Theoretical Explanations of

Criminal Behaviour
Unless otherwise stated, source used
in the creation and design for in class
lecture slides:

“Explanation of Offending” Findley, L.

(2011). Theories of Offending. Pg. 21-
35

Sammons, A. (unknown)
http://www.psychlotron.org.uk/newR
esources/criminological/A2_AQB_cri
m_EysenckTheory.pdf
Explanations of Offending
Theories of offending often revolve one of more of these over-
arching explanations of behavior:
o Moralism
o Positivism
o Biological determinism
o Psychology determinism
o Social determinism
Explanations of Offending
• Moralism
• evil, sin
• “the devil made them do it”
• Someone is possess

• Cure: trepanning = drilling a hole in the head to “release” the spirits

Explanations of Offending
• Positivism
• Free will/choice
• Behaviour (including criminal behavior) is a choice in the pursuit of pleasure
• We will do what makes us happy
• We avoid what causes pain

• Cure: Punishment (for crime)

• Remove the pleasure of crime = crimes decrease
• The more swift and severe the punishment = crimes decrease
Explanations of Offending
• Biological Determinism
• Born bad
• Inherited predispositions toward criminal behavior
• E.g.,

• Cure: no cure
Explanations of Offending
• Psychological Determinism
• childhood issues
• personality traits or temperament that supports criminality

• psychological deficit
Explanations of Offending
• Social Determinism
• Society made me do it
• criminal behavior is the result of social factors and forces rather than by moral,
environmental, psychological, or biological causes
• Bad neighbors = bad people
Over-Arching Theories to be explored
1. Physiological theories
2. Biological theories
3. Psychodynamic theories
4. Learning theories
5. Personality theories

Goal: explain criminal behaviour

 • “There is no one true theory that will rightly
explain crime & criminal behaviour; there is no
one theory that will render all others wrongly
conceived”
• Theories are not ‘truth’ - in reality, they are
describing reality

> Dr. Lyne Piche

Piche, L. (2015). Introductory Lecture 2015 PowerPoint presentation [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from www.drlynepiche.com/.../piche%202330%20Introductory%20Lecture%202015.ppt
Theories to be explored
1. Physiological theories Initially, biological theories gathered a negative
2. Biological theories reputation due to their misinterpretation of Darwin's
theory of natural selection.
3. Psychodynamic theories e.g., eugenics movements and forced sterilization

4. Learning theories Today, modern theorists are helping draw attention

back to these approaches.
5. Personality theories

Goal: explain criminal behaviour

Physiological Theories of
Offending
Can we identify a criminal by their appearance?
Physiological Theories
• These theories tend to adopt a biological determinism
explanation
• But can include additional explanations as well
• Focus: the physical form of the body as a marker of
criminality
Physiological Theories
• Prior to the 19th century, crime and criminals were only discussed in moral
and philosophical terms
• In 1876, Cesare Lombroso started the formal tradition of physiological
theories of criminality
• Lombroso is regarded by many as the “father of modern criminality” (Shafer,
1976)
Lombroso’s atavistic form theory
Cesare Lombrosso (1835-1909)
Lombroso believed criminality was heritable
• his idea dominated view of criminals until the early 20th century.

Three major types of criminals

1. Born criminals
– born bad – failed to evolve

1. Insane criminals
- Due to brain trauma surrounding birth, criminality was the result (not born bad)

2. Criminal of Passion
– commits crime or assault because of sudden impulse/rage, not
premeditated
Lombroso’s atavistic form theory
Cesare Lombrosso (1835-1909)
• Distinct biological class of people who are prone to
criminality
• Lower on the evolutionary scale

• Primitive brains
• These individuals were evolutionary “throwbacks” who had
features in line with our more primitive ancestors

• Developed the “born criminal” theory

• Criminals could be identified because they looked different
• exhibited “atavistic” (i.e., primitive) features
Atavistic Features
• Atavistic stigmata: Physical characteristic representing earlier or
pre-human stages of evolution, that were believed to distinguish
criminals from characteristics,
Proposed 18 physical others including:
1. Sloping forehead
2. Bumps on head – particularly the “destructiveness center” above left ear
3. Bushy eyebrows tending to meet across nose (uni-brow)
4. Twisted nose
5. Excessive cheekbones
6. Large chin and jaw
7. Excessive wrinkles on the skin
8. Long arms
9. Large, handle shaped ears
10. Large lips
11. Blood shot and shifty eyes
Lombroso’s atavistic form theory
How did he establish his list of features?
• Examined criminals and made correlations about
characteristics he found

Example Findings:
• Principle markers of criminality
1. Strong jaw
2. Heavy brow

• Different features associated with different

crimes
• Murders – bloodshot eyes, curly hair
• Sex offenders – thick protruding lips, protruding ears
Lombroso’s atavistic form theory
• Today, this theory is deeply flawed
• No control group
• No non-criminal controls used to establish is atavistic features were
confined to criminal population
• His sample likely contained large numbers of individuals with
psychological disorders and/or chromosomal abnormalities
• He did not distinguish pathology and criminality
• Crime is not a natural or homogenous category of behaviour,
it is a social construct, so what is “inherited”?
• Given our current understanding, crime – a complex
behaviour – is not controlled by single genes
• Correlation ≠ causation
However, he shifted his focus from moral to empirical and shaped the
modern focus of biological and social factors on criminal behaviour.
Sheldon’s Theory of Somatotypes
• Sheldon (1949)
• Advanced the idea of criminality linked to physical form
• Believed body build was linked to personality and temperament

• Sheldon distinguished three basic body types:

1. Ectomorph
2. Endomorph
Somatotype = human body
3. Mesomorph shape and physique. A means
to classify body types.

Source:
https://www.britannica.com/science/somatotype
Sheldon’s Theory of Somatotypes

Principle Claim:
Mesomorphs are
more prone to
criminal behaviour
than the other types

Thin and fragile Round and soft Muscular and hard

• Slim/linear • Relaxed and happy • Broad, square
• Solitary • Sociable • Energetic
• Restrained • Hedonistic • Adventurous
• Introverted • Self-indulgent,
• Aggressive
• Smart pleasure-seeking
Sheldon’s Theory of Somatotypes

• Sheldon suggested a Sheldon (1949)

relationship between how • Assessed somatotypes of college
“mesomorph” one is and their students and delinquents from
“degree of criminality” photographs
• Including measures of • Each photo given a mesomorphy rating
aggression, anti-social, and
uninhibited behaviour • 1 (low) – 7(high)

• Finding: Delinquents had higher

average mesomorphy ratings than
college students (4.6 vs. 3.8)
• Correlation data supported his claim
Sheldon’s Theory of Somatotypes

Hartl et al. (1982) follow-up to Sheldon (1949)

• Result: The most seriously delinquent of
Sheldon’s sample had a mean mesomorphy
rating of 5
• Finding further supported Sheldons claim

• Other studies have also shown a (small)

relationship between bodily build and criminality
(e.g., Putwain & Sammons, 2001)
Sheldon’s Theory of Somatotypes
• Despite some issues regarding Sheldon’s initial claim (and that correlation ≠
causation)…. what might explain this association?

• Blackburn (1993) explanations:

• Mesomorphs may have higher testosterone levels, which may result in higher levels of
aggressiveness
• Aggressiveness ≠ criminality
• People may react to mesomorphs in a way that may increase mesomorphs involvement and risk
of criminal behaviour
• Taunting, fearfulness, pre-emptive aggression
• Stereotypes may promote mesomorphs to be drawn into criminal activity by their peer groups
• Judicial system may treat mesomorphs more harshly, increasing likelihood of being labeled a
criminal
Physiological theories conclusions
• While there appears to be links between physical form can the risk
of criminality, it is clear there is no one (or collection)
physiological abnormality that causes people to commit crime.

• Given how complex crime and criminal behavior are this should
not be surprising
• Even if we narrowed our focus to one crime it is unlikely that a
single physiological factor would explain all examples
Theories to be explored
1. Physiological theories 
2. Biological theories
3. Psychodynamic theories
4. Learning theories
5. Personality theories

Goal: explain criminal behaviour