Module III

Introduction to Criminology

Prepared by: JIM N. YAPYAPEN

Instructor

Checked by: MARK P. CIANO

Dean, SCJPS

Noted by: TROFIMA M. PANGONILO, Ed.D.

V.P Academics

Approved by: JOSSETTE Y. PEREZ-DAES, RN

PRESIDENT/CHAIRWOMAN
 SCHOOL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY (SCJPS)
NOTES ON Introduction to Criminology
EDITED AND COMPILED BY: JIM N. YAPYAPEN

Learning Module: Lesson 3/

Introduction to Criminology

General Instruction:
1. Read and analyze the module from lesson 3,
2. Cross reference from other books or internet sources,
3. Activity sheet 3 are given at the end of the module it should be answered in a given span of time,

Lesson 01: Criminal

THE CRIMINAL

On the basis of the definition of crime, a criminal may be defined in three ways:

 A person who committed a crime and has been convicted by a court of the violation of a criminal law. (legal definition)
 A person who violated a social norm or one who did an anti-social act. (social definition)
 A person who violated rules of conduct due to behavioral maladjustment. (psychological definition)

Criminological Classification of Criminals

Based on Etiology

 Acute Criminal is one who violates a criminal law because of the impulse or fit of passion. They commit passionate crimes.
 Chronic Criminal is one who commits crime acted in consonance of deliberated thinking. He plans the crime ahead of time. They
are the targeted offenders.

Based on Behavioral System

 Ordinary Criminal is considered the lowest form of criminal in a criminal career. He doesn’t stick to crime as a profession but
rather pushed to commit crimes due to great opportunity.
 Organized Criminal is one who associates himself with other criminals to earn a high degree of organization to enable them to
commit crimes easily without being detected by authorities. They commit organized crimes.
 Professional Criminal is a person who is engaged in criminal activities with high degree of skill. He is usually one who practices
crime as a profession to maintain a living.

Based on Activities

 Professional Criminals are those who practice crime as a profession for a living. Criminal activity is constant in order to earn skill
and develop ability in their commission.
 Accidental Criminals are those who commit crimes when the situation is conducive to its commission.
 Habitual Criminals are those who continue to commit crime because of deficiency of intelligence and lack of self – control.

Based on Mental Attitudes

 Active Criminals are those who commit crimes due to aggressiveness.

 Passive Inadequate Criminals are those who commit crimes because they are pushed to it by reward or promise.
 Socialized Delinquents are criminals who are normal in behavior but defective in their socialization process or development.
 Based on Legal Classification

 Habitual Delinquent is a person who, with in a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of
serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, estafa, or falsification, is found guilty of any of the said crimes or a third time
oftener.

 Recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another
crime embraced in the same title of the Revised Penal Code.

CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

Crime in its legal definition may constitute an intentional act in violation of the criminal law and penalized by the state a felony,
offense or misdemeanor. Criminal behavior, therefore, is an intentional behavior that violates a criminal code (Bartol, 1995).

Criminal behavior may also refer to the study of the human conduct focused on the mental processes of the criminal: the way he
behaves or acts including his activities and the causes and influences if his criminal behavior.

VICTIMS OF CRIME

Victimology is simply the study of victims of crimes and contributory role, if any, in crime causation. It is also the scientific
process of gaining substantial amounts of knowledge on offender characteristics by studying the nature of victims. (Schmalleger, 1997).

PENOLOGY (CORRECTION)

This is another object of interest of criminology that deals with punishment of criminal offenders. Punishment is justified by
deterrence, retribution, atonement, societal protection, and reformation of criminals.

APPROACHES AND THEORIES OF CRIME

SUBJECTIVE APPROACHES - deals mainly on the biological explanation of crimes, focused on the forms of abnormalities that
exist in the individual criminal before, during and after the commission of the crime (Tradio, 1999). Included under this approach are:

1. Anthropological Approach – the study on the physical characteristics of an individual offender with non-offenders in the attempt
to discover differences covering criminal behavior (Hooton).
2. Medical Approach - the application of medical examinations on the individual criminal explain the mental and physical condition
of the individual prior and after the commission of the crime (Positivist).
3. Biological Approach –the evaluation of genetic influences to criminal behavior. It is noted that heredity is one force pushing the
criminal to crime (Positivist).
4. Physiological Approach – the study on the nature of human being concerning his physical needs in order to satisfy his ants. It
explains that the deprivation of the physical body on the basic needs is an important determiner of the commission if crime
(Maslow).
5. Psychological Approach – it is concerned about the deprivation of the psychological needs of man, which constitute the
development of deviations of normal behavior resulting to unpleasant emotions (Freud, Maslow).
6. Psychiatric Approach – the explanation of crime through diagnosis of mental diseases as a cause of the criminal behavior
(Positivist).
7. Psychoanalytical Approach – the explanation of crimes based on the Freudian Theory, which traces behavior as the deviation of
the repression of the basic drives (Freud).

OBJECTIVE APPROACHES - The objective approaches deal on the study of groups, social processes and institutions as
influences to behavior. They are primarily derived from social sciences (Tradio, 1999). Under this are:

1. Geographic Approach – this approach considers topography, natural resources, geographical location, and climate lead an
individual to commit crime (Quetelet).
2. Ecological Approach – it is concerned with the biotic grouping of men resulting to migration, competition, social discrimination,
division of labor and social conflict as factors of crime (Park).
3. Economic Approach – it deals with the explanation of crime concerning financial security of inadequacy and other necessities to
support life as factors to criminality (Merton).
4. Socio – Cultural Approach – those that focus on institutions, economic, financial, education, political, and religious influences to
crime (Cohen).
THEORIES OF CRIME AND THE PIONEERS

PRE-CLASSICAL ERA

The Demonological Theory - Before the development of more scientific theories of criminal behavior, one of the most popular
explanations was Demonology (Hagan, 1990). According to this explanation individuals were thought to be possessed by good or evil
spirits, which caused good or evil behavior. The theory maintains that criminal behavior was believed to be the result of evil spirits and
demons something of natural force that controls his/her behavior. Centuries ago, Guilt and innocence were established by a variety of
procedures that presumably called forth the supernatural allies of the accused. The accused were innocent if they could survive an ordeal,
or if miraculous signs appeared. They were guilty if they died at stake, or if omens were associated with them (Bartol, 1995). Harsh
punishments were also given.

PRE-TWENTIETH CENTURY THEORIES (18th C – 1738 - 1798)

In the eighteenth century, criminological literature, whether psychological, sociological, or psychiatric in bent, has traditionally
been divided into three broad schools of thought about the causes of crime: the classical, neo-classical and the positivist schools of
criminology.

The Classical School of Criminology

This is the school of thought advocated by Cesare Beccaria whose real name is Cesare Bonesara Marchese de Beccaria
together with Jeremy Bentham (1823) who proposed “Utilitarian Hedonism”, the theory, which explains that a person always acts in such a
way as to seek pleasure and avoid pain.

Cesare Beccaria in his “ESSAY on Crimes and Punishment” presented his key ideas on the abolition of torture as a legitimate
means of extracting confessions. The Classical theory maintains that man is essentially a moral creature with absolute free will to choose
between good and evil therefore tress is placed upon the criminal himself; that every man is responsible for his act. Freewill (Beccaria) – a
philosophy advocating punishment severe enough for people to choose, to avoid criminal acts. It includes the belief that a certain criminal
act warrants a certain punishment without any punishment without any variation. Hedonism (Bentham) – the belief that people choose
pleasure and avoid pain.

The Neo-Classical School of Criminology

The neo-classical school of criminology argued that situations or circumstances that made it impossible to exercise freewill are
reasons to exempt the accused from conviction. This school of thought maintains that while the classical doctrine is correct in general, it
should be modified in certain details, that children and lunatics should not be regarded as criminals and free from punishment, it must take
into account certain mitigating circumstances.

The Positivist/Italian School (1838 – 1909)

It maintained that crime as any other act is a natural phenomenon and is comparable to disaster or calamity. That crime as a
social and moral phenomenon which cannot be treated and checked by the imposition of punishment but rather rehabilitation or the
enforcement of individual measures. Cesare Lombroso and his two students, Enrico Ferri and Rafaele Garofalo advocated this school.

Cesare Lombroso (1836 – 1909) – The Italian leader of the positivist school of criminology, was criticized for his methodology
and his attention to the biological characteristics of offenders, but his emphasis on the need to study offenders scientifically earned him the
“father of modern criminology.” His major contribution is the development of a scientific approach to the study of criminal behavior and to
reform the criminal law. He wrote the essay entitled “CRIME: Its Causes and Remedies” that contains his key ideas and the classifications
of criminals.

Classifications of Criminals by Lombroso

1. Born Criminals – there are born criminals according to Lombroso, the belief that being criminal behavior is inherited.
2. Criminal by Passion – are individuals who are easily influenced by great emotions like fit of anger.
3. Insane Criminals – are those who commit crime due to abnormalities or psychological disorders. They should be exempted from
criminal liability.
4. Criminoloid – a person who commits crime due to less physical stamina/self self control.
5. Occasional Criminal – are those who commit crime due to insignificant reasons that pushed them to do at a given occasion.
6. Pseudo-criminals – are those who kill in self-defense.
 Enrico Ferri (1856 – 1929) – He was the best-known Lombroso’s associate. His greatest contribution was his attack on the
classical doctrine of free will, which argued that criminals should be held morally responsible for their crimes because they must have
made a rational decision to commit the crime.

Raffaele Garofalo ( 1852 – 1934) – Another follower of Lombroso, an Italian nobleman, magistrate, senator, and professor of
law. Like Lombroso and Ferri, he rejected the doctrine of free will and supported the position that the only way to understand crime was to
study it by scientific methods. Influenced on Lombroso’s theory of atavistic stigmata (man’s inferior/ animalistic behavior), he traced the
roots of criminal behavior not to physical features but to their psychological equivalents, which he called “moral anomalies”.

The Classical and Positivist School Compared

Classical School Positivist School

 Legal definition of crime  No to legal definition

 Punishment fit the crime  Punishment fit the criminal
 Doctrine of free will  Doctrine of determinism
 Death penalty allowed  Abolition of death penalty
 No imperical research  Inductive method
 Definite sentence  Indeterminate sentence

EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY THEORIES

1. David Emile Durkheim (French, 1858 - 1917) - He advocated the “Anomie Theory”, the theory that focused on the sociological
point of the positivist school, which explains that the absence of norms in a society provides a setting conductive to crimes and
other anti-social acts. According to him, the explanation of human conduct lies not in the individual but in the group and the social
organization.

2. Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1969) - Psychologists have considered a variety of possibilities to account for individual differences –
defective conscience, emotional immaturity, inadequate childhood socialization, maternal deprivation, and poor moral
development. The Freudian view on criminal behavior was based on the use of Psychology in explaining an approach in
understanding criminal behavior – the foundation of the Psychoanalytical theory.

3. Robert Ezra Park (1864 - 1944) - Park is a strong advocate of the scientific method in explaining criminality but he is a
sociologist. He advocated the “Human Ecology Theory”. Human Ecology is the study of the interrelationship of people and their
environment. This theory maintains that crime is a function of social change that occurs along with environmental change. It also
maintains that the isolation, segregation, competition, conflict, social contract, interaction and social hierarchy of people are the
major influences of criminal behavior and crimes.

MIDDLE TWENTIETH CENTURY

1. Ernest Kretschmer (1888 – 1964) - The idea of somatotyping was originated from the work of a German Psychiatrist, Ernest
Kretschmer, who distinguished three principal types of physique as:
a. Asthenic – lean, slightly built, narrow shoulders
b. Athletic – medium to tall, strong, muscular, course bones
c. Pyknic – medium height, rounded figure, massive neck, broad face

Kretschmer related these body physique to various pychotic behavioral patterns: Pyknic to manic depression,
asthenics and athletics to schizophrenia.

2. William H. Sheldon (1898 – 1977) - Sheldon is an influenced of the Somatotype School of Criminology, which related body built
to behavior. He became popular of his own Somatotyping Theory. His key ideas are concentrated on the principle of “Survival of
the Fittest” as a behavioral science. He combines the biological and psychological explanation to understand deviant behavior.
Sheldon’s “Somatotyping Theory” maintains the belief of inheritance as the primary determinants of behavior and the physique is
a reliable indicator of personality.

Classification of Body Physique by Sheldon

a. Endomorphy – a type with relatively predominance of soft, roundness through out the regions of the body. They have
low specific gravity. Persons with typically relaxed and comfortable disposition.
 b. Mesomorphy – athletic type, predominance of muscle, bone and connective tissue, normally heavy, hard and firm,
sting and tough. They are the people who are routinely active and aggressive, and they are the most likely to commit
crimes.
c. Ectomorphy – thin physique, flat chest, delicacy through the body, slender, poorly muscled. They tend to look more
fatigue and withdrawn.

3. Edwin Sutherland (1883 - 1950) - Sutherland has been referred to as “the most important criminologist of the twentieth century”
because his explanation about crime and criminal behavior can be seen as a corrected extension of social perspective. For this
reason, he was considered as the “Dean of Modern Criminology.” He said that crime is learned and not inherited.

He advocated the DAT – Differential Association Theory, which maintain that the society is composed of different group
organization, the societies consist of a group of people having criminalistic tradition and anti-criminalistic tradition. And that
criminal behavior is learned and not inherited. It is learned through the process of communication, and learning process includes
technique of committing the crime, motive and attitude.

4. Walter Reckless (1899 - 1988) - The Containment Theory assumes that for every individual there exists a containing external
structure and a protective internal structure, both of which provide defense, protection or insulation against crime or delinquency.
According to Reckless, the outer structure of an individual are the external pressures such as poverty, unemployment and
blocked opportunities while the inner containment refers to the person’s self control ensured by strong ego, good self image, well
developed conscience, high frustration tolerance and high sense of responsibility. (Adler, 1995)

5. Karl Marx, Frederick Engel, Willem Bonger (1818 -1940) -They are the proponents of the Social Class Conflict and Capitalism
Theory. Marx and Engel claim that the ruling class in a capitalist society is responsible for the creation of criminal law and their
ideological bases in the interpretation and enforcement of the laws. All are reflected in the ruling class, thus crime and
delinquency are reflected on the demoralized surplus of population, which is made up of the underprivileged usually the
unemployed and underemployed. Willem Bonger, a Marxist-Socialist, on the other hand, placed more emphasis on working bout
crimes of economic gain. He believes that profit -motive of capitalism generates an egoistic personality. Hence, crime is an
inevitable outcome.

LATE 20TH CENTURY: THE CONTEMPORARY PIONEERS

1. Robert King Merton (1910) - Robert Merton is the premier sociologist of the modern days who, after Durkheim, also related the
crime problem to anomie. He advocated the Strain Theory, which maintains that the failure of man to achieve a higher status of
life caused them to commit crimes in order for that status/goal to be attained. He argued that crime is a means to achieve goals
and the social structure is the root of the crime problem. Merton’s explanation to criminal behavior assumes that people are law
abiding but when under great pressure will result to crime.

2. Albert Cohen (1918) - He advocated the Sub-Culture Theory of Delinquency. Cohen claims that the lower class cannot socialize
effectively as the middle class in what is considered appropriate middle class behavior. Thus, the lower class gathered together
share their common problems, forming a subculture that rejects middle class values. Cohen called this process as reaction
formation. Much of this behavior comes to be called delinquent behavior; the subculture is called a gang and the kids are called
delinquents. He put emphasis on the explanation of prevalence, origins, process and purposes as factors to crime.

3. Gresham Sykes (1922) - He advocated the Neutralization Theory. It maintains that an individual will obey or disobey societal
rules depending upon his or her ability to rationalize whether he is protected from hurt or destruction. People become law abiding
if they feel they are benefited by it and they violate it if these laws are not favorable to them.

4. Lloyd Ohlin (1928) - He advocated the DOT – Differential Opportunity Theory. This theory explained that society leads the lower
class to want things and society does things to people. He claimed that there is differential opportunity, or access, to success
goals by both legitimate and illegitimate means depending on the specific location of the individual with in the social structure.
Thus, lower class groups are provided with greater opportunities for the acquisition of deviant acts.

5. Frank Tennenbaum, Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker (1822 - 1982) - They are the advocates of the Labeling Theory – the theory
that explains about social reaction to behavior. The theory maintains that the original cause of crime cannot be known, no
behavior is intrinsically criminal, behavior becomes criminal if it is labeled as such.

6. Earl Richard Quinney (1934) – He was a Marxist criminologist who advocated the Instrumentalist Theory of capitalist rule. He
argued that the state exist as a device for controlling the exploited class – the class that labors for the benefit of the ruling class.
He claims that upper classes create laws that protect their interest and t the same time the unwanted behavior of all other
members of society. Quinney major contribution is that he proposed the shift in focus from looking for the causes of crime from
the individual to the examination of the Criminal Justice System for clues.

OTHER THEORISTS
 1. Charles Darwin’s Theory (1809 - 1882) - In the theory of evolution, he claimed that humans, like other animals, are parasite. Man
is an organism having an animalistic behavior that is dependent on other animals for survival. Thus, man kills and steal to live.

2. Charles Goring’s Theory (1870 - 1919) - The medical officer in prison in England who accepted the Lombroso’s challenge that
body physique is a determinant to behavior. Goring concluded that there is no such thing a physical chemical type. He
contradicted the Lombroso’s idea that criminality can be seen through features alone. Nevertheless, Goring accepted that
criminals are physically inferior to normal individuals in the sense that criminals tend to be shorter and have less weight than
non-criminals.

3. Earnest Hooton’s Theory (1887 - 1954) - An Anthropologist who reexamined the work of Goring and found out that “Tall thin men
tend to commit forgery and fraud, undersized men are thieves and burglars, short heavy person commit assault, rape and other
sex crimes; where as mediocre (average) physique flounder around among other crimes.” He also contended that criminals are
originally inferior; and that crime is the result of the impact of environment.

4. Adolphe Quetelet (1796 - 1874) - Quetelet was a Belgian Statistician who pioneered Cartography and the Carthographical
School of Criminology that placed emphasis on social statistics. He discovered, basing on his research, that crimes against
persons increased during summer and crimes against property tends to increase during winter.

HISTORICAL TIMELINE OF THE THEORIES

The history of criminology dates back from the works of criminological thinkers or theorists in criminology. The origins of
criminology are usually located in the late-eighteenth-century writings of those who sought to reform criminal justice and penal systems
that they perceived as cruel, inhumane, and arbitrary. These old systems applied the law unequally, were subject to great corruption, and
often used torture and the death penalty indiscriminately.

THEORY MOTIVE
Demonology (5,000 BC-1692 AD) Demonic Influence
Astrology (3500 BC-1630 AD) Zodiac/Planetary Influence
Theology (1215 BC-present) God's will
Medicine (3000 BC -present) Natural illness
Education (1642-present) Academic underachievement/bad teachers
Psychiatry (1795-present) Mental illness
Psychoanalysis (1895-present) Subconscious guilt/defense mechanisms
Classical School of Criminology (1690--) Free will/reason/hedonism
Positive School of Criminology (1840--) Determinism/beyond control of individual
Phrenology (1770-1875) Bumps on head
Cartography (1800-present) Geographic location/climate
Mental Testing (1895-present) Feeble-mindedness/retardation/low IQ
Osteopathy (1892-present) Abnormalities of bones or joints
Chiropractics (1895-present) Misalignment of spine/nerves
Imitation (1843-1905) Mind on mind crowd influences
Economics (1818-present) Poverty/economic need/consumerism
Case Study Approach (1909-present) Emotional/social development
Social Work (1903-present) Community/individual relations
Sociology (1908-present) Social/environmental factors
Castration (1907-1947) Secretion of androgen from testes
Ecology (1927-present) Relation of person with environment
Transexualism (1937-1969) Trapped in body of wrong sex
Psychosurgery (1935-1959) Frontal lobe dysfunction/need lobotomy
Culture Conflict (1938-1980) Conflict of customs from “old” country
Differential Association (1939-present) Learning from bad companions
Anomie (1938-present) State of normlessness/goal-means gap
Differential Opportunity (1961-present) Absence of legitimate opportunities
Alienation (1938-1975) Frustration/feeling cut off from others
Identity (1942-1980) Hostile attitude/crisis/sense of sameness
Identification (1950-1955) Making heroes out of legendary criminals
Containment (1961-1971) Outer temptation/inner resistance balance
Prisonization (1940-1970)
Gang Formation (1927-present)
Behavior Modification (1938-1959)
Social Defense (1947-1971)
Guided Group Interaction (1958-1971)
Interpersonal Maturity (1965-1983)
Sociometry (1958-1969)
Dysfunctional Families (1958-present)
White-collar Crime (1945-present)
Control Theory (1961-present)
Strain Theory (1954-present)
Subcultures (1955-present)
Labeling Theory (1963-1976)
Neutralization (1957-1990)
Drift (1964-1984)
Reference Groups (1953-1978)
Operant Conditioning (1953-1980)
Reality Therapy (1965-1975)
Gestalt Therapy (1969-1975)
Transactional Analysis (1961-1974)
Learning Disabilities (1952-1984)
Biodynamics (1955-1962)
Nutrition and Diet (1979-present)
Metabolism (1950-1970)
Biofeedback (1974-1981)
Biosocial Criminology (1977-1989)
The "New Criminology" (1973-1983)
Conflict Criminology (1969-present)
Critical Criminology (1973-present)
Radical Criminology (1976-present)
Left Realism (1984-present)
Criminal Personality (1976-1980)
Criminal Pathways Theory (1979-present)
Feminism (1980-present)
Low Self Control Theory (1993-present)
General Strain Theory (1994-present)
Customs and folkways of prison culture
Need for acceptance, status, belonging
Reward/Punishment Programming
Soft targets/absence of crime prevention
Absence of self-responsibility/discussion
Unsocialized, subcultural responses
One’s place in group network system
Members “feed off” other’s neurosis
Cutting corners/bordering on illegal
Weak social bonds/natural predispositions
Anger, relative deprivation, inequality
Criminal values as normal within group
Self-fulfilling prophecies/name-calling
Self-talk, excuses before behavior
Sense of limbo/living in two worlds
Imaginary support groups
Stimuli-to-stimuli contingencies
Failure to face reality
Perception of small part of "big picture"
No communication between inner parent-adult-child
School failure/relying on "crutch"
Lack of harmony with environment
Imbalances in mineral/vitamin content
Imbalance in metabolic system
Involuntary reactions to stress
Environment triggers inherited "markers"
Ruling class oppression
Structural barriers to class interests
Segmented group formations
Inarticulation of theory/praxis
Working class prey on one another
Errors of thinking
Critical turning/tipping points in life events
Patriarchial power structures
Impulsiveness, Sensation-seeking
Stress, Hassles, Interpersonal Relations