what was Lombroso’s research supporting the historical approach of criminality and delinquency
“L’uomo delinquente”. The Criminal Man
examined facial and cranial features of 100s Italian convicts
3839 alive, 383 dead
What did Lombroso conclude from his research
40% of criminal acts can be accounted fro by atavistic characteristics
suggested criminals are biologically different and resemble primitive humans
Scientific value of Lombroso’s research
pioneer of criminology and forensic psychology
empirical methods
foundation for modern, evidence based approaches
Why is Lombroso’s work now discredited
flawed methodology
biased samples
ethical concerns
cautionary example of the dangers of reductionism and pseudoscience
key criticism of historical approach - racial biases
DeLisi: atavistic features are more likely to be found among people of african decent
how does Charles Goring’s research contradict the historical approach
6000 sample (1/2 offenders, 1/2 non-offenders)
no evidence that there was a distinct group with unusual facial and cranial features
other ways of distinguishing criminals in the historical approach
Somatotypes - Ernst Kretschmer (1921)
what are the 4 criminal somatotypes
Leptosome or asthentic: tall & thin (petty thieves)
Athletic: tall & muscular (violent crimes)
Pyknic: short & fat (deception crimes & violence)
Dysplastic or mixed: more than one type (crimes against morality e.g. prostitution)
AO3- what could Lombroso’s theory be supporting
Eugenics
he suggests that criminals are ‘born’ and so this is an inherited trait so in society if we want to reduce crime then theories of genetic superiority could call for policies in which whole groups of people should be eliminated from the gene pool