Understanding Crime and Deviance: Core Concepts

Criminal behavior and deviance are distinct yet interconnected concepts in criminology. Deviance refers to behavior that differs from society's established norms, while criminal behavior specifically violates legal codes. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for criminological study.

Definition: Deviance encompasses behaviors that violate social norms but may not necessarily break laws. These can include positive deviance $like heroic acts$, neutral deviance $unusual but harmless behaviors$, and negative deviance $harmful or disapproved actions$.

Society maintains order through both formal and informal sanctions. Informal sanctions are social responses like disapproval or ostracism, while formal sanctions involve official penalties through legal systems. These create a framework of social control that shapes behavior through rewards and punishments.

The legal definition of criminal behavior requires both actus reus $the criminal act$ and mens rea $criminal intent$. This differs from social definitions, which vary based on cultural context and public opinion. A notable example is the Lorena Bobbit case, which highlighted how mental state can affect criminal responsibility.

Example: Criminal and deviant behaviors can overlap or exist independently:

• Both criminal and deviant: Murder, burglary
• Criminal but not necessarily deviant: Digital piracy
• Deviant but not criminal: Public rudeness, social faux pas

Social Construction of Crime Across Cultures

The social construction of crime varies significantly across cultures and time periods, demonstrating how criminal behavior is defined differently based on social context. This variation is evident in laws regarding practices like polygamy, adultery, and drug use.

Highlight: Laws change over time due to:

• Shifting social attitudes
• New research and understanding
• Political changes
• Religious influences
• Public pressure following miscarriages of justice

Cultural differences in criminal law reflect deeper societal values and beliefs. For instance, cannabis legislation varies globally - from full legalization in Canada to strict prohibition in many Asian countries. These differences stem from varying cultural attitudes toward personal freedom, public health, and social order.

The application of criminal law also varies based on circumstances like age of criminal responsibility and moral panics. The Thompson and Venables case in the UK highlighted how age affects criminal treatment, while changing attitudes toward double jeopardy led to legal reforms through cases like Julie Hogg's murder.

Biological Theories of Criminal Behavior

Cesare Lombroso's pioneering work in criminal biology proposed that criminals could be identified by physical characteristics, suggesting a biological basis for criminal behavior. While his specific conclusions are now largely discredited, his work established important foundations for studying biological factors in criminality.

Vocabulary: Somatotypes - body type classifications:

• Ectomorph: Thin, lean build
• Mesomorph: Muscular, athletic build
• Endomorph: Rounded, higher body fat

William Sheldon's somatotype theory suggested correlations between body types and criminal tendency, with mesomorphs showing higher rates of delinquency. While this theory has limitations, it contributed to understanding potential physical correlates of criminal behavior.

Quote: "Scientific research has shown some correlation between physical characteristics and criminal behavior, though these relationships are complex and influenced by multiple factors including social and environmental conditions."

Neurological Perspectives on Criminal Behavior

Modern neuroscience has revealed important insights into brain structure and criminal behavior. Research using PET scans has identified specific brain differences between violent offenders and non-offenders.

Definition: Key brain regions associated with criminal behavior:

• Prefrontal cortex: Controls impulse regulation and risk assessment
• Parietal areas: Processes social information and verbal ability
• Amygdala: Manages emotional responses
• Corpus callosum: Coordinates communication between brain hemispheres

Studies by Raine et al. $1997$ demonstrated that individuals who committed violent crimes often showed reduced activity in crucial brain regions. These findings suggest that neurological factors may influence criminal behavior through effects on impulse control, emotional regulation, and decision-making abilities.

The implications of neurological research extend beyond simple cause-and-effect relationships, highlighting the complex interplay between biological predisposition and environmental factors in criminal behavior.

Genetic Theories of Criminality: Chromosomal and Twin Studies

Chromosomal abnormalities play a significant role in understanding criminal behavior, particularly the XYY syndrome in males. While XX chromosomes determine female characteristics and XY determines male characteristics, an extra Y chromosome has been linked to increased aggression and violent tendencies.

Definition: Concordance rate refers to the percentage similarity between pairs of twins exhibiting particular behavioral traits or disorders.

Twin studies provide compelling evidence for genetic influences on criminal behavior. Monozygotic $identical$ twins share 100% of their genes and the same environment, while dizygotic $non-identical$ twins share 50% of their genes and the same environment. Research shows higher concordance rates for criminal behavior between monozygotic twins compared to dizygotic twins, suggesting a genetic component.

Landmark studies support these findings. Christiansen's 1977 examination of 3,500 twin pairs in Denmark revealed that while concordance rates were present, environmental factors played a substantial role. Similarly, Lang's 1929 study of 30 twin pairs showed that among 13 monozygotic pairs, 10 pairs both exhibited criminal behavior, while among 17 dizygotic pairs, only 2 pairs showed matching criminal tendencies.

Highlight: While genetic factors influence criminal behavior, they are not deterministic. Environmental factors play a crucial role in shaping criminal tendencies.

Adoption Studies and Genetic Influences on Criminal Behavior

Adoption studies provide unique insights into the nature versus nurture debate in criminology. These studies compare behavioral similarities between adoptees and both their biological and adoptive parents to determine genetic influences on criminal behavior.

Example: Mednich's 1975 study of 14,427 adoptees found that children were more likely to have criminal records if their biological parents had criminal histories, regardless of their adoptive parents' background.

The research shows compelling patterns: when biological fathers had criminal records, adoptees showed higher rates of criminal behavior $21-36$ compared to those whose biological fathers had no criminal history $10-11$. This suggests a genetic component in criminal tendencies, though environmental factors remain significant.

These studies overcome limitations of twin studies by separating genetic and environmental influences. However, they face their own challenges, including limited access to biological family information and potential bias in adoption placement processes.

Individualistic Theories: Personality and Psychodynamic Approaches

Eysenck's theory of criminal personality identifies three key traits: Extraversion $sensation-seeking$, Neuroticism $emotional instability$, and Psychoticism $aggressive/antisocial tendencies$. High scores across all three traits indicate increased likelihood of criminal behavior.

Vocabulary: The psychodynamic approach emphasizes unconscious mental processes and childhood experiences in shaping criminal behavior.

Freud's psychodynamic theory suggests criminal behavior stems from an inadequate superego development, manifesting in three ways:

• Weak superego: Insufficient moral development due to absent same-sex parent
• Deviant superego: Criminal values internalized from deviant same-sex parent
• Harsh superego: Overly strict parenting leading to self-destructive behavior

Research supports aspects of both theories. Eysenck and Eysenck's 1977 study of 2,070 male prisoners showed higher scores on personality measures compared to controls, while psychodynamic theory explains deep-rooted motivations for criminal behavior.

Social Structure and Learning Theories in Criminology

Social learning theory, developed by Bandura, emphasizes how criminal behavior is learned through observation and imitation. The famous Bobo doll experiment demonstrated how rewards and punishments influence behavioral imitation.

Quote: "Crime is a logical response to inequality and economic deprivation" - Marxist criminological perspective

Marxist theory explains crime through social structure, arguing that capitalist society creates conditions for criminal behavior through:

• Economic inequality driving property crime
• Consumerism promoting materialistic values
• Selective law enforcement targeting working classes
• Media manipulation of crime statistics

Strain theory complements these perspectives by explaining how societal pressure to achieve success, combined with limited legitimate means, can lead to criminal behavior. Merton's five responses to strain $Conformity, Innovation, Ritualism, Retreatism, and Rebellion$ provide a framework for understanding different criminal adaptations.

Understanding Interactionism and Labeling Theory in Criminology

Interactionism theory examines how human interactions and social meanings shape criminal behavior. This foundational concept in WJEC Criminology Unit 3 revision explores how labels and social reactions influence deviant behavior patterns. The theory posits that criminal identity emerges through complex social processes rather than inherent individual traits.

Definition: Labeling theory states that no action is inherently deviant or criminal - it becomes so when powerful groups create and apply rules to others, effectively "labeling" certain acts as deviant.

The labeling process involves two key stages: primary and secondary deviance. Primary deviance refers to initial rule-breaking acts that haven't been publicly labeled. Secondary deviance occurs after labeling, when individuals internalize their criminal identity and act accordingly. This process demonstrates the social construction of crime, where society's reaction creates and reinforces criminal behavior.

The self-fulfilling prophecy plays a crucial role in criminal identity formation. When society labels someone as criminal, it often becomes their master status - overshadowing other roles like parent, worker, or student. This marginalization frequently pushes labeled individuals toward criminal subcultures where they find acceptance and validation, perpetuating the cycle of deviant behavior.

Example: A young person caught shoplifting $primary deviance$ might be labeled a "thief." This label can lead to social rejection, causing them to seek acceptance among other labeled individuals and potentially engage in more serious criminal activity $secondary deviance$.

Social Reactions and Deviancy Amplification in Criminal Behavior

The concept of deviancy amplification spiral is central to understanding how attempts to control crime can paradoxically increase it. This phenomenon, crucial for WJEC Criminology revision notes, shows how heightened social control measures can lead to escalating cycles of deviant behavior.

Highlight: Deviancy amplification occurs when increased efforts to control deviant behavior actually result in more deviance, creating an escalating spiral of crime and control measures.

The strengths of labeling theory provide valuable insights into crime statistics and social control. It reveals how official crime statistics may be biased, particularly regarding working-class individuals who might be more likely to be labeled as criminals. This understanding is essential for analyzing the social construction of crime law differences.

However, the theory has notable limitations. Critics argue it presents an overly deterministic view, suggesting that labeling inevitably leads to criminal behavior. It may also oversimplify the complex dynamics of criminal behavior by potentially reducing offenders to passive victims of societal labeling.

Vocabulary: Master status - the primary identifying characteristic of an individual that overshadows all other social roles and identities.