Psychology and crime: The intertwining of the two.

The basic components of a crime are divided into two parts; Mens rea and Actus rea. Actus rea is
the voluntary act of the guilty contributing to the crime, whereas mens rea refers to the guilty and
criminal intent of the accused, implying that the accused must be aware of the guilty act he is
performing and its consequences.

Psychology helps in determining the existence of mens rea in a crime and the punishments that
would be appropriate based on the mental condition of the accused, or in certain circumstances
what sort of medical attention or help is required based on the psychological and mental
condition of the accused.

Differentiating crime on the basis of intention is made easier with the help of criminal
psychology. The understanding which criminal psychology offers as to why crimes are
committed by certain individuals helps in appropriately handling cases where mentally ill people
are involved where they commit crime not knowing the consequences of their action.

Psychology as a science, gives us a perspective into the brain of the guilty and helps us
understand what intention was behind the crime and the very trigger behind it. This in turn helps
us in appropriately taking action on such cases, giving the help the accused needs in certain
circumstances.

Sociological theories of criminology believe that society influences a person to become a

criminal. Examples include the social learning theory, which says that people learn criminal
behavior from the people around them, and social conflict theory, which says that class warfare
is responsible for crime.

Sociological criminology has a rich tradition in examining the relationships of demographic and
group variables to crime. Variables such as age, race, gender, socioeconomic status, and ethnic-
cultural affiliation have been shown to have significant relationships with certain categories and
patterns of crimes.

It also probes the situational or environmental factors that are most conducive to criminal action,
such as the time, place, kind of weapons used, and the circumstances surrounding the crime.

On the other hand, psychological criminology is the science of the behavior and mental
processes of the person who commits a crime. While sociological criminology focuses on
psychological criminology focuses on individual criminal behavior—how it is acquired, evoked,
maintained, and modified.

Forensic psychologists and criminal anthropologists play a key role in determining the suspects
of the case by analyzing the crime-scene and giving an idea about the personality and quirks of
the suspect, which in turn helps the police in narrowing down the suspects accurately.

Consistent personality traits involved in a crime can help and predict which individuals are more
likely to commit a crime. However, on the other hand, the search for every single characteristic
personality type of murderers and rapists is not plausible because of the complexities arising
from doing so. ‘Criminal profiling’ is the plausible alternative for such problems.

Criminal profiling is the process of identifying the personality traits, behavioral tendencies and
demographic variables of the offender based on the characteristics of the crime 1. This
information is often based on offenders who have committed similar crimes.

In recent times, a greater understanding of psychology, psychiatry and human behavior has
helped in bringing significant changes in the perspective of legal experts and law in how the
mentally ill are supposed to be dealt with in the justice system.

Bartol CR reviews the underlying about the human nature and their link to psychology and
identifies three main domains:

i) The conformity perspective: This theory believes that human beings are confirming beings
who are strongly influenced by the values that surround their environment and society. Hence,
humans are always influenced to do whichever is the ‘right thing’ according to the norms and
values of the society.
However, when there is a ‘perceived discrepancy’ between the goals cherished, materialistic
values and the availability of legitimate means to do so, delinquency and crimes occur.
Strain theory of Robert K Merton is a good example for this perspective. According to this
theory, societal structures can pressure individuals into committing crimes by increasing the
standard of goal an individual needs to achieve in order to be successful in a society despite the
resources being limited.

ii) The non-conformist perspective: According to this theory, human beings in general are
undisciplined creatures who lack morale, and would commit crimes indiscriminately if given a
chance to rebel and flout against the conventions of society.
Travis Hisschi’s social control theory proposes that exploiting the process of socialization builds
self-control and reduces the inclination and the urge to indulge in antisocial behavior which may
lead to committing crimes.

iii) The neutral perspective: This theory is based on the assumption that human beings are
‘neutral’ by birth and all of their behavioral, tendencies and beliefs are acquired from the social
environment of the individual.
Differential association theory by Edwin Sutherland is a good example for this perspective. It
proposes that individuals learn their values, attitudes, techniques and motives for criminal
behavior through interaction with others.

Many of the infamous offenders have been known to have a rough childhood, being brought up
in an unstable environment and exposed to violence at a very young age. Some examples include
Jeffrey Dahmer, who was bullied during his schooling along with his parents having a rocky
marriage and John Wayne Gacy was no different, he grew up with an abusive and alcoholic
father who would beat Gacy and physically assault his mother as well.

This supports the neutral perspective put forward by Bortal CR. The probability of a child who is
brought up in a stable environment with love and care committing crimes as an adult is much
less compared to a child who grows up in an unstable environment, exposed to violence and
abuse at a young age. This makes the existence of psychology behind crimes far more evident.

There are specific developmental risk factors that lead to delinquency and crime. Criminal as
well as antisocial behavior in adults can be traced back to their childhood. Every person follows
a developmental pathway where these characteristics can be identified at an early age.

1 Bartol CR, Bartol AR, Psychology and Law: Research and Application.
When observed, there are certain risk factors which can be observed to be the common
background in most of the offenders such as alcohol abuse, childhood victimization and mental
illness. Experts believe that the more risks a person is exposed to, the greater is the probability
that person will participate in antisocial behavior throughout his or her lifetime 2.

Just like risk factors, protective factors are also prevalent. Protective factors are the
characteristics or experiences that shield children from serious antisocial behavior which lead to
delinquency and crime in the future. Warm and caring parents and a high-quality educational
experience can be taken as examples for protective factors. In general, a nurturing and healthy
environment minimizes biologically and socially toxic conditions that influence healthy
development3.
However, it cannot be argued that the trigger for all of the crimes is rooted from childhood, but
the prevalence of a risk factor in general can be observed which provides an explanation for the
antisocial behavior of the adult in the future.

Risk factors can be divided into three categories such as, social risk factors, Parental and family
risk factors and psychological risk factors.

Social risk factors include poverty, peer rejection or association with other antisocial peers, pre-
school experience and academic failure.

The connection between poverty leading to crime is not extremely strong but nevertheless still
existent. This in turn leads to victimization of the offender. Often the need to commit a crime
because of lack of resources due to poverty arises, although most of the time, the commit in
question is non-violent.

Children’s peer relations make unique and essential contributions to their social and emotional
development4 as well.
During adolescence, there is a steep increase in susceptibility to peer influence and a decline in
susceptibility to parental influence5, the effect and impact of the peer influence on the individual
increases as a result. In addition, investigators have found that peer influence is also a strong
predictor of adolescent substance use and delinquent behavior 6.

Notably, parent-child relationship has a very crucial impact on how the child is received by their
peers. Being liked and accepted by peers during elementary school is a crucial developmental
task leading to healthy psychological and social development 7. Infamous serial killer Jeffrey
Dahmer is a very good example for this, as his experience during his schooling was a
contributing factor for the root of his triggers.

Preschool experience is also proven to have a very influential effect on an individual and their
psychological and mental development. Poor-quality child care has been reported to put children’s
development at risk for poorer language, cognitive development, and lower ratings of social and
emotional adjustment8.

2 Wasserman & Seracini, 2001

3 Biglan et al., 2012
4 Bagwell, 2004; Blandon et al., 2010; Newcomb, Bukowksi, & Pattee, 1993
5 Mounts, 2002
6 Coie & Miller-Johnson, 2001; Mounts, 2002.
7 Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998.
8 Tran & Weinraub, 2006
Being placed in different homes, day-care centers and classrooms with different and varying peer
groups is proven to lead to decreased prosocial behavior in the child and affect the socialization
skills of the child compared to children who grow up in nourishing and stable houses.

Early academic failure is linked with antisocial delinquency leading to crimes as well9.
According to Prison Statistics in India, among the 4,78,600 prisoners as on 31st December, 2019
the highest number of prisoners were having education Below Class X (41.6%, 1,98,872) followed
by Prisoners with No Education (27.7%, 1,32,729) and prisoners with education Class X And
Above but Below Graduation (21.5%, 1,03,036).

Research has proven that early rejection faced by an individual academically can have a
detrimental effect on their mental and psychological development over a long period of time.

Parental and family risk factors have been known to be a crucial contributing factor for an
individual's antisocial delinquency in their adulthood often leading to crimes. It has been well
recognized over the years about how it is the responsibility of a family to provide a safe, secure,
stable and a nourishing environment for a child to grow without any trauma that might affect the
child’s psychological development.

Single-parent households are a crucial parental risk factor. Estimating the statistics of single
households in India and third world countries is difficult as the census does not report on
important demographics of the subjects such as age, gender, race and so on.

A single-parent household automatically indicates the occurrence of an experience that might

have affected the psychological development of the child such as divorce of the parents,
separation, death of a parent or absence of a parent voluntarily because of their inability to raise a
child.

However, it cannot be always implied that single-parent households lead to delinquency in the
adulthood of the children, as study suggests that almost most of the children from single-parent
households, considered conflict free homes to children from conflict ridden houses where both
the parents are present, are far less prone to being affected psychologically, leading to antisocial
behavior.

Parental style and practices are an extremely important factor contributing to antisocial
delinquency leading to crimes in individuals. Parental practices are strategies employed by
parents to achieve specific academic, social, or athletic goals across different contexts and
situations 10.

For example, teaching the value of hard work through rewards every time they achieve
something is a parental method. According to Diana Baumrind who theorized that there is a very
close relationship between parenting style and the children’s behavior, identified four parental
styles:
(1) authoritarian, (2) permissive, (3) authoritative, and (4) neglecting.

Parents who use authoritarian methods of parenting often try to shape, control and influence the
behavior of their child using certain preestablished, absolute standards. Authoritarian parents do
not encourage any verbal communication which implies equality in the parent-child relationship.

9 Dodge & Pettit, 2003

10 Hart, Nelson, Robinson, Olsen, & McNeilly-Choque, 1998
This type of rigid structure of environment for a child can often affect their psychological
development and other important factors such as self-esteem. These types of parents try to
control the life of their child to the absolute extent, often almost living through their children's
lives.

Children raised under authoritarian style have severe self-image issues and very low self-esteem
leading to antisocial behavior in their adulthood where committing crimes is often seen as their
way of rebelling against the control that had been placed on them all throughout their life.

Parents who adopt to pessimistic method of parenting display negative perceptions, tolerant
attitude towards their children’s behavior including expression of aggressive and sexual
impulses. These types of parents do not try to control the life of their children unlike
authoritarian type of parents.

However, the constant imposing of their negative opinions about the child’s behavior severely
affects the psychological and mental development of the child leading to very low self-esteem,
self-doubt and depression at times as well, as they begin to feel that they are never good enough
despite how hard they try. According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism, permissive parenting can lead to teenage drinking.

Research indicates that permissiveness is not the recommended approach 11 as children in these
families have poor self-esteem, are poor judges of character and will rebel against authority
figures when they are older.

In an authoritative style of parenting, parents often establish mature conversations with the child
based on their age and encourage individuality, growth and independence while constantly
establishing morals and ground rules when the children need to be monitored.

These types of parents try to be reasonable with their children and make them understand about
the consequences of their actions for their mistakes instead of simply punishing them.

Finally, in the neglecting type of parenting, the presence of the parent in the life of the child is
bare-minimum and demonstrates detachment and very little involvement towards the child.
These types of parents are neither demanding nor responsive, making the child fend for itself.

Here, the parents do not structure or monitor, and are not supportive, but may be actively
rejecting or else neglect their child rearing responsibilities altogether12. In the extreme form of
such parenting, it is considered child-neglect.
13
Studies discovered that neglecting style of parenting was one of the strongest risk factors
identified with delinquency and a life of crime. Baumrind found that adolescents from
unengaged families were far more likely than their adolescent peers to be antisocial, lacking self-
regulation, social responsibility, and cognitive competence. primarily on groups and society as a
whole, and how they influence criminal activity,

James Snyder and Gerald Patterson,1987 from their research concluded that two parental styles
contribute directly or indirectly to delinquency, enmeshed and lax parenting styles. This
classification made by James is very similar to Baumrind’s authoritarian and pessimistic styles.

11 Jackson & Foshee, 1998

12 Baumrind, 1991b, p. 62
13 Hoeve et al. (2007)
In enmeshment type of parenting, personal boundaries are nonexistent and unclear between the
parent and the child. Having an enmeshment relationship between a parent and child will often
result in over involvement in each other’s lives so that it makes it hard for the child to become
developmentally independent and responsible for her choices.

Here, when one family member in a coercive interaction acts aversively, other family members
react the same way, escalating the exchange. This pattern results in an intermittent, inconsistent
punishment schedule that, in the long run, does little to discourage antisocial behavior which
would further lead to delinquent behavior.

Lax type of parenting is the opposite of what enmeshment type of parenting constitutes. In this
type of parenting style, the parent ignores their duty as a parent of disciplining the child when
there is a necessity to do so. These parents often fail to recognize when their children are
involved in deviant behavior and believe that they have little to do about it.

Research has proven that parents who follow authoritarian and enmeshment type of parenting are
closely connected to the development of aggression and antisocial behavior in adolescents 14.
Contrasting this discovery, it has been observed that authoritative style of parenting has the
opposite effect on children compared to enmeshment and authoritarian style of parenting.

Out of all the parenting styles discussed, neglecting type of parental style is most closely
associated with delinquency and antisocial behavior. However, this does not imply that children
who grow up in a neglected household are sure to develop antisocial behavior and delinquency to
commit crimes. Alternative role models such as relatives, teachers and mentors have a similar
effect of a parent by providing them moral values and monitoring them.

Influence of siblings in a family is another important risk factor arising from families. Siblings in
general have a very strong influence on each other and younger siblings are always known to be
influenced by the behavior of their older sibling.

Research has found that younger siblings who have a very narrow age gap with their older
siblings try to be different from their older siblings instead of mimicking them. But, since
siblings spend a majority of their time together during childhood and even most of their
adolescence, it is found that they have a very strong influence on the behavioral development of
each other.

When the siblings have a very cordial and warm relationship, and the older sibling is involved in
delinquent and antisocial behavior, the younger sibling who gets influenced by this can try to
follow in the same path as their older sibling. But, if the siblings are not very close enough to
influence each other, and one of them gets involved in delinquent behavior, the other sibling may
make it a point to not be like their other sibling and choose a path different from theirs.

Parental psychopathology is a very crucial risk factor. Children whose parents, especially
mothers who are clinically depressed are at an increased risk of being prone to antisocial
behavior, emotional dysregulation and poor cognitive development 15.

Parental alcoholism also increases the risk of alcohol abuse by their off-springs. Children who
grow up in families which have experienced the death of a family member caused by another
family member are also increasingly prone to antisocial behavior compared to other children.

Blitstein, Murray, Lytle, Birnhaum, & Perry, 2005; Ruchkin, 2002

14

Bennett, Bendersky, & Lewis, 2002; Mazulis, Hyde, & Clark, 2004; Nelson, Hammen,
15

Brennan, & Ullman, 2003

After social environment risk factors, family and parental risk factors, psychological risk factors
are the next crucial contributing factor to the development of antisocial behavior in adulthood.

Lack of empathy, attachment disorder, animal cruelty and cognitive and linguistic deficiencies
are some examples for psychological risk factors contributing to delinquency.

Lack of attachment is a psychological risk factor which can be observed in infants at an early
stage. Children, when introduced to a new environment display a variety of attachment styles
which influence their level of attachment with their parents.

Some children, when in a strange environment, display secure attachment. The child is calm
under the presence of their parents and shows curiosity towards the new environment they are
subjected to. They are distressed when their parents leave and are delighted upon their return.

Children who display secure attachment use their parents or caregiver as a secure base for further
exploration. Other infants are also observed who display insecure style of attachment. This
insecure type of attachment can be divided into anxious and avoidant types of attachment.

Infants who display anxious type of attachment are distressed and intensely anxious upon the
introduction of a new environment and separation from their parents. They tend to cling on to
their parents and refuse to explore the environment any further. However, upon the return of the
parents, the children become indifferent towards them and display a very hostile behavior upon
them. They cry when picked up and push the parent away, refusing to follow them.

On the other hand, children who display an avoidant type of attachment are indifferent towards
the presence of their parents. Avoidant type of attachment is characterized by little to no distress
on the part of infants, irrespective of whether their parents are present or not. Avoidant
attachment in infancy and childhood is associated with dismissing attachment in adulthood 16.

Studies prove that children with a secure attachment base usually develop into psychologically
healthy people. As adults, they form good relationships, empathize with others, and generally
show good self-regulation17.

Ward and his associates,1995 have hypothesized that many sex offenders probably had parents
who were inconsistently affectionate and poor at identifying their child’s needs and providing
them. In essence, the sex offenders demonstrate the dismissing (avoidant) attachment style in
their adult relationships followed by the detached parenting style they experienced.

Lack of empathy is the next psychological risk factor which is a huge contributing factor towards
the development of antisocial behavior and delinquency. The inconsiderate nature and total
disregard towards the feelings of others, makes it easier to commit crimes with a clear mind as
their conscience does not trouble them because of their unresponsive nature towards the feelings
of others. People who engage in violence and/or a large variety of serious offenses appear to
have a significant inability to feel the pain of their victims.

Empathy is categorized into two types, affective empathy and cognitive empathy. Affective
empathy refers to the emotional response one experiences which is characterized by feelings of
concern towards others and the feeling to comfort the other person from their pain.

Cognitive empathy refers to the understanding of the emotion of others from their own point of

16 Adshead, 2002
17 Ansbro, 2008
view. Jolliffe and Farrington (2007) explain that affective empathy is the ability to experience
another person’s emotions, whereas cognitive empathy is the ability to understand another’s
emotions.

Deficiency of empathy has been considered as a characteristic of aggressive and antisocial

individuals. It has been found to be a central ingredient of psychopathy. Recent studies have
proven that deficiency in affective empathy as compared to cognitive empathy is more associated
towards persistent and violent criminal behavior 18.

Animal cruelty is another psychological risk factor which can observed early on in a child’s life.
Researchers have shown an interesting connection between lack of empathy and animal cruelty.
Animal cruelty observed in childhood can indicate some serious psychological problem as it is a
direct connection to lack of consideration towards the pain and feelings of others.
Stouthamer-Loeber and her associates (2004) found that young male who indulge in animal cruelty
are found to be strongest predictors of serious and violent crimes later on in their life.
Jeffrey Dahmer is an excellent example for this study, who showed signs of animal abuse early on
in his childhood which was neglected by their parents.

Cognitive and language deficiency is another risk factor which has been found to contribute to
the development of antisocial behavior because of their inability to express their emotions and
feelings eventually leading them to feel isolated and ignored.

Brownlie et al. (2004) discovered that boys who experienced language impairment at the age of
five have been found to display delinquent behavior at the age of nineteen as compared to boys
who did not have any sort of language impairment.

Language impairment also interferes with socialization and often leads to isolation by their peers
because of these differences which is a key contributing factor for development of antisocial
behavior. This pent-up frustration can often be the cause for outbursts and aggressive episodes.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD] is another major psychological disorder which
affects the psychological development of the children. This disorder is characterized such as
inattention, being easily distracted, impulsive activity and excessive motor activity causing
unnecessary fidgeting or moving.

This however, does not imply that individuals diagnosed with ADHD are prone to commit
crimes. There are many successful people who can prove this otherwise such as Bill Gates and
John F Kennedy. But this is simply a risk factor as it can increase the probability of being
alienated by their peers causing antisocial behavior if the disorder is not treated effectively.

Upon observing the perspectives provided by Barton, and the risk factors arising from social
environment, family and parenting style and psychological issues, it can be observed that
psychology plays a vital role in contributing to the behavior which instigates the committing of
crime and how the neutral perspective is being supported through the existence of risk factors.
Concluding, the relationship between mens rea and actus rea in a crime can be observed by the
existent of psychology hence proving the intertwining of crime and psychology. It provides a
deeper perspective into how an individual is affected when he is faced with various risk factors
and how this in turn results in a detrimental effect on his psychological as well as mental

(Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007; de Kemp, Overbeek, de Wied, Engels, & Scholte, 2007; Schaffer,
18

Clark, & Jeglic, 2009; van Langen et al., 2014; Van Vugt et al., 2011).
development, contributing to the building up of delinquent and antisocial behavior eventually
leading to crimes being committed.

References used:
i
Criminal Behavior: A psychological Approach, Curt R Bartol, Anne M Bartol.