Which Theories Explain Criminal Behaviour The Best?

Which Theories Explain Criminal Behaviour The Best?

When it comes to explaining criminal behaviors, the theories of criminology are broadly categorized into biological, psychological, and social factors. These broad categories examine how a person’s organic makeup, environment, and psychology influence them into a life of crime. However, it is essential to understand that human behavior is the sum of complex interactions of these factors, among others. Nonetheless, criminology draws the line between these factors, narrowing down to the four major theories that explain crime causation and factors that contribute to offender criminality. Thus, the four fundamental theories of crime include rational course, biological positivism, sociological positivism, and psychological positivism.

The first theory explaining criminal behavior is the choice theory, popularly referred to as the rational course. Developed in the 18^th century by the Italian philosopher and politician Cesare Becarria, the rational course considers crime as a classical school of thought. The philosopher cum politician argues that criminal behaviors are deviants and that the offender’s motivation to commit a crime is a purposeful decision. Rather than being led by social factors or factors beyond their control, Becarria argues that a criminal operating under this theory makes the deliberate effort to commit a crime whose impact and consequences they are well aware of, but still decide to go on with their action anyways. The intent of this type of crime is a personal gain in the form of ego-boosting incentives such as power or status and money. In this kind of a criminal act, the offender purports to commit the act after examining their options, consequences, and benefits. The offender then plans the action by consciously picking the location of the crime, the type of the crime they will commit, and their target, and execute the act with the comprehensive knowledge that it is wrong, but prefer to go ahead with their plans regardless.

In the rational course theory, crime is presented as a deliberate and thought of a plan. Crimes in this category could include corruption and laundering of money in parastatals and other institutions, as well as robbing financial institutions. Typically, these types of crimes take months in preparation and planning to ensure that everything goes to plan. Becarria posits that these crimes occur as a joint venture between more than one person, usually a gang in which each individual has their specific role on a material day to ensure everything goes to plan. The perpetrators act on their resolve with the full realization and knowledge that what they do is against the law. Therefore, this theory argues for the clear intent of crime and shows that the perpetrators acted intending to achieve the ends of their criminal motive, and are thus well aware of their crimes.

The second theory is the sociological positivism theory, which was popularized by Andre-Michael Guerry and Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet, statisticians in the 1800s. The statisticians examine the relationship between social influences and crime and posit that the social structures within an offender’s environment, such as peer groups, family, and socioeconomic status, directly influence a person’s involvement in a crime. By conforming to one’s surroundings, one becomes a product of his environment and social learning. In other words, a person’s background of crime, such as having friends who are prone to breaking the law, directly influences another person to follow through. This theory mostly applies to juvenile delinquency in which the youth and high schoolers engage in drugs and substance abuse, as well as lawlessness due to the peer influence from their friends. On the other hand, one’s background in terms of their affiliation to crime and gangs will most certainly influence them to join in the footsteps of the people they consider role models. Guerry and Quetelet use this theory to explain crime and gang activity prevalence majorly in communities that are prone to gang activities and study the cycle that influences the young people involved in crime. They argue that in most cases, young men and women do not have a choice other than to join in the bandwagon as they fight to fit in.

Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso developed the third theory of biological positivism, which bases its argument on anthropology. The theory studies the evolution of crime as a resultant effect of the psychological differences between criminals and non-criminals and argues that some people are born criminals naturally. By submitting that some individuals are born criminals, the criminologist posits that some people are predisposed to committing crimes based on their biological inferiority as compared to personal choice. These natural factors include hormonal imbalance, vitamin deficiencies, diet, and brain function that directly limit a person’s full cognitive development. Such an individual cannot control such factors as their impulses and act impulsively in their actions and reactions as it relates to lawlessness.

Lastly, the psychological positivism developed by Alexander Lacassagne, a French criminologist in the 1800s, posits that the causation of criminality is rooted in the offender’s personality disorders and mental illness. In this scenario, crime is portrayed as a result of the ability of the offender to make an informed choice due to their cognitive development. Such a person cannot make a conscious decision either due to their ability to process situations fully or to consider all the facets of a case involved. The French criminologist gives such examples as schizophrenia, which is a personality disorder characterized by the uncontrollable urge to steal. A person who has schizophrenia does not necessarily take things because they need them, but because they feel right and satisfied after the act. Therefore, crime, in this case, is a means to an end for gratification. Other causes of crime as a result of psychological positivism include bipolar disorder, psychopathic personality, and neuroticism, among other maladies. In law, an individual who commits a crime in any of these capacities does not show a motive or the intent to commit the crime, thus cannot be convicted using the same paradigms that govern the three criteria of a crime.

In conclusion, it is critical to understand the various theories that explain criminal behaviors more profoundly to be able to understand the nature of a crime committed and how they should be convicted. While in most cases, crime is presented as the deliberate and conscious decision to engage in unlawfulness; in other scenarios, the offender does not have full control of their actions. An offense can be a rational decision as much as it can be a psychological disorder or a biological defect. Therefore, it is essential to determine first the motive that pushes a person into committing an offense, and determine where or not they had the intention of doing the act. Drawing on these boundaries of criminology theories goes a long way in ensuring that offenders are rightfully tried and convicted, while at the same time given the psychological help they may need to recover from their disorders.