The Complex Interplay 1

The Complex Interplay of Nature and Nurture in Criminal Behavior.

Nayanaa Varsaale

S22011924

Regent’s University of London

Date of Submission - March 19, 2023

The Complex Interplay 2

The Complex Interplay of Nature and Nurture in Criminal Behavior.

Nature versus nurture is a classic debate in the field of psychology that asks whether

human behavior is primarily determined by genetics or by environmental factors. While

some researchers argue that genetics plays the dominant role, others suggest that

environmental factors have a greater impact (Plomin et al., 2012).

Advocates of the nature argument assert that genes have a substantial impact

on human traits and abilities. They rely on findings from behavioral genetics, including

twin studies (Minnesota Twin Study, conducted by Thomas Bouchard and his

colleagues), which indicate that genetic factors contribute to numerous aspects of human

behavior such as intelligence, personality, and mental health. A case in point, research on

identical twins raised in different environments reveals striking similarities in their

characteristics and capabilities, underscoring the significant role that genetics play in

these domains (Plomin, 2018). The nurture argument posits that environmental factors

play a crucial role in determining human behavior, with proponents pointing to parenting,

education, and socialization as key factors. They support their stance with research

demonstrating that changes in the environment can have a significant impact on behavior,

such as the influence of the quality of early childhood education on cognitive

development (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000).

The origins of criminal behavior are multifaceted and can be impacted by a

range of factors, such as genetics, biology, psychology, and the environment. This

complexity makes it challenging to determine whether criminal behavior is a result of

innate traits or external factors. Consequently, the nature versus nurture debate is relevant

in comprehending the intricacies of criminal behavior (Ishikawa & Raine, 2002).

The Complex Interplay 3

The question of whether criminal behavior is primarily influenced by nature or

nurture has been a subject of intense debate among researchers, policymakers, and the

public for decades. While some argue that biological and genetic factors play a key role

in predisposing individuals to criminal activity, others emphasize the importance of

environmental factors such as poverty, family dynamics, and exposure to violence.

Understanding the relative contributions of these different factors to criminal behavior is

not only important for developing effective prevention and intervention programs, but

also for informing broader social and political debates about the nature of human

behavior and responsibility. In this context, it is crucial to examine the evidence

supporting each perspective, as well as the ways in which they might interact or intersect.

By doing so, we can gain a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the

complex phenomenon of criminal behavior, and work towards more effective and

equitable solutions.

Criminal behavior is a complex phenomenon that has been studied for

centuries. The causes of criminal behavior have been attributed to various factors,

including genetics, biology, psychology, and environmental factors. The debate on

whether criminal behavior is influenced by nature or nurture has been ongoing for

decades. This essay aims to explore the different perspectives on the role of nature and

nurture in criminal behavior and provide research evidence to support the arguments.

Nature perspective:

The nature perspective argues that criminal behavior is primarily influenced by

biological and genetic factors. According to this perspective, individuals with a genetic

predisposition to criminal behavior are more likely to engage in criminal activities than
The Complex Interplay 4

those without this predisposition. Studies have identified several biological and genetic

factors that may contribute to criminal behavior.

One of the biological factors that have been linked to criminal behavior is brain

structure and function. Studies have shown that individuals who engage in criminal

behavior may have differences in brain structure and function compared to non-criminal

individuals. For example, research has shown that individuals with psychopathy exhibit

reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex, a brain region involved in decision-making and

impulse control (Volavka, 1999).

Another biological factor that may contribute to criminal behavior is hormonal

imbalances. Testosterone, for instance, has been linked to aggression and violent

behavior. Studies have shown that individuals with high levels of testosterone are more

likely to engage in criminal activities than those with lower levels (Batrinos, 2012).

The genetic perspective argues that genetic factors play a significant role in

criminal behavior. Studies have shown that there is a genetic component to criminal

behavior. For example, studies on twins have shown that criminal behavior tends to run

in families. A study conducted by Hicks et al. (2012) found that genetic factors accounted

for approximately 40% of the variance in criminal behavior.

Nurture perspective:

The nurture perspective argues that criminal behavior is primarily influenced

by environmental factors. According to this perspective, individuals who grow up in

environments that promote criminal behavior are more likely to engage in criminal

activities than those who do not. Environmental factors that have been linked to criminal

behavior include poverty, family dysfunction, peer pressure, and exposure to violence.
The Complex Interplay 5

Poverty is one of the environmental factors that have been linked to criminal

behavior. Individuals who grow up in poverty-stricken areas are more likely to engage in

criminal activities than those from affluent backgrounds. The lack of opportunities, poor

education, and limited access to resources make it difficult for individuals in poverty to

achieve their goals through legitimate means (Chilton, 1995).

Family dysfunction is another environmental factor that has been linked to

criminal behavior. Children who grow up in homes with dysfunctional families are more

likely to engage in criminal activities than those from functional families. Dysfunctional

families are characterized by parental neglect, abuse, and conflict, which can lead to

emotional and behavioral problems in children (Juby, 2001).

Peer pressure is another environmental factor that has been linked to criminal

behavior. Individuals who associate with peers who engage in criminal activities are

more likely to engage in similar activities than those who do not. Peer pressure can be a

powerful motivator, especially for adolescents who are still developing their sense of

identity and self-esteem (Paternoster & Piquero, 1995).

Research evidence:

Research has provided evidence to support both the nature and nurture

perspectives on criminal behavior. Studies have shown that genetic factors play a

significant role in criminal behavior. For example, a study conducted by Raine et al.

(1997) found that individuals with a genetic predisposition to low levels of autonomic

arousal were more likely to engage in criminal activities than those without this

predisposition.

Research has also provided evidence to support the nurture perspective on

criminal behavior. For example, a study conducted by Moffitt et al. (2002) found that
The Complex Interplay 6

individuals who grew up in environments characterized by poverty, family dysfunction,

and exposure to violence were more likely to engage in criminal activities than those who

did not.

The interplay between nature and nurture is a complex relationship that

influences human behavior, including criminal behavior. Nature, referring to genetics and

biology, and nurture, referring to environmental factors, both play significant roles in

shaping an individual's personality, behavior, and criminal tendencies. When it comes to

criminal behavior, the nature perspective argues that genetics and biology have a

significant impact. Studies mentioned in this essay have shown that certain genes and

biological factors are associated with a higher risk of criminal behavior. For example,

research has found that individuals with a history of violent behavior often have lower

levels of serotonin in their brains, which can increase impulsivity and aggression. On the

other hand, the nurture perspective posits that environmental factors such as poverty,

family dysfunction, and exposure to violence are crucial determinants of criminal

behavior. For instance, growing up in poverty or in a violent home can lead to a higher

risk of criminal behavior later in life.

One limitation is the oversimplification of the debate, which can create a false

dichotomy between genetics and environment. Genetics and environment interact in

complex ways that make it difficult to separate their influences on human behavior.

Moreover, the role of epigenetics, which refers to changes in gene expression that are not

caused by alterations in the DNA sequence, has shown that the nature-nurture debate is

more nuanced than previously believed. Another criticism of the nature versus nurture

debate is that it may overlook the role of individual agency and free will. While genetics

and environment can influence behavior, individuals still have the capacity to make
The Complex Interplay 7

choices and decisions that affect their lives. Therefore, focusing solely on genetics or

environment may ignore the importance of personal responsibility and agency in human

behavior. Finally, the nature versus nurture debate may perpetuate social and cultural

stereotypes, particularly around race and gender. Certain groups may be unfairly

stereotyped as being predisposed to criminal behavior based on their genetics or

environment, leading to discrimination and stigmatization. Therefore, it is important to

consider the social and cultural context in which the nature-nurture debate takes place

and to avoid oversimplification and stereotype (Genschow et al., 2017).

Understanding the role of nature and nurture in criminal behavior is essential

for designing effective prevention and intervention programs. Programs that address the

underlying biological, genetic, and environmental factors that contribute to criminal

behavior have a better chance of reducing criminal activity than those that only focus on

one factor. Therefore, future research should continue to explore the complex interplay

between genetics, biology, psychology, and environmental factors to develop more

effective approaches to prevent and reduce criminal behavior.

There is a growing consensus among researchers that criminal behavior is

influenced by a combination of genetic, biological, and environmental factors. While

there is evidence to support the nature perspective, which emphasizes the role of genetics

and biology, there is also a strong body of research that supports the nurture perspective,

which emphasizes the role of environmental factors such as poverty, family dysfunction,

and exposure to violence. Given the complexity of the issue, it is important for prevention

and intervention programs to take a multidisciplinary approach that addresses all the

underlying factors that contribute to criminal behavior. Programs that address genetics,

biology, and environmental factors have a better chance of reducing criminal activity
The Complex Interplay 8

than those that only focus on one factor. Therefore, future research should continue to

explore the complex interplay between these factors to develop more effective

approaches to prevent and reduce criminal behavior.

Ultimately, the debate on nature vs. nurture in criminal behavior is not a binary

one. Rather, criminal behavior is the result of a complex interplay between various

factors, and any effective solution must take this complexity into account. By taking a

multidisciplinary approach that addresses all the underlying factors that contribute to

criminal behavior, we can work towards reducing crime rates and promoting a safer

society for all.

Additionally, understanding the nature versus nurture debate in criminal

behavior has important implications for the criminal justice system. It is crucial to

consider the role of environmental factors such as poverty, abuse, and exposure to

violence when making decisions about punishment and rehabilitation. A more

comprehensive understanding of the factors that contribute to criminal behavior can lead

to more effective and fair criminal justice policies. Furthermore, recognizing the

complexity of the nature versus nurture debate can help to reduce stigma and

discrimination towards individuals who engage in criminal behavior. It is important to

acknowledge that criminal behavior is influenced by a range of factors, and not solely the

fault of an individual's genetics or upbringing. By understanding the multiple influences

on criminal behavior, we can work towards creating a more compassionate and just

society that supports individuals in making positive changes.

In conclusion, the debate on nature versus nurture in criminal behavior is a

complex and multifaceted one, with evidence to support both perspectives. It is important

to recognize that criminal behavior is influenced by a combination of factors, including

genetics, biology, psychology, and environmental factors. Understanding these factors is

The Complex Interplay 9

crucial for developing effective prevention and intervention programs and creating a

more just and compassionate society. While the nature perspective argues that genetics

and biology play a significant role in criminal behavior, the nurture perspective posits

that environmental factors such as poverty, family dysfunction, and exposure to violence

are crucial determinants. Both perspectives have research evidence to support their

claims. However, it is important to note that criminal behavior is not determined by one

factor alone. Rather, it is a combination of various factors that interact and influence

behavior (Ashhar, 2021).

The Complex Interplay 10

REFERENCES

Ashhar, M. (2021, May 8). The Interplay of Nature and Nurture on Criminal Behaviour -

Effective Thoughts. Effective Thoughts. https://effectivethoughts.net/the-

interplay-of-nature-and-nurture-on-criminal-behaviour/#:~:text=Biological

%20factors%20can%20influence%20criminality,inclination%20towards%20anti

%2Dsocial%20behavior.

Batrinos, M. L. (2012). Testosterone and aggressive behavior in man. International

Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 10(3), 563–568.

https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.3661

Chilton, R. (1995). Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points Through Life. By

Robert J. Sampson and John H. Laub. Harvard University Press, 1993. 309 pp.

$32.50. Social Forces. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/74.1.357

Farrington, D. P., & Painter, K. A. (2004). Theories of crime and their relevance to crime

prevention. Crime and Justice, 30, 421-476.

Genschow, O., Rigoni, D., & Brass, M. (2017). Belief in free will affects causal

attributions when judging others’ behavior. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(38), 10071–10076.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1701916114

Hicks, B. M., Carlson, M., Blonigen, D. M., Patrick, C. J., Iacono, W. G., & MGue, M.

(2012). Psychopathic personality traits and environmental contexts:

Differential correlates, gender differences, and genetic mediation. Personality

Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3(3), 209–227.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025084
The Complex Interplay 11

Ishikawa, S. S., & Raine, A. (2002). Behavioral Genetics and Crime. Neurobiological

Foundation of Aberrant Behaviors, 81–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-

4615-0943-1_4

Juby, H. (2001). Disentangling the Link between Disrupted Families and Delinquency

Sociodemography, Ethnicity and Risk Behaviours.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Disentangling-the-Link-between-

Disrupted-Families-Juby-Farrington/

e3ca09b3de6971293266e657fda9904673c2bed4

Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Rutter, M., & Silva, P. A. (2001). Sex differences in antisocial

behaviour: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence in the Dunedin

Longitudinal Study. Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490057

Paternoster, R., & Piquero, A. R. (1995). Reconceptualizing Deterrence: An Empirical

Test of Personal and Vicarious Experiences. Journal of Research in Crime

and Delinquency, 32(3), 251–286.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427895032003001

Plomin, R. (2018). Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are. Penguin UK.

Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., Knopik, V. S., & Neiderhiser, J. M. (2012). Behavioral

Genetics. Worth Publishers.

Raine, A., Lencz, T., Bihrle, S., LaCasse, L., & Colletti, P. M. (2000). Reduced

Prefrontal Gray Matter Volume and Reduced Autonomic Activity in

The Complex Interplay 12

Antisocial Personality Disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57(2), 119.

https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.57.2.119

Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). From Neurons to Neighborhoods. National

Academies Press EBooks. https://doi.org/10.17226/9824

Volavka, J. (1999). The Neurobiology of Violence. Journal of Neuropsychiatry and

Clinical Neurosciences, 11(3), 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.11.3.307