Causes of Crime: Theories, Criminal Law, and Society
This paper surveys the major theoretical categories used to explain criminal behavior, ranging from biological and psychobiological models to psychological, sociological, and social conflict frameworks. It examines how thinkers such as Gall, Sheldon, Freud, Durkheim, and Merton have conceptualized the origins of deviance and criminal conduct. The paper then turns to the theory and practice of criminal law, outlining its three principal functions — protection, punishment, and deterrence — and evaluating how effectively those functions address the underlying social causes of crime. It concludes by arguing that criminal law, while valuable, is structurally limited in its capacity to remedy the social inequities and disparate opportunities that drive criminal behavior.
- Introduction to Crime and Its Theoretical Background: Overview of major theoretical categories explaining criminal behavior
- Biological and Psychobiological Theories of Crime: Skull shape, somatotypes, and inherent biological determinants of crime
- Psychological and Sociological Explanations for Criminal Conduct: Freud, Durkheim, Merton, and social control theories of deviance
- Criminal Law: Theory and Practice: Cultural variation and principles underlying criminal law systems
- The Functions of Criminal Law: Protection, punishment, and deterrence as purposes of criminal law
- The Effectiveness and Limits of Penal Law: Poverty, inequality, and what criminal law cannot fix
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It organizes a broad theoretical landscape (biological, psychological, sociological) into a coherent progression, giving readers a clear map of how criminological thinking has evolved.
- It moves logically from theory to application — first explaining why crime occurs, then analyzing how law responds to it — creating a satisfying argumentative arc.
- The concluding critique is well-grounded: rather than simply describing criminal law, the paper honestly assesses its structural limitations in addressing social inequality and root causes of crime.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective comparative synthesis — drawing on multiple thinkers (Gall, Sheldon, Freud, Durkheim, Merton) without getting lost in any single theory. Each theorist is briefly contextualized, compared to adjacent frameworks, and then connected to the broader argument about what criminal law can and cannot accomplish. This technique allows an undergraduate writer to show breadth of reading while maintaining analytical focus.
Structure breakdown
The paper divides into two halves: the first surveys categories of criminological theory (biological, psychobiological, psychological, sociological, conflict-based), while the second shifts to criminal law — its ideal functions, practical applications, and societal limitations. The conclusion ties both halves together by arguing that criminal law addresses behavior after the fact but cannot substitute for the social reforms needed to reduce crime at its roots. Approximately six logical sections with clear transitional signposting throughout.
Introduction to Crime and Its Theoretical Background
Unwanted conduct by individuals, and societal attempts to control behavior that is dangerous to others or to society as a whole, obviously predates recorded history (Schmalleger, 2001). In the modern era, sociologists have suggested many general categories of explanations for the causes of unwanted behavior classified as crime, including: free will, biological, psychobiological, psychological, sociological, social psychological, social conflict, and phenomenological theories, as well as other emergent theories conceived much more recently (Schmalleger, 2001; Henslin, 2002; Macionis, 2002).
Biological and Psychobiological Theories of Crime
Biological theories of crime, such as phrenology, atavism, criminal families, and somatotypes, conceive of criminal behavior as largely predetermined within the individual by virtue of inherent personal characteristics that distinguish the brains and other fundamental biological structures of criminals from those of non-criminals. Franz Joseph Gall, for example, offered the theory that criminal behavior is predictable based on the shape of the human skull.
William Sheldon's similar theory of somatotypes suggested that human beings possess one of three types of dominant physical features: ectomorphic, mesomorphic, and endomorphic (Schmalleger, 2001). According to Sheldon, mesomorphs are more prone to violence and other forms of aggression that predisposed them to criminal behavior. In more recent times, the connection between somatotypes and crime has been rejected, though the concept was incorporated into theories addressing other aspects of human variation, such as athleticism and proneness to overweight and obesity (Gerrig & Zimbardo, 2005).
Psychological and psychobiological theories of crime conceive of criminal behavior as a function of myriad internal factors within the individual — some of which are inherent components of the person, while others reflect the interplay between inherent factors and external influences that affect both the manner and degree to which those inherent factors shape individual behavior (Schmalleger, 2001).
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
7-Day Pass
Does not renew
Get 7-Day PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.