Nature vs. Nurture Debate

Nature Argument: Born to be Bad?

Proponents of the nature perspective argue that certain biological predispositions can increase an individual’s susceptibility to criminal behaviour. These factors include brain abnormalities, neurotransmitters and prenatal conditions. Genes don’t predetermine criminal behaviour. Instead, they might create vulnerabilities that can push someone towards crime when combined with specific environmental factors.

Evolutionary theories propose that sex variations in the fight-or-flight responses might stem from hormonal differences and could be instrumental in forming an identity of crime. Ancestral hunter-gatherer societies might have placed distinct selective pressure on males and females. Males engaged in hunting could have benefitted from a more pronounced fight-flight response, while females responsible for childcare might have favoured a more nuanced approach to threat assessment.

Nurture Argument: Shaped by Surroundings

Social learning theory suggests that criminal behaviour is acquired through interactions within one’s social environment, particularly with family and peers. This theory posits that individuals learn criminal attitudes, motivations, and techniques through observation and interaction with others involved in criminal activity. These learned motivations can be categorised as positive and negative reinforcements, with negative experiences in the individual’s environment potentially contributing to the development of unfavourable criminal behaviour. From this perspective, criminal acts can manifest unmet needs and values within the individual, driven by the social context in which they were raised. A few of the many factors include:

Socioeconomic status – poverty, lack of educational opportunities and unemployment can limit an individual’s options and increase their risk of resorting to crime.
Family environment – a chaotic or abusive home environment can have a detrimental impact on a child’s development, increasing the likelihood of aggression and delinquency.
Peer pressure – the influence of peers, especially those involved in criminal activity, can significantly impact an individual’s behaviour.
Community factors- Communities with high crime rates, limited resources, and social disorganisation can create an environment that fosters criminal activity.

Beyond the Binary: The Interplay of Nature and Nurture

Our genes and our environment aren’t independent forces shaping who we are. The gene provides a blueprint, but our experiences act like a sculptor, influencing how those traits are expressed.

Gene-environment interaction – genes may not directly cause criminal behaviour but can interact with environmental factors to increase vulnerability. For example, a child with a genetic predisposition for aggression might be more likely to react violently in an abusive environment.
Epigenetics: These field studies were conducted on how environmental factors can influence gene expression. For instance, childhood trauma can leave epigenetic marks that affect brain development and increase the risk of antisocial behaviour.
Life-course perspective: This perspective emphasises how experiences throughout an individual’s life can influence their risk of criminal behaviour. Early childhood experiences may set the stage for later vulnerability, while positive interventions can mitigate some of these risks later in life.

A case study is provided to highlight the complex association between nature and nurture in shaping an individual’s susceptibility to criminal behaviour:

John Doe is a 32-year-old male with a history of violent behaviour. His criminal record includes two assault charges, one stemming from a bar fight and another from a road rage incident. John grew up in a seemingly stable, middle-class family. His parents reported a relatively positive childhood environment, with no history of physical or emotional abuse.

– John underwent a comprehensive psychological evaluation following his most recent arrest. He scored within the normal range on most cognitive assessments. However, he exhibited significant difficulties with impulse control on standardised tests. He also displayed high levels of frustration intolerance and anger proneness.

– As part of a research study exploring the biological underpinnings, John consented to genetic testing. He was found to carry a specific variant of the MAOA (Monoamine Oxidase A) gene, often called the “warrior gene”. This variant has been linked to lower levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin, which plays a role in regulating mood and aggression. Individuals with this variant are not guaranteed to become violent, but research suggests they may be more susceptible to aggressive behaviour, particularly when combined with specific environmental triggers.

– Despite a seemingly positive upbringing, John’s history revealed an environmental trigger for his aggression. He recounted enduring persistent harassment from his peers throughout his time in school. These experiences could have exacerbated his underlying impulsivity and contributed to his development of aggressive coping mechanisms.

John’s case exemplifies the interaction between nature and nurture in criminal behaviour. While his genetic predisposition for impulsivity might have increased his vulnerability to violence, it wasn’t the sole factor. The experiences of bullying could have acted as a trigger, pushing him towards instant acting out or bringing a negative outcome to an emotional event.

Conclusion

The nature vs. nurture debate in criminal behaviour is not about finding a single culprit. It’s about acknowledging the interplay between our genes and the environments we navigate. Criminologists now agree that both are responsible for the occurrence of a crime. By understanding this, we can develop a more nuanced approach to preventing and addressing crime, ultimately creating a safer and more just society.

Glossary

Predisposition – a liability or tendency to suffer from a particular condition, hold a specific attitude or act in a certain way.

References

Moffitt, T. E. (2006). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental perspective. In D. S. Elliott (Ed.), Handbook of juvenile delinquency (2nd ed., pp. 67-90). Academic Press.
Jagadeesan, P., Jagadeesan, R., & Ramachandran, R. (2021). Nature versus Nurture: Are Criminals Born or Raised? – A Comprehensive Analysis. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 2(10), 564-579. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17376.81922
Raine, A., Lencz, T., Biven, L., Lacono, S., & Colletti, P. (2000). Reduced prefrontal grey matter volume and criminality in violent offenders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57(12), 1180-1188.
Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Riggs, P., & Martin, J. (2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Development and Psychopathology, 14(1), 67-90.
Jacobson, S. W., Jacobson, J. L., Sokol, R. J., & Glynn, P. D. (2008). Prenatal alcohol exposure and child behavioural development: Pregnant Alcohol and Nicotine Study. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 32(1), 158-168.
Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Earls, F. (1999). Neighbourhood structure and collective violence: A multilevel systemic analysis. American Sociological Review, 64(5), 673-692.
Widom, C. S. (1996). The cycle of violence. American Journal of Public Health, 86(12), 1650-1654.
Felson, R. B. (2002). Routine activity theory and application to criminology. Northeastern University Press.
Foley, D. L., Hegyi, T., Kavanagh, D., & Holmes, A. (2008). Monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene polymorphisms and emotional processing in violent offenders. Behavioural and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 7(1), 58-77.
Bursik, R. J. (1993. Social disorganisation and theories of crime. Social Forces, 72(2), 671-717. Muir, J. D. (2016). Nature vs. Nurture (Criminology is at it Again!). Monash. https://www.academia.edu/24476129/Nature_vs_Nurture_Criminology_is_at_it_Again_

Authored By

Vaishnavi Narreddy

Vaishnavi Narreddy is a recent graduate with a master’s degree in Forensic Science, specializing in Forensic Psychology. She is excited to bring a unique perspective to the world of corporate investigations. Her areas of interest include intelligence, uncovering fraud, and threats. Outside of academics and work, she is an avid reader, writer, and extreme movie buff.