Bioanthropological theories have failed to provide solid evidence directly linking physical or genetic characteristics to deviant behavior. Although they have played a role in the history of criminology, they have been superseded by broader and more scientifically sound approaches that take into account the complexity of the phenomenon. We understand this evolution and this criticism well.
The first bio-anthropological theories
The most famous theories studying deviant behavior date back to Lombroso, Sheldon, and the Gluecks (between the early and first half of the 900th century), who for years attempted to support a biological correlation between the onset of criminal behavior and genetics without obtaining solid empirical foundations. The development of neuroscience, however, has allowed for a deeper understanding of brain function and has offered an important contribution to the study of "the neural correlates underlying the cognitive and affective processes that drive antisocial behavior" [Balloni et al. 2015: 112].
In this regard, neurological sciences have attempted to understand criminal behavior by taking into account social, environmental, and cultural conditioning and by observing neural factors. Specifically, neuronal function has been considered closely related to the individual's age, which is why adolescence can be seen as a stage in which the risk of engaging in aggressive and criminal behavior is greater than at other stages of life. The use of "neurofunctional techniques" [Balloni et al. 2015: 112] such as positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) have been fundamental to studies conducted in neurocriminology because they allow the detection of brain activity in the subject during the execution of a specific cognitive task.
Neuroscience and sociology
Neurologist Antonio Damasio argues that dysfunctions in the medial orbitofrontal cortex are related to a reduced ability to manage aggressive feelings because people tend to reflect less on their actions [Damasio 2000: 81-94] , thus facilitating the potential development of violent behavior. In adults, the prefrontal cortex has greater control over emotions originating from the limbic system, unlike adolescents who, not having yet fully developed this part of the cortex, demonstrate particular difficulty regulating certain emotions originating from the amygdala and the limbic system, two areas of the brain linked to aggressive impulses. A biological correlation is thus highlighted [Bianchini et al. 2009] between adolescents and impulsive behaviors that can lead to violent or deviant actions due to the incomplete development of the frontal cortex, which is not yet capable of fully controlling limbic impulses.
However, social, psychological, cultural, and environmental phenomena, essential to the study of criminogenesis, should not be underestimated. It is not possible to analyze criminal behavior solely from a neurofunctional perspective . By integrating this branch of study, it can be seen as a valuable ally of biological, psychological, and sociological theories capable of examining the interdependence between the nervous system, the human mind, and the society in which we live.
Sara The Strawberry
References
- BALLONI A., BISI R., SETTE R. (2015), Principles of Criminology. Theories, CEDAM, Trento.
- DAMASIO AR, GRABOWSKI TJ, BECHARA A., DAMASIO H., PONTO LLB, PARVIZI J., HICHWA RD (2000), “Subcortical and cortical brain activity during the feeling of self-generated emotions” Nature neuroscience
