Criminal Psychology: Causes of Crime

What you'll learn

This revision guide covers the complete Edexcel GCSE Psychology specification for criminal psychology, focusing on biological, individual differences and social explanations for crime. You'll understand how genetics, brain structure, personality, moral development and social learning combine to explain criminal behaviour. This topic requires you to evaluate competing theories using research evidence and apply them to real-world scenarios.

Key terms and definitions

Recidivism — the tendency for a convicted criminal to reoffend, often measured as percentage returning to prison within a specific timeframe

Amygdala — the brain structure involved in processing emotions, particularly fear and aggression; dysfunction may link to criminal behaviour

Personality — the relatively stable patterns of thoughts, feelings and behaviours that distinguish individuals from one another

Role model — a person whose behaviour is observed and imitated by others, particularly in social learning theory

Cognitive distortions — faulty or biased ways of thinking that allow criminals to justify their actions and avoid taking responsibility

XYY syndrome — a chromosomal abnormality where males have an extra Y chromosome (47 chromosomes total instead of 46), historically linked to criminal behaviour

Moral reasoning — the process of determining what is right and wrong, which develops through stages according to Kohlberg's theory

Vicarious reinforcement — learning through observing the consequences of another person's behaviour rather than experiencing consequences directly

Core concepts

Biological explanations of crime

The biological approach examines how genetic and physiological factors influence criminal behaviour.

Genetic explanations

Twin and adoption studies suggest hereditary factors contribute to criminality. Lange's (1930) research on twins found 77% concordance for criminality in monozygotic (identical) twins compared to 12% in dizygotic (non-identical) twins. This suggests genetic factors play a role, though not exclusively.

The XYY syndrome hypothesis proposed that males with an extra Y chromosome were predisposed to violent crime. Early studies of prison populations found higher rates of XYY males. However, later research showed XYY males commit mainly property crimes rather than violent offences, and many XYY males never offend at all. The theory is now largely discredited but remains historically important.

Crowe's (1972) adoption study found adopted children whose biological mothers had criminal records were more likely to have criminal records themselves compared to adopted children of non-criminal biological mothers. This separates genetic from environmental influences, supporting genetic transmission of criminal tendencies.

Brain structure and neurotransmitters

Research using brain imaging techniques has identified differences in criminal brains, particularly in the amygdala and prefrontal cortex. Raine et al. (2000) found 11% reduction in prefrontal grey matter in antisocial personality disorder patients compared to controls. The prefrontal cortex regulates impulse control and moral decision-making.

Reduced amygdala volume correlates with increased aggression and reduced fear responses, potentially explaining why some offenders show no remorse. The amygdala helps process emotional information and regulate aggressive impulses.

Evaluation of biological explanations:

• Supported by empirical evidence from twin, adoption and brain imaging studies
• Deterministic — suggests criminals cannot control their biology, raising ethical issues about responsibility and punishment
• Reductionist — ignores social and psychological factors that interact with biology
• Practical applications in identifying at-risk individuals for early intervention

Individual differences explanations

Personality theories

Eysenck's personality theory proposes criminal behaviour links to specific personality dimensions. According to Eysenck, criminals score high on:

• Extraversion — seeking stimulation and excitement, taking risks
• Neuroticism — anxious, emotionally unstable, difficult to condition
• Psychoticism — aggressive, lacking empathy, impulsive

Eysenck argued these traits are biologically based and make individuals harder to condition through punishment, therefore less likely to learn society's rules. Criminals supposedly have an underactive nervous system requiring more stimulation, leading to sensation-seeking behaviour.

Eysenck and Eysenck (1977) compared 2070 male prisoners with 2422 male controls, finding prisoners scored higher on psychoticism but results for extraversion and neuroticism were inconsistent. This only partially supports the theory.

Cognitive explanations

Kohlberg's theory of moral development proposes thinking progresses through stages:

1. Pre-conventional level — morality based on punishment avoidance and self-interest
2. Conventional level — morality based on social rules and approval
3. Post-conventional level — morality based on abstract ethical principles

Kohlberg suggested criminals operate at pre-conventional levels, making moral decisions purely on avoiding punishment rather than understanding right and wrong. Palmer and Hollin (1998) compared moral reasoning in convicted offenders and non-offenders, finding offenders showed less mature moral reasoning, supporting Kohlberg's theory.

Cognitive distortions allow criminals to justify their behaviour:

• Minimisation — downplaying the seriousness of actions ("it was only a small fire")
• Euphemistic labelling — using softer language ("borrowing" instead of "stealing")
• Hostile attribution bias — interpreting ambiguous actions as threatening, justifying aggressive response

Evaluation of individual differences explanations:

• Measurable through standardised tests and interviews
• Provides basis for rehabilitation programmes targeting thinking patterns
• Correlation doesn't prove causation — personality might result from criminal lifestyle rather than cause it
• Cultural bias in moral reasoning measures based on Western values

Social learning theory explanation

Bandura's social learning theory explains crime through observational learning and modelling. Criminal behaviour is learned from the environment through:

The modelling process:

1. Attention — noticing the behaviour of a role model (gang member, family member, media figure)
2. Retention — remembering the observed behaviour
3. Reproduction — having the ability to copy the behaviour
4. Motivation — having reason to imitate, often through vicarious reinforcement

Children who observe crime being rewarded (money, status, respect) are more likely to imitate it. If a role model is arrested (vicarious punishment), imitation becomes less likely.

Key research evidence:

Bandura, Ross and Ross (1961) demonstrated observational learning in the Bobo doll experiment. Children who observed an adult model behaving aggressively towards the doll later imitated specific aggressive acts, especially when the model was rewarded. Children who saw the model punished showed less imitation.

Charlton et al. (2002) studied children in St Helena before and after television was introduced. Despite exposure to media violence, aggression levels remained stable, suggesting other factors mediate the relationship between observation and behaviour.

Application to criminal behaviour:

Social learning theory explains why crime runs in families — children observe and imitate parents' criminal behaviour when it appears rewarding. It also explains regional variations in crime types (gang culture in certain areas provides criminal role models).

The theory accounts for desistance (stopping crime) when individuals encounter new prosocial role models or when criminal behaviour stops being reinforced.

Evaluation of social learning theory:

• Supported by controlled laboratory studies showing observational learning occurs
• Explains cultural and familial transmission of criminal behaviour
• Laboratory studies lack ecological validity — imitating aggression toward a doll differs from real violence
• Doesn't explain why individuals exposed to identical role models respond differently
• Practical applications in rehabilitation through providing positive role models

Social explanations: Differential association theory

Sutherland's differential association theory proposes criminal behaviour is learned through interaction with others. Crime occurs when a person is exposed to more definitions favourable to law violation than definitions unfavourable to law violation.

Key principles:

• Criminal behaviour is learned through communication within intimate personal groups
• Learning includes techniques for committing crimes and specific attitudes, motives and rationalisations
• A person becomes criminal when they acquire an excess of definitions favourable to crime
• The ratio of pro-criminal to anti-criminal definitions determines likelihood of offending

Farrington's (1995) Cambridge Study of Delinquent Development tracked 411 males from age 8 to 48. Those with convicted parents were significantly more likely to offend themselves, supporting the theory that criminal attitudes and behaviours transmit through social interaction.

Evaluation:

• Explains how criminal behaviour clusters in families and communities
• Accounts for why crime is more common in certain neighbourhoods
• Difficult to test scientifically — how do we measure "definitions favourable to crime"?
• Doesn't explain spontaneous crimes or why some exposed to criminal influences don't offend

Worked examples

Example 1: 4-mark question

Question: Outline Eysenck's theory of the criminal personality. [4 marks]

Model answer:

Eysenck proposed that criminals have specific personality traits that make them difficult to condition (1 mark). Criminals score high on extraversion, meaning they seek excitement and stimulation due to an underactive nervous system (1 mark). They also score high on neuroticism, making them anxious and emotionally unstable (1 mark). Finally, they score high on psychoticism, showing aggression, lack of empathy and impulsivity (1 mark).

Examiner note: Each distinct point about the theory gains one mark. Students must go beyond simply listing the three dimensions to explain what they mean.

Example 2: 6-mark question

Question: Evaluate biological explanations of criminal behaviour. [6 marks]

Model answer:

One strength of biological explanations is they are supported by empirical evidence from twin studies such as Lange's research finding 77% concordance in MZ twins compared to 12% in DZ twins (1 mark). This controlled research provides objective evidence for genetic factors in crime (1 mark).

However, biological explanations are reductionist as they ignore the role of social factors like poverty or criminal role models (1 mark). Most crimes likely result from an interaction between biological predispositions and environmental triggers, which purely biological explanations cannot account for (1 mark).

Another weakness is that biological explanations are deterministic, suggesting criminals have no control over their biology (1 mark). This raises ethical concerns about responsibility and whether biologically predisposed individuals should receive different treatment in the justice system (1 mark).

Examiner note: Evaluation marks require making a judgement (strength/weakness) then justifying it with evidence or reasoning. Aim for three developed evaluation points for 6 marks.

Example 3: 9-mark question

Question: Discuss social learning theory as an explanation for criminal behaviour. [9 marks]

Model answer structure:

AO1 (knowledge): 3-4 marks

• Outline the four stages of modelling: attention, retention, reproduction, motivation
• Explain role models and vicarious reinforcement
• Brief reference to key study (Bandura's Bobo doll)

AO3 (evaluation): 5-6 marks

• Strength: Research support from Bandura et al. showing observational learning
• Strength: Explains why crime runs in families without genetics
• Weakness: Laboratory studies lack ecological validity
• Weakness: Cannot explain why some exposed to criminal models don't offend
• Application: Used in rehabilitation programmes providing prosocial role models

Total: Aim for approximately 200-250 words written in continuous prose.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

• Confusing correlation with causation — Don't claim brain differences or personality traits cause crime; state they are associated with or linked to crime. Research is typically correlational.

• Describing studies without linking to theory — Always explain why you're mentioning research. State explicitly how findings support or challenge the explanation.

• Using vague evaluation — Avoid generic statements like "This theory is good." Specify what is good, why it's good, and provide evidence or reasoning.

• Muddling the explanations — Keep biological, individual and social explanations separate. Don't mention genes when discussing social learning theory unless explicitly comparing approaches.

• Forgetting practical applications — Edexcel values real-world relevance. Mention how theories inform rehabilitation programmes, sentencing decisions or crime prevention strategies.

• Ignoring command words — "Outline" requires description only; "Evaluate" requires judgements with justification; "Discuss" requires both description and evaluation.

Exam technique for Criminal Psychology: Causes of Crime

• Match detail to marks available — For 2-mark questions, make two distinct points. For 6-mark questions, develop three evaluation points with evidence. For 9-mark extended responses, balance AO1 (description) and AO3 (evaluation) approximately 40:60.

• Use specialist terminology accurately — Terms like amygdala, vicarious reinforcement, cognitive distortions and recidivism demonstrate psychological knowledge and gain credit. Define terms briefly if using them for the first time.

• Structure evaluation using PEEL — Make a Point (strength/weakness), provide Evidence (research/example), Explain how evidence supports your point, then Link back to the question. This ensures developed commentary rather than superficial statements.

• Apply knowledge to scenarios — Questions may describe a criminal case and ask you to explain it using a theory. Select the most relevant theory, identify specific features from the scenario that match theoretical concepts, and explicitly connect them.

Quick revision summary

Criminal behaviour has biological causes (genetics, XYY syndrome, brain structure particularly amygdala dysfunction), individual differences (Eysenck's personality theory with high extraversion/neuroticism/psychoticism, Kohlberg's pre-conventional moral reasoning, cognitive distortions), and social causes (Bandura's social learning through observation of role models with vicarious reinforcement, Sutherland's differential association through exposure to pro-criminal definitions). Each explanation has supporting research evidence but also limitations regarding determinism, reductionism and practical application. Exam questions require balanced evaluation using research evidence to support judgements about explanatory power and real-world utility.