Psycho Social Issues in Criminal Behavior

Psychosocial Aspects of Criminal Behavior

Criminality is a multifaceted issue that is influenced by the presence or absence of several factors. The nature of these factors varies from biological and psychological factors, to social and environmental factors. As a multidimensional construct, criminality cannot be fully understood through the use of one perspective exclusively. As a complex issue, criminality requires attention to various perspectives in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the causes and prevalence of criminal behavior. The factors that influence criminal behavior can loosely be grouped into three categories, including biological, environmental, and psychological factors. Thorough investigation of these three types of factors may yield insight into the causes and issues involved in criminal behavior.

Historically, possible biological factors involved in criminal behavior received much attention. Hereditarian claims in the United States between 1900 and 1940 argued that violent and criminal behavior had a strong genetic or neurogenetic basis (Allen, 2001). For example, Hooton claimed that, as a class, criminals possess distinct anthropometric characteristics, which included smaller body size, ectomorphic (lanky, thin) body build, straight hair, mottled eye color, shorter and broader noses, flatter ears, and a lower and more sloping forehead. Hooton also claimed that categories of criminals can be distinguished by anthropometric features. For instance, he claimed that murderers and robbers tend to be tall and thin, whereas killers, forgerers and conmen tend to be tall and heavy. Burglars, on the other hand, were claimed to be small and thin, while rapists and other sex offenders are short and heavy. Furthermore, Hooton also claimed that American-born and nine different ethnic or racial stocks differ significantly from each other in physical characteristics and the types of crimes they commit. Hooton based his claims on inferior biology, in that the degree and type of inferiority disposed one to crimes, while the environment called them forth. Of course, these claims hold no merit under the scientific scrutiny used according to today's standards, and there is an understanding that such false claims based on physical and racial characteristics are dangerous in their possible implications. However, biology has been found to play a role in criminality to certain extents.

Lee & Coccaro (2001) investigated the neuropharmacological influences involved in criminality and aggression. These researchers suggested that impulsive aggression has a role in both criminal and non-criminal behavior, and that an impulsive crime is essentially not synonymous with a premeditated one. They also suggested that impulsive aggression probably has a significant genetic, heritable component, although a single gene for aggression has not been found. It is possible that future research may find a polymorphism or combination of genes that contribute to the expression of an impulsive-aggressive phenotype.

Lee & Coccaro (2001) also discussed the role of deficient serotonergic function in behavioural disinhibition and the expression of impulsive aggression. This role has been demonstrated through the reduced levels of CSF 5-HIAA that have been associated with violent criminality. Furthermore, the serotonergic system is also very responsive to environmental factors, particularly early disruptions in development and early exposure to abuse or trauma. Impulsive aggression may be an aspect of personality that is relatively stable over a period of years, heritable, and correlated with biological variables. Therefore, the role that serotonergic functioning plays in the presence of impulsive aggression can only be understood in the context of a complicated relationship between genetics, biological processes, psychological functioning, and environmental influences.

Moreover, the expression of impulsive aggression and violent behavior is more than likely a mix of genetic and environmental factors. Lemonick (2003) claimed that a disposition for criminal behavior is determined early in life, suggesting a strong correlation between a harsh childhood and criminality later on. This author suggested that criminal behavior may be linked to a defective gene that made too much of an enzyme called monoamine oxidase A. This results in excessive destruction of neurotransmitters that help keep people calm and happy. However, many violent criminals do not exhibit this gene, while many non-criminal individuals do. This is where environmental factors possibly come into play, influencing whether or not the violent effects of the gene will be exhibited.

Lemonick (2003) explained how scientists have discovered that neither genes alone nor childhood abuse alone could explain adult violent behavior. However, a study examining boys who had both genetic mutation and early abuse indicated that 85% of these boys had committed a violent act as an adult. Furthermore, genes may influence people's susceptibility or resistance to environmental factors that are harmful, such as abuse. Someone with a low genetic predisposition for criminal behavior may have to be pushed to extremes to become violent, while an individual with a high genetic predisposition for criminal behavior might commit violent acts more easily.

Wilson (2002) described a longitudinal study that took place in 1972 that examined the MAO A genotype in the participants and periodically assessed the subjects' history of abuse and criminal convictions, their disposition for violence, as well as any symptoms of anti-social personality disorder. The results of this study indicated that only 12% of children that experienced abuse had low MAO A levels, and these accounted for almost half of their generation's convictions for violent crime. The researcher indicated that the combination of abuse and the genetic variation magnified the odds of criminal behavior by nine times, and that low levels of MAO A did not predict anti-social outcomes. Conversely, the enzyme's relation to aggression only emerged when consideration was given to whether the children were abused.

Testosterone is often considered to be related to aggression, given its increased concentration in males vs. that in females. An article entitled "Testosterone's family ties" that appeared in Science News maintained that there is in fact no link between testosterone concentrations and either delinquent behavior or depression in children and adolescents of both sexes if their relationships with parents are close. Furthermore, this article explained how behavior and mood problems most often seen in children are due to poor parental relationships. In a study, boys with high testosterone levels that related well to their mothers engaged in far fewer delinquent acts that boys with low testosterone levels that did not get along well with their mothers. Like that seen with genetic factors, testosterone levels of children create behavioural predispositions that get modified by the quality of parent-child relationships. The article described a good parent-child relationship as one in which the parent knew about and approved of the child's activities, the parent took part in activities with the child, and the child reported they felt close to the parent.

However, this article did report an interesting sex difference that emerged four children with less than adequate relationships with parents. Among these children, boys of all ages with higher testosterone concentrations were more prone to delinquency, while among girls, delinquent behavior most often appeared in those with low concentrations of testosterone between the ages of 10 and 14. The reasons for these observed sex differences were reported to be unclear.

Neuroimaging studies of antisocial behavior have been conducted, that have attempted to determine physical and neuroanatomical aspects of criminal behavior (Bassarath, 2001). According to Bassarath (2001), structural studies have tended to indicate that functions of the temporal lobe are implicated in criminal behavior, especially with respect to sexual offenders. However, several studies have yielded negative findings, which renders these studies inconclusive. Functional studies have also implicated the role of the prefrontal cortex, specifically the medial and lateral areas in antisocial behavior. Prefrontal reductions in the brains of men with antisocial personality disorder have been demonstrated through studies that quantify gray matter deficits in the frontal lobe. Also, work using PET has demonstrated high right-sided subcortical activity in affective murderers, and other systems, including the amygdala, brainstem nuclei, basal ganglia, and association cortex are likely involved and awaiting further clarification.

Bassarath (2001) explains the limitations of the existing literature. First, as of yet, there are no published functional MRI studies that look at antisocial behavior. Second, There are not any studies, as of yet, which examine possible developmental precursors of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. Third, there are few biological studies that test interactions between biological vulnerability, psychological risks, and social factors. Fourth, the lack of specificity of phenotypic variants is a major hurdle that must be overcome in order to understand the underlying neurobiology of persons with antisocial behavior or violent tendencies. Fifth, and finally, translating neurobiological research into preventions, treatments, and policy may continue to pose challenges.

Another biological factor that may influence or cause criminal behavior is brain damage caused by viral infection (Tselis & Booss, 2003). Tselis and Boos (2003) explain how infections of the central nervous system can damage the brain and cause abnormal behavior, and that behavior is affected by damage to different parts of the brain. Examples of infections that may ultimately cause abnormal behavior include neurosyphilis, encephalitis, lethargica, herpes simplex encephalitis, and various other acute and chronic viral encephalitides. The researchers indicate that some cases of violence and other criminal behavior are the result of central nervous system infection, and that criminal sanctions in such circumstances are inappropriate in the absence of criminal intent.

There is also the possibility that blood zinc and copper concentrations may differ between criminals and non-criminals. Tokdemir et al. (2003) investigated the effects of zinc and copper on the behavior of schizophrenic patients by comparing blood zinc and copper levels in criminal and non-criminal schizophrenic patients. Results of this study indicated that mean plasma zinc values were significantly lower in criminal patients when compared to non-criminal patients, while mean serum copper levels were significantly higher in criminal patients that in non-criminal patients. Future research is required to examine why these differences occur, and to explore possible prevention and treatment strategies utilizing this knowledge.

Leon-Carrion and Javier (2003) maintained that blows to the head during development might be a predisposing factor to violent criminal behavior, and they explore the possible role that rehabilitation for consequences of head injury plays in crime prevention.

These researchers compared the school and head injury histories of violent and non-violent prisoners, and results indicated that the delinquent subjects in both groups demonstrated a history of academic difficulties. However, the violent group had a more pronounced history of sustained head injuries that were never treated. Furthermore, these researchers suggest that academic problems are not enough themselves to predict violent behavior, but difficulties at school along with discrete damage due to blows to the head may have some predictive power. Based on these results, the researchers concluded that the treatment of the cognitive, behavioural and emotional consequences of brain injury could be considered a possible measure for crime prevention.

The biological evidence thus far has indicated that there are potential neurological, structural, and genetic mechanisms implicated in criminal behavior. However, most of the evidence also indicates the influential role that environmental factors play in the expression of biological predispositions. Without certain environmental factors, many individuals exhibiting biological risk factors for criminal behavior may never commit crimes or display impulsive aggression. It is important to explore these environmental factors in order to better understand the processes underlying criminal behavior.

Raine et al. (2003) conducted a study to assess the effects of an early nutritional, educational, and physical exercise enrichment program on adult outcome for schizotypal personality, conduct disorder, and criminal behavior. In this study, 83 children were assigned to an experimental enrichment program from ages 3 to 5 years, and were matched on temperment, nutritional, cognitive, autonomic, and demographic variables with 355 children in a control group. Objective and self-reported measures of schizotypal personality and antisocial behavior were obtained from the subjects when they were 17 and 23 years of age. The results of this study indicated that the subjects who participated in the enrichment program at ages 3 to 5 years had lower scores for schizotypal personality and antisocial behavior at the age of 17 years and for criminal behavior at the age of 23 years, in comparison with the control group. In addition, the beneficial effects of the intervention were greater for children that showed signs of malnutrition at the age of 3 years, especially with respect for antisocial behavior at the age of 17 years. Based on these findings, Raine et al. (2003) concluded that enriched, stimulating environments are beneficial for the psychological and behavioural outcomes of children. Furthermore, these findings may have implications for the prevention of some psychological disorders and criminal behavior.

Parental absence during childhood has also been associated with criminality later in life. Maki et al. (2003) sought to investigate the relationship between very early separation and criminality. The data set that permitted this type of study included a cohort that consisted of 2906 subjects born between 1945 and 1965 in Finland who were temporarily isolated from their families immediately after birth and sent to nursing homes due to tuberculosis in the family. The results of this study indicated that criminal behavior was more prevalent among both male and female subjects that were separated at birth from their families because of tuberculosis in the family than among the control group. However, the differences between the study group and the control group were modest. The researchers concluded that the influence that early separation has on later criminality of children is somewhat limited.

Another possible environmental factor involved in criminality is exposure to stress, in that exposure to stressors is positively associated with criminal behavior (Eitle and Turner, 2003). Eitle and Turner (2003) conducted a study to assess the role that race and ethnicity play in the comprehension of the relationship between stress and crime. They also sought to investigate the effects that stress had on criminal behavior in a group of young adults prone to crime. The results of this study indicated that racial differences in criminal involvement are largely reducible to differences in exposure to stressors, with blacks typically being exposed to significantly more stressful events over their lifetimes than members of other racial or ethnic groups. Therefore, prevention of criminal behavior could be focused on efforts to minimize stressors experienced by minority ethnic groups.

As an environmental factor, marriage has also been proven to reduce criminality. A University of Florida study described in the Ascribe Health & Fitness News Service found that the contentment of a steady marriage is a powerful measure against a life of crime. The article describes how the most hardened ex-cons were far less likely to return to criminal behavior if they settled down into the routined life of a solid marriage. This study also discovered that common-law marriages or living with a partner did not have these same criminality-reducing effects. Conversely, cohabiting without marriage seemed to increase the likelihood that ex-cons would return to criminal behavior. These findings indicate possible avenues for the treatment of criminals and the prevention of further criminal behavior.

An environmental factor that may have power in predicting the likelihood of violent crime is alcohol intoxication. An article in DATA indicated that whenever violent crime occurs, chances are high that either the victim, the perpetrator, or both are intoxicated. This article describes how alcohol is a significant contributor to violent crimes and to crimes that involve public disorder. Also, while suspects are more likely to be intoxicated than victims, drunkenness increases the odds of victimization by up to six times. A study is described that observed 1236 police-citizen encounters, of which 34% involved alcohol. Furthermore, suspects were 4.3 times more likely to be intoxicated than victims.

In trying to pinpoint possible prevention measures for youth violence, Tolan (2001) acknowledged several factors that contribute to criminality among young people. Exceptionally high levels of mortality are linked to the access that youth have to guns. Also, there is evidence that youth violence occurs in different forms that necessitate different prevention measures. For instance, some youth violence is situational, some is best understood within its relationship context, some occurs due to predatory criminal activity, while some violent behavior is the result of serious psychopathology. Moreover, identifying prevention measures requires the evaluation of several possible cause for the criminal behavior.

Environmental factors that are evident in childhood may be predictive of criminal tendencies in adulthood. Huesmann et al. (2002) noted that early aggressive behavior is one of the best prectors of adult criminality, and they aimed to assess the degree to which family background variables, parental beliefs and behavior, as well as child intelligence predict child aggression and adult criminality. The results of this study indicated that aggressive children were less intelligent, less popular, rejected more by their parents, had parents who believed in the use of punishment, were less identified with their parents' self-image, and were less likely to express guilt. A adults, aggressive children with parents who were less well educated, experienced more marital disharmony, and who seldom attended church were most at risk of committing criminal behavior. Furthermore, after controlling for the effect of early aggression, most effects disappeared and the only effect that significantly added to the risk of arrest by age 30 was the presence of parents with a strong belief in punishment, while the only factor that then reduced the risk of arrest was parents that attended church often. Moreover, parental authoritarianism and child intelligence were found to reduce the risk of conviction after arrest.