biological, social and biosocial perspectives on the formation of aggression and violent behaviour

7/28/2019 Biological, Social and Biosocial Perspectives on the Formation of Aggression and Violent Behaviour

1/11

Biological, Social and Biosocial

Perspectives on the Formation of

Aggression and Violent BehaviourChristopher Richard Isaac

21798311


2/11

P a g e | 2

2 Biological, Social and Biosocial Perspectives on the Formation ofAggression and Violent BehaviourBy Christopher Richard Isaac

21798311

Table of Contents

Essay Question: __________________________________________________ 3Word Count: ____________________________________________________ 3

1964 (Not Including References in Text) ____________________________ 31. Introduction: ________________________________________________ 32. Biological Perspective: ________________________________________ 3

2.1. Twin Studies _____________________________________________ 42.1.1. Adopted Children _____________________________________ 4

3. Learning Perspective: _________________________________________ 53.1. Behaviourism ____________________________________________ 5

3.1.1. Classical Conditioning _________________________________ 53.1.2. Operant Conditioning __________________________________ 6

3.2. Social Learning ___________________________________________ 63.2.1. Frustration Theory _____________________________________ 7

4. Biosocial Perspective _________________________________________ 85. Conclusion: _________________________________________________ 96. References: ________________________________________________ 11


3/11

P a g e | 3


21798311

Essay Question:

Critically review the major theoretical perspectives on the development of

aggression and violent behaviour

Word Count:

1964 (Not Including References in Text)

1. Introduction:The issue of aggressive and violent behaviour is an issue which can be

explained through several perspectives. In modern the two perspectives that

tend to clash most are the social learning and biological perspectives of

explaining behaviour (Walters & White, 1989:455). Thus it is the purpose of

this assignment is to explore why these two ideologies clash in their description

and then to explore ways in which the two can complement each other to

describe the formation of aggressive and violent behaviour.

2. Biological Perspective:The biological perspective of criminal behaviour maintains that criminal

behaviour is, at least partially, explained by physiological and neurological

factors (Siegel, 2008:11). This perspective, thus, deals with both hereditary

behaviour such as temperament and behaviour caused by substance abuse such

as alcohol abuse (Bartol & Bartol, 2011:53, 65).

It is important to remember that the biological school in the modern day is not

deterministic or at least not as deterministic as it was. In Raine (2004:43) the

term predisposition is used. This is an important word because it implies

likelihood for a person to exhibit aggressive or violent but not certainty. For

instance, a person with a predisposition to act in an aggressive may or may not


4/11

P a g e | 4


21798311

manifest and furthermore this aggressive behaviour doesnt always become

violent.

2.1.Twin StudiesTwin studies and the study of siblings are a good basis for discovering whether

or not the biological approach has any credence. Raine (2004:44, 45) states that

identical twins who share the exact genetic makeup are more likely to exhibit

the same criminal tendencies than non-identical twins in which 51.5% of

identical twins were found to exhibit criminal tendencies while only 20.6% of

non-identical twins were shown to exhibit criminal tendencies. While, this may

be refuted because of the similar social environments in which twins are raised

there is strong evidence that even when raised apart the more genetically similar

siblings are the more likely they are to share similar traits as shown in Passer

and Smith (2008:71) wherein identical twins separately raised were found to

have a 0.75 similarity in intelligence while regular siblings scored only 0.21

similarity. This shows that there is a strong predisposition for twins to exhibit

the same behaviours or personality traits while siblings show a lesser

predisposition to exhibit the aforementioned traits. Therefore, twin studies

shows that genetic predisposition does, to some degree, influence the way in

which aggressive or violent behaviour develops.

2.1.1. Adopted ChildrenSome scientists believe that there is a genetic link that results in aggressive and

violent behaviour as well as criminal tendencies. Walters and White (1989:476)

discuss several studies involving genetic hereditary of criminal behaviour. The

one that is discussed most is that of adoptees. In the study they find that while

there is a significant link to the relationship between adopted children and their

biological parents it is of only a small significance. Brennan and Mednick

(1993:21) also find in their literature review that the majority of studies show a

significant correlation of a link between adopted children and their biological


5/11

P a g e | 5


21798311

parents. They show that adopted children whose biological mothers were

alcoholics that exhibit anti-social personalities had a one-in-three chance of

being diagnosed with an anti-social personality too.

However, Walters and White (1989:476) also show that in studies conducted

with both environmental and biological factors taken into account that

environmental factors show much more significant results than those of

biological factors. This is not to say that there isnt a biological factor in

criminality but rather to say it plays a lesser role than does environment. There

is a definite synthesis when an adopted child has criminal biological parents

and is raised in an environment conducive to criminality that the results show a

far more significant result than that of environmental and biological factors

alone (Walters & White, 1989:476; Brennan & Mednick, 1993:21).

3. Learning Perspective:The learning perspective is a perspective that deals largely with the idea that

ones environment shapes their personality and the way in which they will

respond to different situations. Behaviourism and social learning are the

concepts that peoples responses to stimuli are conditioned or learned through a

series of interactions with their environment (Bartol & Bartol, 2011:86, 91).

3.1.BehaviourismBehaviourism is a psychological concept that behaviour is learned (Passer &

Smith, 2008:9). Two very important aspects of this theory are classical and

operant conditioning. The reason that these two concepts are very important is

that in their conception they both showed that there is a definite connection

between learning and outcomes known as association.

3.1.1. Classical ConditioningClassical conditioning is the concept that a response can be conditioned if an

association between two unrelated stimuli is formed. Pavlov developed a


6/11

P a g e | 6


21798311

method in which to test this by using dogs (Passer & Smith, 2008:214). Pavlov

used a tuning fork that elicited no response from the dog when making a tone

and food that elicited the response of salivation. By ringing the tuning fork

every time the dog was given about to be given food, the dog began to associate

the ringing of the tuning fork with being given food and then began to salivate

every time he heard the tuning fork.

3.1.2. Operant ConditioningOperant condition was introduced by Skinner and varies from classical

conditioning that the principle is not to show that the conditioned behaviour is

an automatic response but rather to show that the response is based on the

consequences of the action being done (Passer & Smith, 2008:223). An

example of this in criminality could be extended to drunk driving in that a

driver driving drunk for the first time is stopped by police and arrested is less

likely to repeat the behaviour because the circumstance of his response or

behaviour is not desirable while a drunk driver that often drives drunk and is

never arrested for it is more likely to exhibit the behaviour because there is very

little negative association between drinking and driving.

3.2.Social L earningSocial Learning is an extension of both operant and classical condition. The

theory is a generalization of the concepts put forward by Skinner and Pavlov

(Bartol & Bartol, 2011:91). This theory tries to link the social environment of a

person with the way in which they react by means of association and learning.

Socialization is an important aspect of this theory. Socialization is the idea that

the societal environment shapes the associations an individual has with certain

behaviours (Giddens, 2009:291). Socialization according to Jenkins (in

Haralambos & Holborn, 2004:826) even defines an individuals identity.

Jenkins says that peoples identities are never independent of the context of the

environment or interaction with other individuals. This is reflective of the core


7/11

P a g e | 7


21798311

edicts of social learning theory that purports that identifying with one group of

people will in some way shape the way in which you behave and, therefore, that

behaviour is learned through these interactions.

The same can be said of violent and aggressive behaviour because it is itself

behaviour and therefore, from the perspective of social learning, is learned.

While the concept of rape being a patriarchal construct for men to exhibit

power over women is somewhat outdated Lea and Auburn (2001:13) have

identified that rape, like other behaviours, is perpetuated through social norms.

Social norms and learned behaviour do not rule out thoughts of an abnormal

behaviour they do, however, tend to regulate whether or not people will act on

them. Thus, by normalising or being able to justify a social faux pas the

incidence of the faux pas will likely increase. For instance, a public figure being

acquitted of rape charges on the basis that the victim was fed breakfast.

3.2.1. Frustration TheorySocialized behaviour could then be said to be the pursuit of social approval or

the avoidance of social shame (Wright & Hensley, 2003:74). So removing the

prospect of shame from a type of behaviour results in that behaviour becoming

more prevalent. However, Wright and Hensley also explain another way in

which social learning can explain aggressive or violent behaviour, at least in

serial murderers. They explain that behaviour exhibited by an individual

requires resolution and, in this case, approval from a loved one. If this

resolution or approval fails to take place the individual may then become

frustrated or humiliated. For instance, a child bringing home a good test result

from school to a parent whose approval the child seeks and the response is

negative without reason (the opposite of the expected outcome) the child then

becomes frustrated.

The extension of frustration theory to serial killers is obviously unique but the

concept can be extended to more normal forms of aggressive or violent


8/11

P a g e | 8


21798311

behaviours. Frustration as mentioned above and in Bartol and Bartol (2011:98)

is the result of positive outcomes being thwarted despite exhibiting positive

behaviour. So it is easy to see why aggressive or violent behaviour could

manifest in everyday life. A mother frustrated that her children wont behave

resorts to shouting, a more aggressive behaviour, to achieve the satisfaction of a

positive result and thus associating the aggressive behaviour with the positive

outcome. The same can be said of the mothers shouting not working and then

her resorting to violence to elicit the desired response.

4. Biosocial PerspectiveWhat many of the biological reviews above find is that many show that in

unison with the social learning theory that the results reflected are more

significant than both the results found when testing for environmental influence

and those found when testing for biological factors (Walters & White,

1989:476). This sheds light on an integrated theory of explaining aggression

and violent behaviour. Hicks, Krueger, Iacono and Patrick (2004:925) explain

that they find positive and significant results when testing the heritability of

certain disorders and their likelihood of manifesting certain disorders meaning

that there may be a genetic predisposition toward developing some disorders inthe children of people who have one or more disorders themselves. However,

they also show that there are social factors acting on the inherited

predisposition toward a disorder (Hicks, Krueger, Iacono & Patrick, 2004:926).

This means that biological and social factors can act independently of one

another but are more likely to develop in children being raised in an

environment conducive to aggressive and violent behaviour that have a

hereditary predisposition toward acting in these ways too. In connection with a

social learning theory like frustration theory it makes sense that someone with a

predisposition toward violent or aggressive behaviour that theyd become more

susceptible to becoming frustrated.


9/11

P a g e | 9


21798311

However, these two perspectives are often at odds with one another and the

research almost always tends to favour the social learning side of the argument

as described by Walters and White (1989:476). Much of the data collected on

the genetic heritability of aggressive and violent behaviour is accrued in a

manner that does not separate those being genetically tested from the social

environment in which they are raised, even in adoption studies there are some

discrepancies of this nature when it is acknowledged that many adopted

children in Denmark are adopted by parents of the same socio-economic

background and therefore likely to be exposed to certain risk factors prevalent

in them (Walters and White, 1989:475).

5. Conclusion:The issue with studying solely through the scope of a social learning theory is

that they do not account for the existence of those who do not develop violent

or aggressive behaviours when exposed to certain risk factors or frustrations or

those that do not experience these social factors while still developing these

same behaviours. While it is true that there will always be an exception to the

rule this exception must also have an explanation. In some cases the positively

significant results of biological explanations for some behaviours does implythat a biological approach could explain these discrepancies.

However, viewing behaviour formation purely from a biological perspective is

definitely unreliable as even the most convincing research reviewed shows that

at most that these behaviours are a predisposition rather than an inevitable

outcome. This means that the biological perspective may supplement social

learning theories to better understand the outliers when trying to understand

aggressive and violent behaviour. So the biosocial perspective of aggressive

and violent behaviour formation makes sense. A child born with a

predisposition toward these behaviours is more likely to exhibit them than a

child without the predisposition raised in an environment conducive to these


10/11

P a g e | 10


21798311

behaviours (Brennan & Mednick, 1993:21). Therefore, explaining more of the

populations likelihood to develop those behaviours.


11/11

P a g e | 11


21798311

6. References:Bartol, C.R., & Bartol, A.M., (2008). Criminal Behaviour: A Psychological

Approach, (9th

Ed). Pearson Education Inc.: United States of America: New

Jersey.

Brennan P.A., Mednick S.A., (1993). Genetic Perspectives on Crime. Acta

Psychiatr Scand, 370, 19-26.

Giddens, A. (2009). Sociology (6th

Ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Haralambos, M., Holborn, M., & Heald, R. (2004). Sociology Themes and

Perspectives (6th

Ed.). England: HarperCollins Publishers Limited.

Hicks, B.M., Krueger, R.F., Iacono, W.G., McGue, M., Patrick, C.J., (2004).

Family Transmission and Heritability of Externalizing Disorders. Arch Gen

Psychiatry, 61, 922-928.

Lea, S., Auburn, T., (2001). The Social Construction of Rape in the Talk of a

Convicted Rapist.Feminism & Psychology,11(1), 11-33.

Passer, M.P., & Smith, R.E. (2008). Psychology the Science of Mind and

Behaviour, (4th Ed). New York: Mcgraw: Hill.

Raine, A., (2002). Biological Basis of Crime in Crime: Public Policies for

Crime Control, 43-74. California: Oakland: ICS Press.

Siegel, L.J. (2004). Criminology Theories, Patterns, & Typologies, (8th

Ed).

Canada: Wadsworth.

Walters, G.D., White, T.W., (1989). Heredity and Crime: Bad Genes or Bad

Research? Criminology, 27(3), 455-484.

biological, social and biosocial perspectives on the formation of aggression and violent behaviour

Documents