A Comparison

| A Comparison | Social Learning Theory and Biological Trait theory | | Carrie Procita | Criminology, CJ 200Professor Christensen24 September 2011 |

This paper compares and contrasts two of the theories of crime; the Social Learning Theory, and the biological trait theory. It considers the historical foundations of the study of criminal behavior; and examines ways in which society should respond to criminal behavior in terms of prevention. |

Outline:
Introduction:
A. Description of theories B. Thesis Statement
Body:
A. How genetics influence criminal behavior 1. History of Biological theory 2. Who defends this theory 3. How this theory is applied

B. How environmental factors influence criminal behavior 1. History of Social Learning Theory 2. Who defends this theory 3. How this theory is applied

C. My Opinion 1. Both theories contain valid points of view 2. Multiple factors contributing to criminal behavior
Conclusion

A Comparison: Social Learning Theory and Biological Trait Theory

Criminal behavior has always been a focus for psychologists due to the age old debate between nature and nurture. Is it the responsibility of an individual 's genetic makeup that makes them a criminal or is it the environment in which they are raised that determines their outcome? In studying criminal behavior, many psychologists have developed theories meant to explain deviant characteristics. The major debate in these theories centers on the concept of genetic makeup and criminal activity. While some theorists believe that the environment influences criminal behavior, others hold to the idea of criminals having inherent characteristics that cause them to become criminals (Robertson, 2011). Two theories of crime that attempt to explain why people commit crime are the Social Learning Theory and Biological Trait theory. Social Learning Theory states that environmental factors influence criminal behavior, Biological Trait theory states that genetics and environmental factors influence criminal behavior, while both attempt to explain why people commit crimes; together they provide a comprehensive explanation.
Biological theories state that individuals commit criminal acts due to biological or genetic defects. Crime is a result of these abnormalities, and not a choice made by the offender. In the late 19th century, Italian "father of criminology" Cesare Lombroso claimed he could prove scientifically that criminality was inherited, and criminals were incurable. Cesare Lombroso studied cadavers of executed criminals to scientifically determine whether law violators were physically different from people of conventional values. Lombroso thought that there were common physical traits shared by criminals. He describes criminals based on distinct characteristics in the jaw line, teeth, and nose as well as a common "intracranial feature." It was his opinion that certain people were born criminals (Volkert, 2007). Twin and adoption studies have been one of the major focuses in research that relates to criminal behavior and genetic influence. Twin studies manipulate the environmental factors of behavior by examining if identical twins raised apart are different from twins raised together. These studies examine the similarities between identical twins that are separated at infancy; research indicates that such twins are often extremely similar even though they grew up in completely different environments (Tibbetts). Adoption studies allow genetic factors of behavior to be tested by taking advantage of the fact that an adopted person shares their genetic makeup with their biological parents but was actually raised by people other than the biological parents. So, if a behavior is genetic the person should resemble their biological parent but if a behavior is more environmentally influenced, the person will resemble the parent that raised the person. In one adoption study in Denmark, Karl Christensen collected information on some 6.000 pairs of twins born between 1881and 1910 and who lived up to the age of fifteen. He then separated them into MZ (identical) and DZ (fraternal) twins, and finally used the Penal register to discover whether either or both twins had been convicted. He found that adoptive siblings split into separate foster homes had a 12.9% concordance rate of crime and aggressive behavior. This study also showed correlations between biological parents who committed criminal activity and their children they gave up for adoption committing criminal activity. This study suggests that biological characteristics which increase the risk for criminal convictions and aggression are transmitted from biological parents to their offspring and increase risk for criminal activity (“Positivist approach in,”). Though many believe that new technology is making twin and adoption studies seem less relevant they are still important in assessing the role of environmental factors versus genetic factors in such characteristics as aggression. The increase of genetic discoveries and the thinking of a new generation of scientists have allowed genetics and aggression to be linked together without as much controversy as was characteristic in the past. Most of the current research involving genetics and aggression is aimed at understanding the link between genes and the environment that leads to aggression and criminal activity. Contemporary biological theorists do not suggest that a single biological or psychological attribute adequately explains all criminality (Siegel, 2010). They concentrate more on variations in genetic and other biological factors in interaction with the environment, and are less likely to refer to biological defects or abnormalities. Contemporary studies have examined traits as diverse as: hormones, diet, allergies, and environmental contaminants. Neurophysiological (brain) factors have also been examined and include studies of brain diseases and tumors, brain wave patterns, and MBD (minimal brain dysfunction) and Hyperactivity disorder. Also examined have been genetic factors such as the presence of extra Y chromosomes and other hereditary traits (Eve, Segal, & Stevens). Social learning theory suggests that people learn the techniques and attitudes of crime from close relationships with criminal peers: crime is a learned behavior (Siegel, 2010). Among others, Albert Bandura is considered the leading proponent of this theory (Ormrod, 1999). The social learning theory is the behavior theory most relevant to criminology. Albert Bandura believed that aggression is learned through a process called behavior modeling. He believed that individuals do not actually inherit violent tendencies, but they modeled them after three principles sources: family interactions, environmental experiences and the mass media. Albert Bandura argued that individuals, especially children learn aggressive behavior from observing others, either personally or through the media and environment. In 1961 Bandura conducted a controversial experiment known as the Bobo doll experiment, to study patterns of behavior, at least in part, by social learning theory, and that similar behaviors were learned by individuals shaping their own behavior after the actions of models. The experiment was criticized by some on ethical grounds, for training children towards aggression. Bandura 's results from the Bobo Doll Experiment changed the course of modern psychology, and were widely credited for helping shift the focus in academic psychology from pure behaviorism to cognitive psychology. The experiment is among the most lauded and celebrated of psychological experiments. (“Albert bandura-wikepedia”).
By themselves, the biological trait theory and the social learning theory fail to explain all criminal behavior; studies have consistently shown that both genetics and environmental factors influence criminal behavior and in my opinion both theories contain valid points of view. Research has been conducted regarding the two theories and has resulted in a conclusion that both genes and environment do play a role in the criminality of an individual. This evidence has been generated from a number of twin, family, and adoption studies as well as laboratory experiments. The adoptee with non-criminal biological parents and criminal adoptive parents were over ten percent more likely to receive a criminal record than those who’s biological and adoptive parents who had no criminal history. In addition to this, adoptees that had both a criminal biological and adoptive parents showed the highest rates of receiving a criminal record in comparison to all other combinations in this study. Environmental factors cannot be ignored in this particular topic (“Criminal behavior-overview”). Also, the research has stated that it is more often an interaction between genes and the environment that predicts criminal behavior. Having a genetic predisposition for criminal behavior does not determine the actions of an individual, but if they are exposed to the right environment, then their chances are greater for engaging in criminal or anti-social behavior (Jones, 2005). In my opinion, society should try and identify those individuals, especially children, who may become susceptible to certain disorders or personality traits that can lead into antisocial, delinquent, or criminal behavior. Society should focus on the treatment and rehabilitation of those individuals in need. Certain educational, environment enrichment programs have been shown to have a lasting effect on children if given by a certain age. If more of these programs could be developed, society could help prevent the future antisocial or criminal behavior of children. In conclusion, there are numerous theories which claim the criminal personality has a genetic component or a environmental component. The two theories that I have examined in this paper are the Biological Trait Theory and the Social Learning Theory which are from different disciplines. Biological Trait Theory comes from the view that criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. Social Learning Theory stems from the social process theory which is the view that criminality is a function of people’s interactions with various organizations, institutions, and processes in society. Lombroso, a criminal anthropologist was one of the earliest theorists who believed criminal behavior had a genetic component unlike that of their non-criminal counterparts. He also believed there was a genetic element formulating the idea that a criminal is born, not made. Albert Bandura believed that individuals do not actually inherit violent tendencies, but they modeled them after three principles sources: family interactions, environmental experiences and the mass media. He argued that individuals, especially children learn aggressive behavior from observing others, either personally or through the media and environment. It is impossible to rule out the role of environmental factors in the causation of criminal behavior. This is evident in another study which took criminal records of both biological and adoptive parents into consideration. The results confirmed that as well as a genetic influence there is also a significant environmental influence. Finally, society should try and identify those individuals, especially children, who may become susceptible to certain disorders or personality traits that can lead into antisocial, delinquent, or criminal behavior. Society should focus on the treatment and rehabilitation of those individuals in need.

References
Robertson, S. (2011, April 12). Inherited criminal characteristics. Retrieved from http://www.ehow.com/info_8211415_inherited-criminal-characteristics theory.html#ixzz1YyBsgdPT
Volkert, F. (2007, May). Choice theory and trait theory on crime control. Retrieved from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/241356/choice_theory_and_trait_theory_on_crime_pg2.html?cat=72 Tibbetts, S.G. (n.d.) Student study site for criminological theory. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/chapters.htm
Positivist approach in criminology. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://my.liuc.it/MatSup/2008/L25511/CRI_bilogical%20factors_0809.pdf
Siegel, L. J. (2010). Criminology: The Core. (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth.

Eve, R., Segal, C. & Stevens, K. (n.d.). Criminology: causes, patterns and control of crime. Retrieved from http://www.nsspress.com/criminology/toc.htm
Omrod, J.E. (1999). Social learning theory. Retrieved from http://teachnet.edb.utexas.edu/~Lynda_abbot/Social.html
Albert bandura-wikipedia, (n.d.). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Bandura
Criminal behavior-overview. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://mikefy82.hubpages.com/hub/Criminal-Behaviour--Overview
Jones, C.M. (2005, February). Genetic and environmental influences on criminal behavior. Retrieved from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/jones.html

References: Robertson, S. (2011, April 12). Inherited criminal characteristics. Retrieved from http://www.ehow.com/info_8211415_inherited-criminal-characteristics theory.html#ixzz1YyBsgdPT Volkert, F. (2007, May). Choice theory and trait theory on crime control. Retrieved from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/241356/choice_theory_and_trait_theory_on_crime_pg2.html?cat=72 Siegel, L. J. (2010). Criminology: The Core. (4th ed.).  Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth. Omrod, J.E. (1999). Social learning theory. Retrieved from http://teachnet.edb.utexas.edu/~Lynda_abbot/Social.html