Cesare Lombroso was one of the most renowned scientific biology and criminology theorists. He invented the term atavism, suggesting that illegal activity results from primitive desires that have survived evolution. Lombroso analyzed people’s appearance, highlighting the key elements for each type of crime. According to him, certain physical traits can be used to predict potential criminals. The developed theories formed the basis of the Italian school of criminology, or criminal anthropology, which studies the interaction between anthropometrics and criminal activity.
Such figures as Enrico Ferri, Raffael Garofalo, and even Charles Darwin were also involved in developing these theories. Since Lombroso was the first criminologist to take a scientific approach to studying criminals, he is considered by many to be the ancestor of modern criminology. His theory and concept of atavism were revised many times, while Lombroso re-evaluated the impact of anthropological and environmental traits. In his theories, he also studied female criminals, linking them primarily to prostitution. Lombroso’s teachings were further explored in the writings of the English physician Charles Buckman Goring and the professor of anthropology Earnest A. Hooton. They both examined thousands of inmates, concluding that the environment has a much more significant effect than physical traits on the spread of criminality. Thus, at the moment, the concept of anthropological criminology is considered a dead end. However, according to Canadian researchers, the study of minor traits in children associated with genetic problems or exposure to toxins may help analyze the risk of violent activity.
Criminological theories have evolved over the centuries, observing patterns of crime around the world. In particular, comparative criminology was formed, the main purpose of which is to consider and study the similarities and differences in crimes of different countries and cultures. The characteristics of crime in different countries are influenced by many factors, including traditions, legislation, and history. Different theories provide different approaches to the study of similarities and differences, and they all have advantages and disadvantages. This fact makes it necessary to study and compare the situation in the world from different points of view. Moreover, different perspectives are suitable for various environments and criminological circumstances. While criminology considers the causes of crime from psychological, social, political, economic aspects, the theories presented also emphasize different aspects. Thus, comparative criminology uses criminological theories to describe the similarities and differences in crimes in different countries of the world, depending on their characteristic features.
Comparative Criminology
Comparative criminology seeks to understand the reasons and patterns of crime across different countries and cultures. Major criminological theories are able to explain the similarities and differences in crimes around the world as they examine the causes of their occurrence through social aspects. Different states have various legislation, which depends on the criminological problems existing in society. The reasons for committing crimes and manifestations of deviant behavior are described by criminological theories and can also be applied to study the social structure of society. While the use of statistics makes it difficult to describe the similarities and differences in crime across countries due to various factors, criminological theories operate with more general patterns. This fact makes a comparative theoretical approach to criminology possible and useful.
Strain Theories
First of all, human behavior in various cultures can manifest itself both in accordance with social norms and in violation of them. In particular, the various cultural values of a society and its goals may not coincide with the means of achieving them available to society. This factor is a subject for consideration by strain theories. Conformity, thus, occurs when “there is little strain exists between goals and the means to achieve those goals (“Strain theories final,” 2021). Agnew (1999) notes that “communities may affect crime rates by influencing the goals theta residents pursue and the ability of residents to achieve this goal through legitimate channels” (p. 61). Such goals can be an economic success, a certain social status, as well as the achievement of equal and fair treatment. In relation to the causes, as well as the differences and similarities in crimes around the world, this theory can be used to explain how the social strain characteristic of different cultures affects the situation.
In particular, countries set different social goals for people but do not provide them with the means to achieve them. Since social strain can meet different responses in the form of conformism, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, or rebellion, various goals and means become social norms (Merton, 1938). Agnew (1999) also emphasizes that communities are characterized by different levels of strain, which affects the crime rate and the formation of the response to strain. Thus, the data applying these theories can be used to study the presence or level of strain that is present in different communities or cultures and its causes, which explains the differences or similarities in crimes. Thus, it can be assumed that countries with similar strain levels have the same crime rates. However, the reasons for the social strain can vary, which requires a deeper statistical analysis.
Conflict Theories
Social structure theories focus on consideration of the reasons for the crime in relation to social disorganization and deviation. Examining the similarities and differences in crimes is possible through the study of communities, in particular in terms of racial composition and politics of different countries. For example, “Section two: Theories of crime causation” gives an example of the assumption by the sociologist Wilson that the poverty and deteriorating situation of African American communities at the end of the 20th century is the result of underdeveloped policies which offer benefits to these populations and growing racism (pp. 220-221). This claim may also be associated with social conflict theory, as Wilson also emphasizes that African Americans view Whites as antagonists (“Section two: Theories of crime causation,” p. 221). The conflict, in this case, arises as a result of disagreement with the fact that the privileged class, in particular on the basis of race, determines the norm. In this way, conflict criminology describes ” how the control of the political and economic system affects the administration of criminal justice” (“Social conflict theory,” p. 290). In particular, the theory will explain how members of the less privileged classes receive more severe punishment for lesser crimes.
Critical Race Theory
Racism and social structure can thus also be used as a theoretical framework to explain the differences and similarities in crime around the world. Hayle. Wortley & Tanner (2016) indicate in their study that “race attracts police attention” (p. 342). Conflict theory and critical race theory, in this case, explains that in comparison with Whites, Blacks are more often perceived as prone to crime, which causes increased attention of the police. Moreover, racial profiling is an increasingly acute problem in North America and Europe (Hayle et al., 2016). Racial profiling is based on stereotypes biases of police officers rather than reasonable grounds (“Critical theories”). The manifestation of racism in the Western can be considered a legacy of colonial history. The criminal justice system of Canada, in particular, developed during the colonial era and inherited features characteristic of that period. In this connection, we can also identify the emergence of denial of racial communities belonging to the White society and the formation of their own culture (“Chapter 2: Concepts”). Racism can also take on institutional and structural forms, while states are not even aware of it.
Conflict theories and critical race theory, in this case, can explain why in certain countries there is a different level of crimes committed by representatives of racial or ethnic minorities. However, this task is complicated by the absence and often impossibility of collecting reliable statistics due to racial profiling and institutional racism. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police announced an initiative to record statistics on the participation of indigenous peoples in Canada’s criminal justice system (“Collection of data on Indigenous and ethno-cultural groups,” 2020). Thus, statistics may not always indicate a low level of social conflict and related crimes in the country due to the developed institutional and structural racism. Nevertheless, conflict theory best illustrates the similarities which exist in various countries where such a phenomenon is present. Most Western countries that have adapted the features of the colonial past are currently working to include racial and ethnic minorities in the criminal justice system. However, this activity is often associated with social conflict based on the alienation of communities from major societies, which can affect crime rates.
Control Theories and Rational Choice Theory
Social control theories explain how relationships between people within society and the community prevent the manifestation of antisocial behavior. According to the theory of social bond, “deviant and criminal acts result when a person’s bond to society is weak or broken” (“Control theory”). So, attachments, values, and beliefs of a person make him or her not commit a crime. Another theory that illustrates control by the criminal justice system is the theory of deterrence. According to this theory, the expectation of punishment, which can take various forms, affects the prevention of the commission of a crime (“Chapter 4: Classical theories of Deviance”). Thus, the criminal justice system can directly influence criminal actions through legislation and the punitive system.
As well as the theory of social bond, this assumption describes what limiting factors exist in society and the state to prevent antisocial behavior. Thus, criminological theories can explain differences or similarities in crimes through the description of the punitive system of different countries and the social relations characteristic of cultures. For example, countries with stricter penalties can reduce the level of certain crimes due to the fear of the punitive system in society. Cultures in which social relationships are less valued, and there is alienation between people are more likely to experience increased crime rates.
However, these factors can be neglected by the aspects that rational choice theory describes. According to this theory, a person commits a crime if he sees a certain benefit in him that outweighs the fear of punishment or social censure (“Chapter 4: Classic theories of deviance”). This circumstance can also be associated with social or psychological conditions, as well as situational opportunities. Despite the fact that a person can commit crimes under the influence of a significant group, rational choice is more often characteristic of economic crimes for the purpose of material gain. Thus, comparative criminology can also explain differences or similarities by considering the conditions and reasons for which the crime was committed. In particular, rational choice theory examines which conditions specific to a particular country or culture most affect the assessment of the consequences of a crime by a person.
Mental Illness and Crime
Crime in all countries of the world is also associated with punishment, most often with imprisonment. Criminological theories can help explain the differences and similarities in crime in terms of mental health. “Chapter 3: Mental Illness” notes that “mentally ill people are not only likely to be involved in some type of public alteration or minor offense, but also a higher risk of victimization than most other people” (p. 98). Insufficient attention and support from the community often result in mentally unhealthy people going to jail. Nevertheless, more and more researchers note the fact that isolation often becomes the main method of punishment in correctional institutions, which worsens the condition of mentally ill prisoners (“Critical policy analysis“). Criminological theories, in this case, also pay attention to such factors as the psychology of people to explain the causes of crimes. In this respect, differences or similarities in crimes in countries can be described by the level of attention to mental diseases, their stigmatization, as well as the system of punishments adopted in the country.
Queer Criminology
For comparative criminology, it is also important how widespread the desire for a hetero-normative society is in a particular society or culture. Bill C-6 specifically mandates banning activities that force people to undergo conversion therapy (“Bill C-6,” 2020). This event suggests that in Canada, there was a certain stereotypical attitude towards representatives of the LGBTQ + community as deviant members of society. This assumption can also be a source of social conflict and lead to an increase in the number of crimes. As in the case of mental illness, representatives of sexual minorities can experience pressure from society, which can result in both crimes and victimization. In this situation, comparative criminology and queer criminology can describe the differences in similar crimes in the world. For example, in countries in which the culture is more traditional and religious, representatives of sexual minorities may more often become participants in criminal episodes.
Conclusion
While there are other criminological theories explaining the causes of crime, including social learning theories and interactionist theories, the theories described most clearly characterize the topic under study. In particular, comparative criminology focuses on the study of various factors, including the legislation of a particular country, to identify the features of the criminological environment. Social conflict and social strain are the most important aspects, as they have a wide impact on modern developed regions. Criminological theories also describe in different ways the factors that restrict or motivate people to commit a crime. Moreover, they also touch upon aspects of discrimination, which is most relevant in modern conditions. Comparative criminology applies different criminological theories to describe the criminological characteristics of countries. These observations can later be compared to identify factors that are characteristic of a particular state or culture.
References
Agnew, R. (1999). A general strain theory of community differences in crime rates. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(2).
Hayle, S., Wortley, S., & Tanner, J. (2016). Race, street life, and policing: Implications for racial profiling. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 58(3), 322-353.
Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3.
Social conflict theory (Chapter 9).
Strain theories final (Winter 2021) [PowerPoint slides].
There are various methods of inquiry. These methods can be grouped into either scientific or non scientific methods. The preferred method of inquiry in criminal investigation is the scientific method. In this method, an investigator develops a hypothesis and then investigates the viability of the hypothesis, which is a similar procedure as used in science. In addition to the scientific method of inquiry, non-scientific methods are also used.
The non scientific methods relate to authority, tenacity and intuition. Authority method of inquiry is where an investigator takes the words of a person in authority as true and relies on them for investigation (Wood, 1995). In criminal investigation, authority method of inquiry can apply where an investigator is influenced by individuals in authority in his or her investigation. For example, claims from senior police officers may influence the direction of an investigation.
Tenacity is the other method of inquiry. In this method, an investigator relies on prior knowledge without questioning whether the information is true or not. In criminal investigation, tenacity can lead to bias in investigation. For example, when investigating a crime such as drug trafficking, prior knowledge of the common trend in drug trafficking may mislead the investigation.
Intuition is the other common method of inquiry. In this method, an investigator uses inner feeling to direct the investigation. In criminal investigation, some investigators claim to use inner feeling to direct their investigation but the method is not reliable.
To be successful, an investigator should have the right mindset. This means that he or she should not have a fixed mind while carrying out an investigation but should be open to all possibilities (Ray, 1998). Despite being open to all eventualities, an investigator should be guided by the obvious and then move to the details.
It is expected that a good investigator should have a checklist, which he or she uses as a guide in an investigation. The mindset in investigation usually is derived from experience, training, observation and studies carried out on a subject. The mindset provides an investigator with a framework which he or she uses to carry out investigations.
Experience is vital in criminal investigation. Experience exposes an investigator to many possibilities and therefore helps make an appropriate decision at the right time. Therefore, being open to all possibilities is equivalent to having an investigative mindset. The following scenario illustrates the importance of being open to all possibilities: A man crosses the border regularly on bicycle.
An investigator initially suspects the man to be a drug trafficker but on checking, nothing suspicious is found on the man. Later, the man is found to be smuggling the bicycle he was ridding (Ray, 1998, p.4). The scenario shows the importance of considering many possibilities rather than having a fixed mindset.
The scientific technique is the most reliable method of inquiry. It is also possibly the most common method. Scientific method is a logical method of carrying out an investigation. Unlike non scientific methods, the scientific method follows a specific procedure in finding an answer to a given problem (Hunter & Dantzker, 2006). The scientific method assumes a healthy skepticism, which enables the investigator to approach a problem with an open mind.
The main objective of scientific methods is to overcome any bias and therefore arrive at a conclusion in an objective manner. The first step in the scientific method is observation. After observations are made, the investigator develops a hypothesis, which he or she tries to test through the process of investigation (Becker, 2008).
The investigator then identifies all the variables to the problem under investigation. Guided by the set hypothesis, the investigator evaluates the variables in order to support or reject the hypothesis. The results of a scientific study are obtained in an objective manner and are therefore justifiable.
In a criminal investigation, the hypothesis defines the investigative problem in a precise manner. The investigator then goes ahead to conduct the test, gather the necessary information, and make predictions. The investigator then uses inductive reasoning to make conclusion based on gathered data.
The objective of a criminal investigation is to gather information to determine whether crime has been committed in order to bring the individuals involved to book. A successful investigation should provide prove beyond doubt as to who was involved in a crime in order to allow justice to take its own course.
In conducting investigations, investigators rely on various sources of information. The three main source of information include the people involved, physical evidence and records. The people involved in a crime include the victim, the suspect and witnesses (Palmiotto, 2004, p. 2).
The victim and witness provide first-hand information related to the crime and therefore guide the investigation. A witness refers to any person who has first-hand information on the circumstances under which the crime is committed. Witnesses help investigators to verify information provided by the victim or the suspect. On the other hand, physical evidence plays a significant role in criminal investigation.
Do they not only provide evidence, which is important in a court of law but they also provide insights to the investigator. The records retained by criminal justice systems are the other important source of information. The past criminal records and fingerprint records of the suspect among other records play a significant role in criminal investigation.
Reference List
Becker, R. (2008). Criminal Investigation, New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning
Hunter, R., & Dantzker, M. (2006). Research Methods for Criminology and Criminal Justice: a primer, New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Palmiotto, M. (2004). Criminal Investigation, Washington DC: University of America.
Ray, D. (1998). Information-gathering Strategies: The Investigative Mindset, Web.
Wood, A. (1995). Methods on Criminology inquiry, Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, 23(2), 78-86.
Social Bonding Theory Explanation and Its Four Key Elements
The theory of social bond was first developed in 1969. The author of this theory, Travis Hirschi, dwelled on the different approaches to social problems and tried to explain them in the most extensive way possible (Hirschi, 2011). It is interesting that a bit later this theory was expanded and the theory of social control appeared. In order to correctly apply Hirschi’s theory, one should clearly realize the idea on which this theory is based.
The major concept developed by the social bonding theory claims that there are several important elements that should be taken into consideration when assessing criminal behaviors inherent in an individual (Hirschi, 2011). On a bigger scale, the theory of social bonding appeared as an attempt to extend the general theory of crime. Nonetheless, there is a critical difference between the two reflected by Hirschi’s peer-centered approach. The four major elements of the theory include the notions of commitment, attachment, the belief of importance, and involvement in various activities (Hirschi, 2011).
The first and the foremost element is the attachment. According to the idea of the social bonding theory, the society that surrounds us has a momentous impact on our personality and may restrain an individual from committing a crime (Hirschi, 2011). Ultimately, in the case if the crime occurs, there are three key attachment sources which include peers, parents, and educational facilities. The theory describes attachment as the ability of humans to be both moral and social beings to a certain extent at the same time (Hirschi, 2011).
The second element is called commitment. This element of the social bonding theory can be reflected by educational expectations and professional ambitions. The fact that we contribute to our well-being is seen as a constraint that minimizes the probability of delinquent behavior (Hirschi, 2011). Third, the involvement in conventional activities is presented as a way to reduce the occurrence of criminal activity by means of motivating the individual to partake in other activities. In this case, the theory claims that deviation will be highly unlikely due to limited spare time (Hirschi, 2011).
The belief of importance is connected to the personal values of an individual. This element of the theory can be explained as an attainable constraint that is commonly developed within a society. Consequently, delinquent behavior should be anticipated in case if the individual refuses to adhere to the common guidelines and attain the values promoted by the society (Hirschi, 2011).
The Relation between the Social Bonding Theory and Conformity
There is a strict relationship between the theory of social bonding and conformity. The theory explains it as the process of socialization and creation of a link between the society and a given individual (Siegel, 2015). The link is supported by the key four elements that were mentioned above. Therefore, the stronger is the manifestation of these four elements, the smaller are chances that the individual will display delinquent behavior or engage themselves in illegal activity (Douglas, Burgess, & Ressler, 2013).
Therefore, the weaker is the influence of the group, the weaker is the individual’s attachment to their behaviors and commitment to their values. The idea of conformity is inextricably linked to the notions of independence and rules of conduct (Wagner, 2013). Conformity may also be perceived through the individual’s unwillingness to commit crimes due to the fact that they realize the consequences of such behavior.
The connection between conformity and social bonding theory can also be described as a rational restriction which rewards commitment and law-abiding behavior. Another example of this linkage is the parents’ influence on their child’s conformity (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2015). We should take into consideration the parenting style and the parents’ ability to communicate the ideas of adequate behavior to their kid when the levels of commitment and conformity tend to zero.
Social Bonding Theory and the Schools of Crime Causation
The theory of social bonding can also be associated with several theoretical schools of crime causation (Douglas et al., 2013). First, there is an explicit connection between the theory and the impact of strain on a given individual. This relationship can be described by incorporation of the key elements of the social bonding theory into the theory of strain. On a bigger scale, it means that strained individuals are predisposed to delinquent behavior, but their attachment to the peers and commitment to values may serve as the barriers on the way to criminal activities (Douglas et al., 2013).
Another example of the connection is the social learning theory. The society often is able to influence an individual to an extent where the person will unquestioningly obey the unwritten rules and values of the society. In this case, the relationship is dependent on the belief of importance, and it dynamically coexists with the moral norms of the individual (Douglas et al., 2013). Overall, the theory of social bonding is in full compliance with the majority of the theoretical schools of crime causation and clearly reflects their essential hypotheses.
References
Beirne, P., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2015). Criminology: A sociological approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Douglas, J. E., Burgess, A., & Ressler, R. K. (2013). Crime classification manual: A standard system for investigating and classifying violent crimes. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Hirschi, T. (2011). Causes of delinquency. New York, NY: Routledge.
Siegel, L. J. (2015). Criminology: The core (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Wagner, W. E. (2013). Practice of research in criminology and criminal justice. New York, NY: Sage.