presence of improper role models in developmental years and of course the inner conflicts
or lack thereof are considered as the cause of the inappropriate needs that care the main cause
of criminal behaviour according to the psychological theory.
The criminals with these abnormal psychological needs are defined in the current literature as
antisocial personality disorder that was previously defined as psychopath or sociopath. This
type of criminal behaviour is expressed in the behaviour of an individual early in life and the
current criminal justice system focuses on this theory in the criminal justice system to some
degree (Hollin, 2006). The behavioural pattern of an individual is forced to change based on
the factor that the if the pleasure felt by fulfilling a need is not greater than pain or discomfort
of getting punished then the person will be less likely to act on those needs of his dysfunction
or abnormal mind (Dein & Woodbury-Smith, 2010).
The sociological approach to the criminal behaviour is very different as it does not consider
the inner needs of the individual as the main motivator for crime but the outside factors that
form his perception are deemed as the main cause of criminal behaviour. The social structure
and the morality of the society, familial sense of normalcy and peer group preferences often
force a person into criminal activities as they perceive them as normal activity and thus he
tries to conform to the standards of the society where he is developed (Bosse, Gerritsen &
Treur, 2007). Therefore, the environment is considered as a most important external element
that acts as a motivator for crimes. The contradictions of these interrelated groups are often
balanced by one another even if they are of opposing standards. However, if the balance is
not equal then a person is forced to change his own behaviour to conform to the standards the
society has pinked for him without even trying to resist as they think it is the normal reaction
for them. These factors not only normalises the crime and criminal behaviour but also often
endorses it by promoting the criminal behaviour by making it a thing to brag about and not be
remorseful for (Burton & Marshall, 2005). The historical development of the society and the
5 | P a g e

social structures are often thought to be the cause of these sociological standards that promote
criminal behaviour (Bender & Lösel, 2011). An example can be given as in old and middle
ages in Europe the gypsies were considered thieves and brigands and they often conformed to
the description because the distrust aimed at them and the refusal to trade with them farmers
by believing they will be cheated. A more modern example is the African American society
in USA which were considered criminals and often rejected from any and all modes of
income because of the social structure so many of them had to resort to a life of crime
(Burton & Marshall, 2005). These are only a few of the social examples that are evident all
throughout the society in different ages and nations as the people from particular social strata
were expected to be criminals. Thus were forced to the act even if they did not derive any
pleasure from the act or did not any other need than the normal need to provide for
themselves and their family. Therefore, the psychological need to commit crime was rejected
by this school of thought. The criminal justice system is not supported by this theory as they
think that the approach to promote the behavioural patterns toward certain sections of society
can be better dealt with empowerment and social inclusion. According to them the
sociological belief and conformity can easily be dispelled with social empowerment as these
people do not derive any pleasure from the crimes and they will embrace a different way if
they are shown direction. Criminality is not seen as an individual trait in this theory as the
social factors are blamed for criminal behaviour rather than the personality of an individual.
The social dynamics of the group is deemed the cause of criminality and the social causes
that promote the situation that forces specific social groups into crime are seen as the
motivators. Therefore, this theory of criminal behaviour focuses on the external motivators of
crime rather than the internal ones and thus is opposite to the psychological theory of
criminal behaviour.
In the biological approach to define criminal behaviour, the need to commit criminal acts is
correlated with the biological make up of a person. The genetics and hereditary traits are
related to the criminal behaviour along with neurological dysfunction (Besemer & Farrington,
2012). Among the other factors the injury, unusual development, childhood experience of
trauma caused by all of the above factors are also considered as the motivator for criminal
behaviour. This theory does not carry much value in the modern criminology but was very
popular in the period between eh 1930s and the 1970s. The theorists of this approach also
encouraged stricter penalties for the criminals as they believed that they could not be
reformed by any means other than medical treatment. Therefore, they spoke in favour of
6 | P a g e

compulsory psychosurgery and/or chemical treatment to ensure the brain and neurological
functions of the person returned to normal before they could be released in the society. There
are almost 40000 instances of frontal lobotomy to treat various neurological disorders
including controlling criminal behaviour. The use of lobotomy to treat defiant children or
moody ones are characterised by the inhuman methods used to separate the nerves of
prefrontal lobe from the rest of the brain that was inhumane at its worst and a futile approach
at its best. It can be stated that the behaviour of the person undergone a lobotomy often
changes drastically but the change was often at the cost of loss of intellectual capability
(Gossop et al., 2005). The risk s and unwanted outcomes made them fall out of favour of
modern approach of criminology but the use of chemical medication to address the
imbalances in brain are still used for various reasons. Some still view it is a risky endeavour
but the lack of permanent disability makes them acceptable for most cases.
Most of the preconceived notions of this concept of criminal behaviour has been dispelled by
modern science which can be explained by the dispelling of the notion that the infamous
genetic type XYY was through to be market for criminal behaviour and especially violent
crimes. However, modern brain scan shows that the people with this genetic marker are far
from criminal and the only effect the genetic marker has is the reduction of intellectual
capabilities and higher chance of learning disabilities (Mouridsen et al.,2007). Therefore, the
modern medication and criminology dispelled most of the concepts ways of controlling
criminal behaviour and there has not been any definitive proof to ensure that eh genetics and
neurological structure has any connection to criminal behaviour what so ever (Benton, 2007).
Conclusion
This essay paper is based on the criminal psychology. The major factors of criminal
psychology are sub divided in three major sub parts named as psychology factors, biological
factors and sociological factors. Crimes lead to destroy the balance of the society and proper
justice should be necessary for reducing the risks of imbalance in the society (Tierney and
O’Neill, 2013). In this context, criminology is the most vital aspect. Criminology describes
criminal behaviours. The major idea of criminology is to identify the major reasons of crimes.
Criminology also considered the mental conditions of the criminal. In some cases, the
mentally ill people commit crime in cases (Wolfgang, et al, 2012). The related theories
related to criminal physiology leads to identify the major reasons of the criminal actions. In
this situation, analysis of the criminal behaviour theories is also most vital and it helps to
7 | P a g e

identify the various aspects of criminal behaviours. As the crime leads to destroy the stable
conditions of the society, so taking proper actions for eliminating the crimes is also most
essential (Williams III and McShane, 2010). Criminology is vital in this aspect as it helps to
understand the major reasons of the crimes. Besides these, it also helps to understand the
mental conditions of the criminals. This essay paper effectively illustrates the three models of
criminology those include biological model, sociological model and sociological models
(Williams III and McShane, 2010). These effective models of criminology will helps to get
effective idea about the mental conditions of the criminals (Wolfgang, et al, 2012). Social
factors are also the major factors behind criminal psychology. Besides these, analysis of the
major factors of criminology also helps to understand the various aspects of behaviours of the
criminals.
8 | P a g e

References
Bender, D., & Lösel, F. (2011). Bullying at school as a predictor of delinquency, violence and
other anti‐social behaviour in adulthood. Criminal behaviour and mental health, 21(2), 99-
106.
Benton, D. (2007). The impact of diet on anti-social, violent and criminal behaviour.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 31(5), 752-774.
Besemer, S., & Farrington, D. P. (2012). Intergenerational transmission of criminal
behaviour: Conviction trajectories of fathers and their children. European Journal of
Criminology, 9(2), 120-141.
Besemer, S., Farrington, D. P., & Bijleveld, C. C. (2013). Official bias in intergenerational
transmission of criminal behaviour. British Journal of Criminology, azt006.
Bonta, J., & Andrews, D. A. (2007). Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment
and rehabilitation. Rehabilitation, 6, 1-22.
Bosse, T., Gerritsen, C., & Treur, J. (2007, May). Cognitive and social simulation of criminal
behaviour: the intermittent explosive disorder case. In Proceedings of the 6th international
joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems (p. 58). ACM.
Burton, J. M., & Marshall, L. A. (2005). Protective factors for youth considered at risk of
criminal behaviour: does participation in extracurricular activities help?. Criminal Behaviour
and Mental Health, 15(1), 46-64.
Dein, K., & Woodbury-Smith, M. (2010). Asperger syndrome and criminal behaviour.
Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 16(1), 37-43.
Douglas, K. S., Guy, L. S., & Hart, S. D. (2009). Psychosis as a risk factor for violence to
others: a meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 135(5), 679.
Flynn, N. (2010). Criminal behaviour in context. Willan Publishing.
Gossop, M., Trakada, K., Stewart, D., & Witton, J. (2005). Reductions in criminal
convictions after addiction treatment: 5-year follow-up. Drug and alcohol dependence, 79(3),
295-302.
9 | P a g e

Gottfredson, M.R. and Hirschi, T., 2010. A general theory of crime. Stanford University
Press.
Hollin, C. (2006). Criminal behaviour: A psychological approach to explanation and
prevention. Taylor & Francis.
Mouridsen, S. E., Rich, B., Isager, T., & Nedergaard, N. J. (2007). Pervasive developmental
disorders and criminal behaviour: A case control study. International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology.
Prins, H. (2015). Offenders, Deviants Or Patients?: An Introduction to Clinical Criminology.
Routledge.
Renda, J., Vassallo, S., & Edwards, B. (2011). Bullying in early adolescence and its
association with anti‐social behaviour, criminality and violence 6 and 10 years later. Criminal
Behaviour and Mental Health, 21(2), 117-127.
Tierney, J. and O’Neill, M., 2013. Criminology: theory and context. Routledge.
Walters, G. D. (2006). Appraising, researching and conceptualizing criminal thinking: A
personal view. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 16(2), 87-99.
Williams III, F.P. and McShane, M.D., 2010. Criminology theory: Selected classic readings.
Routledge.
Wolfgang, M.E., Ferracuti, F. and Mannheim, H., 2012. The subculture of violence: Towards
an integrated theory in criminology (Vol. 16). London: Tavistock Publications.
10 | P a g e