Abstract
Crime remains one of the major social predicaments many communities across the globe continue to grapple with. Past scholars have presented a wide range of explanations to shed more light about the nature of this problem. The neurological theory has become one of the widely studied biological concepts intended to describe how neurotransmitters and neurodisabilities in influencing human behaviors. With its assumptions and attributes, the theory remains reasonable and capable of explaining the nature of crime in human societies. In most cases, the established criminal justice system will tend to punish and incarcerate most of these wrongdoers. In the future, it would be recommendable that all key stakeholders come together and develop sustainable rehabilitative programs that have the potential to help most of these vulnerable individuals.
Introduction
Sociology is an expansive field that allows scholars and theorists to analyze and describe a wide range of issues affecting different communities across the globe. These professionals apply divergent theories in an effort to describe and understand the problematic nature of crime and its possible causes. Biological frameworks have remained common and widely studied to explain some of the natural or innate factors that influence violent behaviors. Within the past few decades, proponents of these models have focused on various attributes to monitor criminal tendencies, such as facial features, physical attributes, and genetics. The neurological theory of crime has sufficient assumptions that shed more light about the problematic nature of this social concern and how to deal with it using rehabilitative strategies.
Literature Review
The presence of crime in many societies compelled researchers to consider biological attributes since they had the potential to influence such malpractices. In their work, Ling et al. (2019) indicated that biological explanations had been applied successfully in the field of criminology since the early 19th century. Such theories were intended to explain how a person’s biological attributes could contribute to his or her possible involvement in crime. Modern scholars would go further to describe how it would be impossible for an individual to become an offender without sufficient social interaction. Consequently, Gyimesi (2022) explains why theorists have linked various human attributes to biological theories, such as risk-taking and aggression. In another investigation, Zavatta and Cantelmo (2019) concluded that hormonal and generic factors had the potential to predispose specific people to violent behaviors. Some people could acquire these personal traits after suffering from serious medical conditions or injuries.
Charles Darwin stands out as the first renowned scholar whose contributions in the field of biology remain timeless. Through the idea of evolution, modern students of criminology acknowledge that some people might engage in actions that could result in social degeneration (Gyimesi, 2022). Certain behaviors associated with risk-taking activities make it possible for individuals start engaging in crime. Despite the gaps in some of these original concepts and biological theories intended to describe crime, new thoughts would emerge from the mid-20th century to improve the field (Gyimesi, 2022). Modern studies have gone further to describe the possible relationship between crime and genetic constitution.
Modern scholars have been interested in a wide range of attributes that have the potential to influence their behaviors, such as the chemicals found in the brain and neurotransmitters. For example, Du (2020) completed a study that sought to investigate the possible relationship between neurons and environmental factors and their possibility towards triggering criminal tendencies. Such investigations have played a critical role towards the development of the neurological theory of crime (Zavatta & Cantelmo, 2019). The foundational explanations behind this model focus primarily on the central nervous systems and how it functions with other brain parts. For instance, Ling et al. (2019) argue that the frontal lobe of the brain plays a major role in dictating various human behaviors, including self-monitoring, concentration, goal setting, and planning. Ling et al. (2019) observed that the frontal lobe of the brain was directly linked to the development of psychopath or antisocial personality. Most of the individuals suffering from the condition would have reduced chances of feeling guilty or displaying empathy.
The involvement of neuroscientists in the investigation of crime has led to new ideas regarding the biological attributes capable of influencing criminal behaviors. For example, Martínez (2018) indicated that the presence of neurotransmitters in the brain dictated a person’s behaviors, thoughts, goals, and emotional responses. Relying on the same information, Zavatta and Cantelmo (2019) observed that the presence of certain chemicals in the brain could trigger psychotic or violent behaviors, such as dopamine. Consequently, medical experts and psychologists supported the use of antidepressants to help in the reduction of dopamine in the affected individuals. Such a scientific approach was practical and capable of helping minimize the aggression level of the affected individual.
Norepinephrine remains a common compound in the human brain that has the potential to influence behavior. In their study Zavatta and Cantelmo (2019) observed that the chemical triggered aggressiveness in some people, thereby maximizing their chances of engaging in criminal behaviors. Similarly, people who had reduced levels of the compound in their brains had higher chances of becoming antisocial (Williams et al., 2018). These observations show conclusively that the norepinephrine is a neurological chemical capable of guiding scholars to learn more about the problematic nature and development of criminal behaviors. Additional studies are being completed in an effort to understand this compound and consider how most of the affected individuals could receive personalized support.
Past studies have identified serotonin as another neurotransmitter in the human body that could shed more light regarding people’s involvement in crime. This inhibitory chemical occurs naturally in the frontal cortex and the limbic system (Gyimesi, 2022). In the study by Zavatta and Cantelmo (2019), it emerged that the reduction of serotonin in the brain could encourage affected persons to engage in crime. Grandi (2022) went further to indicate that the neurotransmitter played a major role in the management and control of impulsivity in human beings. By appreciating and understanding the nature of the identified neurological compounds, investigators can understand some of the reasons why some individuals engage in crime.
Current Application of the Question in Criminology
The above section has outlined specific neurotransmitters and chemicals that offer sufficient insights regarding the nature and occurrence of crime. The selected biological theory is relevant since it continues to make it possible for forensic experts and neuroscientists to think deeper and learn more about brain neurological functioning. Through these models, analysts have succeeded to examine how some of the environmental factors tend to inhibit normal brain functioning and subsequent development (Grandi, 2022). After criminal behaviors are reported, investigators tend to arrest and eventually incarcerate the offender after the completion of the court process. However, such an initiative has been identified as ineffective and incapable of helping most of the incarcerated people become better and responsible. The emerging attempts and investigations have been intended to revolutionize the criminal justice system while at the same time ensuring that future communities are empowered to address the problem.
The acceptance of neurological theory of crime is a decision that has helped expand the field by introducing new ideas that could guide forensic investigators and future scholars. Martínez (2018) examined the possible impact of neurodisabilities and the role they played towards influencing violent tendencies. In the study, the scholar identified abuses and trauma in childhood as possible challenges that could result in poor neurodevelopment. Most of the victims eventually become disconnected and incapable of pursuing their goals in life. Some had increased chances of becoming demoralized and unwilling to engage in meaningful social interactions. The application of the neurological concept has helped more analysts link these problems to childhood truancy, violence, and engagement in criminal activities (Kirchmair, 2019). The emerging ideas have continued to shed more light about the role of biology and its possible impact on unacceptable behaviors.
Recent investigations have made it possible for analysts to learn more about brain injury and the presence of abusive environments during childhood. The presence of this occurrence has the potential to trigger emotional imbalances, thereby contributing significantly to psychological problems (Williams et al., 2018). In their study, Kirchmair (2019) observed that most of the children affected by these problems would eventually develop neurodevelopmental disorders. Consequently, they would encounter diverse difficulties in their social interactions and be unable to make timely decisions (Zavatta & Cantelmo, 2019). In adulthood, most of these victims would definitely have higher chances of engaging in aggressive and violent behaviors that could amount to crime. The absence of proper support and attention to meet the diverse demands of these individuals has worsened the situation.
The nature of neurological concerns has compelled more experts in the field of psychiatry to get involved and scrutinize offenders before going through the criminal justice system. The development of neurodisabilities tends to trigger negative emotions and behaviors (Kirchmair, 2019). In most cases, the affected persons will find it hard to exhibit proper cognitive abilities or maintain social interactions. Bonicalzi and Haggard (2019) indicated that number of individuals facing this form of biological challenge remained underinvestigated or unreported. In such a situation, a person who has gone through this kind of trauma would be acting in a natural manner. Unfortunately, the individual will eventually be in contact with the justice system after engaging in crime or displaying violent behaviors. This reality explains why some professionals have been concerned and ready to analyze the nature and complexity of this epidemic affecting most of the imprisoned individuals.
The practicability and appropriateness of neurological factors in the study and analysis of crime has led to the introduction of additional risk factors for criminal behaviors. For instance, Bonicalzi and Haggard (2019) acknowledged that neurodisabiliites met the minimum threshold for the causes of aggressive behavior. Such attributes would include brain injury, abuse, child trauma, and experience of violent scenes (Williams et al., 2018). Children who grew up in similar environments had higher chances of remaining deviant or showing social interaction problems. Consequently, the affected individuals would remain troubled and be unable to become productive members of their respective communities. By considering the presence of these risk factors, it would be possible for criminologists to deal with the individuals more effectively. The acknowledgement has informed better and more practical ways for sentencing or dealing with these offenders.
The assumptions of the studied theory are practical and capable of guiding more scholars to theorize how and why some criminal activities occur. Du (2020) accepts that social offenses tend to have huge economic, social, and human impacts. Whenever a criminal activity takes place, chances are high that it could result in the loss of resources, death, or injury. Some victims become injured, thereby being unable to continue pursuing their goals in life. At the same time, some of the people who engage in such malpractices might be pushed by neurotransmitters. This reality presents a unique form of vulnerability that needs to become a primary concern for criminologists and sociologists (Williams et al., 2018). Specifically, proponents of this category of biological theories support their use towards understanding the reasons why some people engage in unacceptable behaviors.
With many criminal activities being recorded and reported every day, most of the straightforward sociological and environmental theories of crime might not explain their occurrence accurately. A detailed examination of a person’s neurological abnormalities has become a powerful approach for understanding behavior (Bonicalzi & Haggard, 2019). Different people would suffer from neurological abnormalities that expose them to violent behaviors. Since something is usually a miss in the brain, the victim would have higher chances of behaving awkwardly (Grandi, 2022). These attributes, therefore, offer a strong reason for encourages analysts and scholars to continue investigating the nature and occurrence of certain criminal activities.
In a nutshell, the neurological theory of criminology is reasonable and capable of guiding scholars to learn more about this social problem. The most important thing is for analysts to stop speculating or treating all offenses similarly. The end result is that more stakeholders have succeeded in finding new ways to explain a wide range of criminal behaviors (Williams et al., 2018). Forensic neuroscientists have been involved to study some of these malpractices in an effort to provide progressive and personalized support to most of the offenders (Du, 2020). These attributes show conclusively that the global community should put more emphasis on this biological theory since it has adequate explanations and ideas that could help people learn more about the nature of crime. Due to its effectiveness, sociologists and criminologists have been able to propose proper mechanisms to deal with the problem while empowering more people to realize their potential.
Future Implications
The neurological theory has become a recognizable biological concept that continues to attract attention of different experts in the field of criminology. Over the years, criminal justice systems have been pursued in such a way that they promote the best strategies to punish offenders while providing justice to the affected person. While this approach sounds realistic and acceptable, it harbors some gaps in the manner in which justice is served (Kirchmair, 2019). The adoption of this theory has helped more people appreciate that past brain injury and the disturbance of neurotransmitters could impact behavior. In such a case, some individuals would engage in violent crime or unacceptable activities due to the neurological impulses recorded in their brains (Zavatta & Cantelmo, 2019). The complexity of these possible aspects explains why this specific theory might become a topic of interest in the near future.
The social problem of crime is associated with numerous challenges, both economic and social. Grandi (2022) supports the inclusion of neurological theory since it sheds more light about the vulnerability in the criminal justice system. In the future, more institutions and jurisdictions would find it necessary to consider the power of neurodisabiliites and how they affect many undiagnosed people. These victims are compelled to make involuntary choices in their lives depending on the situations they face. When most of the offenders with such problems are imprisoned, chances are high that they will repeat their mistakes even after completing their jail terms (Martínez, 2018). Consequently, future analysts would be compelled to think deeper and consider how the criminal justice process could be transformed to meet the demands of such vulnerable populations. This approach is recommendable if communities are to provide personalized support and guidance to more people who could be suffering from neurodisabilities.
The acceptance of vulnerability is a possible trend that experts predict in the near future. Specifically, those in the criminal justice system might become more concerned about the past of offenders before presenting the best form of punishment (Straiton & Lake, 2021). The stakeholders will dig deeper and come up with justice systems that are progressive and rehabilitative in nature. For example, Bonicalzi and Haggard (2019) support the use of supportive mechanisms to provide additional care and empowerment to victims of childhood abuse. The approach could increase their chances of becoming more responsible and pursuing their goals. A rehabilitative approach in the future application of this theory could result in a scenario whereby more family members become involved in the process. The individuals will offer personalized support, guide the affected individuals, and identify the best coping mechanisms.
The consideration of this practical proposal will result in the establishment of rehabilitation centers intended to meet the demands of offenders with neurodisabilities. While pronouncing the most appropriate justice to the affected victims, criminologists and jurors would propose the expansion of such centers to provide additional support to more citizens (Straiton & Lake, 2021). The proposed approach will play a major role towards helping reduce the rate of reoffending. The beneficiaries will be encouraged to go through additional screening to ascertain their neurodisabilities much better. The strategy will increase chances of tackling the problem of crime since it affects many communities.
The strengths associated with the studied theory could compel educationists and sociologists to apply it in their respective fields. For instance, those in curriculum development could capitalize on the model to propose proper support mechanisms and assistive teachings devices for persons with neurodisabiliites. The ultimate objective would be to encourage these individuals and ensure that they appreciate their situations. The provision of additional counseling and support will make it possible for the individuals to cope and improve their social abilities. Similarly, the theory would become a useful tool for social workers and psychiatrists to collaborate and find persons who might be having defective neurotransmitters. Such individuals will be included in most of the established rehabilitative centers irrespective of their age (Martínez, 2018). These people will benefit from personalized support mechanisms and therapies intended to minimize the impacts of their neurodisabiliites.
The suggested future applications of the neurological theory indicate that the criminal justice system will become more supportive, progressive, and functional. Specifically, the promoted initiatives will be intended to rehabilitate and empower most of the individuals whose neurotransmitters are inadequate or dysfunctional (Straiton & Lake, 2021). The adoption of these ideas could trigger a paradigm shift in helping more parents and guiding them to minimize chances of childhood trauma. The rehabilitative programs could address most of the problems most of the affected individuals face and eventually be able to lead better and productive lives. Consequently, the efforts will play a synergistic role towards tackling crime and making more societies livable.
Conclusion
The neurological theory of criminology is one of the biological concepts developed to explain how and why some individuals engage in violent behaviors. The disturbance of various neurotransmitters in the brain, such as dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine, could trigger a neurodisabilty. Most of the persons affected by this problem tend to have increased chances of engaging in criminal activities. The described attributes show conclusively that the framework offers plausible assumptions that could shed more light about criminal tendencies. Most of these offenders will eventually be incarcerated or punished accordingly in an effort to provide justice to the affected victims. Key stakeholders should, therefore, think deeper and find new ways to help most of these vulnerable individuals. This effort would influence a paradigm shift whereby rehabilitative programs would become the norm to meet the demands of these offenders. New support centers will emerge and target other people who have increased chances of committing crime.
References
Bonicalzi, S., & Haggard, P. (2019). Responsibility between neuroscience and criminal law. The control component of criminal liability. Rivista Internazionale di Filosofia e Psicologia, 10(2), 103-119. Web.
Du, Y. (2020). The application of neuroscience evidence on court sentencing decisions: Suggesting a guideline for neuro-evidence. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 18(2), 493-524. Web.
Grandi, C. (2022). Criminal law and neuroscience: Theory and practice in the Italian perspective. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 11, 1-10. Web.
Gyimesi, J. (2022). Epilepsy, violence, and crime. A historical analysis. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 58(1), 42-58. Web.
Kirchmair, L. (2019). Objections to coercive neurocorrectives for criminal offenders – Why offenders’ human rights should fundamentally come first. Criminal Justice Ethics, 38(1), 19-40. Web.
Ling, S., Umbach, R., & Raine, A. (2019). Biological explanations of criminal behavior. Psychology, Crime & Law, 25(6), 626-640. Web.
Martínez, N. (2018). Punishment and rehabilitation in the use of neurointerventions for criminals. AJOB Neuroscience, 9(3), 152-153. Web.
Straiton, J., & Lake, F. (2021). Inside the brain of a killer: The ethics of neuroimaging in a criminal conviction. Biotechniques, 70(2), 69-71. Web.
Williams, W. W., Chitsabesan, P., Fazel, S., McMillan, T., Hughes, N., Personage, M., & Tonks, J. (2018). Traumatic brain injury: A potential cause of violent crime? Lancet Psychiatry, 5(10), 836-844. Web.
Zavatta, L., & Cantelmo, R. (2019). At the origin of crime – Current developments in neuroscience. Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, 7(2), 68-76. Web.