If two people grow up in the same neighborhood, why does one commit violent crimes while the other doesn’t? When a crime occurs, many people find themselves wondering: Did something make them this way or were they always like this? The debate, known as nature vs. nurture, has been central in criminal psychology for decades.
On one end, the “nature” argument focuses on someone’s biology and genetics. It is suggested that some biological traits are linked to criminal behavior such as impulsivity and aggression, limited cognitive abilities, and other genetic factors. Irregularities in brain areas responsible for decision making or emotional regulation, such as the amygdala which plays a key role in aggression, anxiety, and behavioral regulation, may make some people more prone to risky behavior. However, despite the potential contributing factors as a result of biological components, these traits do not automatically mean someone is going to commit a crime. Biology can increase the risk, not it doesn’t determine the outcome.
On the other hand, the “nurture” side emphasized the role of the environment on a person. Factors such as trauma, neglect, influence of other people, and exposure to violence can contribute to criminal behavior. Growing up in unstable and harmful environments can shape how an individual responds to stressful situations, how they handle conflict, and how they go about solving problems throughout their life. In a lot of cases, criminal behavior can be linked to learned behaviors or past experiences instead of some previously established destiny of being a criminal since birth.
In modern research many tend to focus on the intersection between nature and nurture. The two components can be a better explanation for criminal behavior when considered together as opposed to being treated as two separate entities. For instance, a person may have a biological tendency to act more aggressively and impulsively, but that trait may not lead to criminal behavior depending on their environment. If they have a great home life, structured education and social life, and no negative influences, they may have a reduced risk of becoming a criminal. In contrast, if they were raised in turmoil and had ongoing stress and trauma, combined with their biological traits leaning towards aggressive behavior, their risk of criminal behavior may be heightened.
Ultimately, psychologists have been coming to the conclusion that trying to figure out whether criminals were born or made may be the wrong outlook. Instead, they should focus on how the two factors come together and affect each other. The most likely explanation for criminal behavior is that it emerges from a complex relationship between biology and genetics, environment, and individual actions. Recognizing this relationship is key to understanding that criminal behavior does not have one clear explanation but instead has a more intricate cause.