Historical

• Lombrosso eval limitations


  P: Several critics have been made about Lombrosso's work.

  E: This includes Delisi, 2012, who had questioned whether the entirety of Lombrosso's work was positive.

  E: Many of the features Lombrosso identified as atavistic (dark skin and curly hair) are more likely to be found in those of African descent. In other words he is saying African ppl are more likely to be offenders, a view fitting the 19th century's eugenic theory

  L: Therefore, this suggests that many aspects of Lombrosso's theory was subjective not objective, influenced by racial predejuices at the time
• Lombrosso eval strength:


  P: One strength is that Lombrosso made important contributions to modern criminology

  E: He shifted the emphasis away from moralistic discourse - where offenders are viewed as weak minded toward more of a scientific theory where the individual is not to be blamed due to genetics and evolutionary purposes

  L: Therefore, this shows that his work has been highly important
• AO3

  LIMITATION

  • method of investigation was poorly controlled
  • Lombroso failed to control important variables within his research
  • Unlike Goring he did not compare his offender sample with a non-offender control group
  • Could have controlled for confounding variables that may have explained higher crime rates in certain groups
  • IE research has demonstrated links between crime + social conditions ie poverty (Hay and Forrest 2009) links that would explain why offenders were more likely to be unemployed
  • suggests that Lombrosos research does not meet modern scientific standards