Introduction to Criminology:

According to Edwin Sutherland and Donald Cressey, “Criminology is a body of knowledge regarding crime as a
social phenomenon. It includes within its scope the processes of making laws, of breaking of laws, and of
reaction toward the breaking of laws”.

The term criminology was coined by:

 Raffaele Garofalo “Criminologia”
 Paul Topinard “Criminologie”

Criminology came from Latin and Greek words:

 Latin word “Crimen” means “Crime or Offense”
 Greek word “Logia” means “Study”

Principal Division of Criminology:

1. Criminal etiology- attempts at analysis of the causes of crimes.
2. Sociology of law- attempts at analysis of the condition under which penal / criminal laws develop as a
process of social control.
3. Penology- concerned with the control and prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders.

Major Perspectives of Criminology:

1. Classical/Choice Perspective- “Situational forces” crime is a function of free will and personal choice.
Punishment is a deterrent to crime.
2. Biological/Psychological Perspective- “Internal forces” crime is a function of chemical, neurological,
genetic, personality, intelligence, or mental traits.
3. Structural Perspective- “Ecological forces” crime is a function of neighborhood conditions, cultural forces,
and norm conflict.
4. Process Perspective- “Socialization forces” crime is a function of upbringing, learning, and control. Peers,
parents, and teachers influence behavior.
5. Conflict Perspective- “Economic and political forces” crime is a function of competition for limited
resources and power. Class conflict produces crime.
6. Development Perspective- “Multiple forces” biological, social-psychological, economic, and political forces
may combine to produce crime.

This criminological enterprise is composed of the following developed criminal behaviors among
criminals (Siegel, 2013)
1. Criminal Statistics- Gathering valid crime data, devising new research methods and measuring crime
patterns and trends.
2. Sociology- Determining the origin of law, measuring the forces that can change laws and society
3. Theory Construction- Predicting individual behavior, understanding the cause of crime rates and trends
4. Criminal Behavior System- Determining nature and cause of specific crime patterns, studying violence,
theft, organized, white-collar, and public order crimes
5. Penology- Studying the correction and control of criminal behavior, creating effective policies on developing
methods of social control
6. Victimology- Studying the nature and cause of victimization, identifying the critical role of the victim in the
criminal process.

BRIEF HISTORY OF CRIMINOLOGY:

Prior to the 18th century (Walsh, 2012), explanations of a wide variety of phenomena, including criminal
behavior, tended to be of a religious or spiritual nature. Good fortunes and disasters alike were frequently
attributed to good or evil supernatural forces. A simple extension of this worldview was to define crime as the
result of demonic possession or the evil abuse of free will (demonological explanation). Most explanations of
crime equated it with sin - the violation of a sacred obligation. During the middle ages, superstition and fear of
satanic possession dominated the thinking regarding crime. People who violated social norms or religious
practices were believed to be witches or possessed by demons. The prescribed method for dealing with the
possessed was burning at the stake, a practice that survived into the 17th century.

This demonological explanation for criminal behavior began to wane in the 18th century with the
beginning of the Enlightenment, which was essentially a major shift in the way people began to view the world
and their place in it. This new worldview questioned traditional religious and political values, such as absolute
monarchy and demonic possession. In their place, the substituted humanism, rationalism, and a belief in the
primacy of the natural over the supernatural world, Enlightenment thinkers believed in the dignity and worth of
individuals, a view that would eventually find expression in the law and in the treatment of criminal offenders

Enlightenment theorists like Thomas Hobbes, Rousseau, Locke Voltaire and Montesquieu introduced
the idea of social contract. The idea of Social contract is an extraordinary important part of the enlightenment
philosophy that people invest in the laws of their society, with the guarantee that they will be protected from
others who violate such rules. The other concepts of this philosophy are the following (Tibbets & Hemmens,
2010):
1. Democracy, which emphasizes that every person in society should have a say in government
2. Individual's right to the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness
3. Human beings are rational and therefore have free will.

Criminology as a discipline has evolved into three phases, beginning in the 18th century. Although
crime and criminals have been around for as long as societies have existed, the systematic study of these
phenomena did not begin until the late 1700s. When scholars first distinguished crime from sin, they made
possible explanations of criminal behavior that were not theological (religious). This, in turn, allowed for the
dispassionate, scientific study of why crime occurs. The development of this study is now known as the era of
classical criminology. By the mid-18th (Siegel, 2018), social philosophers began to rethink the prevailing
concepts of law and justice. They argued for a more rational approach to punishment, stressing the
relationship between crimes and their punishment should be balanced and fair. This view was based on the
prevailing philosophy of the time, “utilitarianism," which emphasized that behavior occurs when the actor
considers it useful, purposeful, and reasonable. Philosophers called for more moderate and just approach to
penal sanctions, which could substitute for the cruel public executions designed to frighten people into
obedience. The development of this study is known as the era of classical criminology.

The writings of Cesare Bonesana Marchese di Beccaria (Father of Classical Criminology) and his
followers form the core of what today is referred to as classical criminology. As originally conceived in the 18th
century, the classical criminology theory has the following basic elements:
1. In every society, people have free will to choose criminal or lawful solutions to meet their needs or settle
their problems.
2. Criminal solutions may be more attractive than lawful ones because they usually require less work for a
greater payoff.
3. People's choice of criminal solutions may be controlled by their fear of punishment.
4. The more severe, certain, and swift the punishment, the better able it is to control criminal behavior.

The classical perspective influenced judicial philosophy during much of the late 18th and 19th
centuries. Prisons began to be used as a form of punishment, and sentences were geared proportionately to
the seriousness of the crime. Capital punishment was still widely used but began to be employed for only the
most serious crimes. The byword was "let the punishment fit the crime."

The second phase (Siegel, 2018) began in the 19 th century, referred to as modern criminology. During
this era, criminology distinguished itself as a subspecialty within the emerging disciplines of psychology,
sociology, and economics. And in the late 19 th century, Dr. Cesare Lombroso, an Italian philosopher founded
for the first time ever, the Positivist School of Criminology. Positivism has two main elements. The first is the
belief that human behavior is a function of internal and external forces like social factors, wealth, social class,
and others. The second element is embracing that scientific method of inquiry theory to solve problems.
Criminologists conducted empirical tests (observations or experiments) of their theories regarding crime, rather
than relying solely on speculation, and consequently developed a wide range of theories.
 During the latter part of the 19th century, criminology was accepted as a field of study by the
department of sociology of a growing university in the United States. Since that time, sociologists in the United
States have made systematic studies of crimes and criminals.

The third phase, which began in the second half of the 21 st century, may best be called independent
criminology. During this period, criminology began to assert its independence from the traditional disciplines
that spawned it. Criminological theories have become more multidisciplinary because independent
criminologists seek to understand crime itself rather than study crime as one aspect of an overall sociological
or psychological theory.

To summarize the history:

1. The first stage was a long period of time during which nearly all explanations for human existence were
rooted in superstition and religion.
2. The second stage was "rational understanding" in which logical reasoning and intuition of life are applied.
3. The third stage which Comte called the positivist stage understanding came primarily from applying the
scientific method.

RESEARCH ENTERPRISE OF CRIMINOLOGY

Criminologists are not just concerned with causes of crimes; they are also concerned on how to
discover causes of crimes. In essence, criminologists are not just consumers of research interpret a
phenomenon, they are also producers of research to contribute to understanding crimes and criminal behavior.
Social phenomenon needs to be analyzed to understand why something occur in society, especially crimes
and criminal behavior.

Since criminology is a social science, it relies on empirical data for its findings. In the discovery of
causes of crime, criminologists rely on the research process. Research is heavily reliant on the scientific
process to be acceptable. According to Maxfield and Bobbie (2018), science offers an approach to both
agreement reality and experiential reality. Agreement reality is the thing we consider real because we have
been told they are real and everyone else seems to agree they are real. For example, we believe in God,
because our parents said God exists and others believed it too even though no one has seen God. On the
other hand, experiential reality is the thing we know from direct experience. For example, we know fire can
burn us, maybe because at some point of our lives we were burned by fire. Scientists have certain criteria that
must be met before they will agree on something they have not experienced personally. In general, an
assertion must have both logical and empirical support; it must make sense, and it must agree with actual
observations.

The Importance of Theory for Science:

Since criminology studies criminal behavior in order to develop a theoretical explanation, science plays
an important role. In a way, criminologists are involved in investigative research for answers to criminal
behavior. As emphasized by Layder (2018), integral to science is the notion of theory-based explanation of
empirical data or evidence. This is central to investigative research blending of theory-testing and theory-
generating research strategies. It also underlines an important role of “general” or ‘formal” theory and concepts
but only in so far as they serve the aims of empirical research and are themselves strongly anchored in
empirical data.

It is obvious that theory is the result of scientific inquiries using empirical data. As stressed by Siegel
(2018), two critical features of any discipline are its theory and its methodology. Theory involves an attempt to
develop reasonable explanation of reality. The first critical feature is theory. Theory is an effort to structure,
summarize or explain the essential elements of the subject being studied. Without the generation of useful
theoretical explanation, a field is intellectually bankrupt; it becomes merely a collection of "war stories" and
carefully documented encyclopedic accounts. It fails to explain, summarize, or capture the essential nature of
its subject matter.

Indeed, developing theories will enable experts to easily explain the existence of crime and its root
cause. However, theory cannot be reached without following an acceptable process. The second critical
feature is methods. According to Siegel (2018), methods involves the collection' and analysis of accurate data
or facts. It is the process by which a theory is reached. Theory devoid of method, explanation without accurate,
supportive data is just as much a dead end as method is devoid of interpretative theory.
As further stated by Schmalleger (2011), a theory, ideally, is made of clearly stated propositions
suggesting relationship, often causal, between events and occurrences being studied. In addition, Maxfield and
Babbie (2018) defined theory as a systematic explanation for the observed facts and laws that relate to a
particular aspect of life e.g. juvenile delinquency, domestic violence, violent crimes, and property crimes. For
Tibbetts (2015), theory is a set of concepts linked together by a series of statements to explain why an event or
phenomenon occurs.

Another aspect to consider in the search for truth is objectivity. Without this, any research is useless
because the data is not reliable and have no place in the scientific community. As argued by Siegel (2018), a
basic tenet of scientific research is that researchers attempt to maintain objectivity. This requires that the
investigators strive to be value-free in their inquiry and, in a sense, to permit the findings to speak for
themselves.

As stressed by Gupta (2019), criminologists use the same type of research methods as do other
sociologists. In the process, criminologists use observational studies, crime statistics, or crime report data to
identify the root cause of criminal behavior and provide the necessary theory to explain its unique
characteristics.

Choice of Criminological Research Methods:

In studying crime and criminal behavior, a criminologist has a variety of methods available. As stressed
by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), education, health, social works, public administration and other areas of social
activities are considered applied social science or fields of practice because these fields deal with the everyday
concerns of people's lives. It is true that criminology is an applied social sciences and concerned with crime as
a social phenomenon that requires critical analysis to understand why people resort to crimes and what factors
lead to the development of a criminal inclination.

Choosing the right method is imperative for a successful theory development in the field of criminology.
Different purposes of research would require different methods to gather the needed information. In doing
criminological research, the criminologists can choose between two general methods, a qualitative approach,
and a quantitative approach. As stated by Maxfield and Babbie (2018), a variety of research methods are
available to the criminologists and criminal justice researchers. Each method has its strengths and
weaknesses, and certain concepts are studied more appropriately by some methods than by others.

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

Oualitative Research Method; According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), qualitative research is
exploratory in nature. Qualitative research is an effort to understand situations in their uniqueness as part of a
particular context and their interactions. This understanding is an end in itself, so that it is not attempting to
predict what may happen in the future necessarily, but to understand the nature of that setting - what it means
for participants to be in that setting, what their lives are like, what is going on for them, what their meanings
are, what the world looks like in that particular setting- and in the analysis to be able to communicate that
faithfully to others who are interested in that setting. In other words, in qualitative research it uses words or
experiences as data to be analyzed rather than numbers as data. The over-all purpose of qualitative research
is to achieve an understanding of how people make sense out of their lives, delineate the process (rather than
outcome or product) of meaning-making, and describe how people interpret what they experience. In collecting
data for qualitative research, it uses a variety of methods like unstructured or semi-structured interview guide,
using focus-group discussions (FGDs) or personal or individual interviews.

There are several types of qualitative research according to Merrian and Tisdel (2016):
1. Ethnographical Analysis- focuses on the culture and social regularities of everyday life. This method is
normally used to study the life and culture of Indigenous people, a certain cult, etc.
2. Phenomenological Analysis- this type of analysis attends to ferreting out the essence or basic structure of
a phenomenon. The aim is to arrive at structural descriptions of an experience, the underlying and precipitating
factors that account for what is being experienced.
3. Grounded Theory- consists of categories, properties and hypothesis that are conceptual links between and
among the categories and properties. This is the usual method used in developing a theory to explain a certain
phenomenon.
4. Narrative Inquiry- in this method, the study of experience is done through stories. Emphasis is on the
stories people tell and how these stories are communicated - on the language used to tell the stories. The
write-up tends to keep each story intact rather than analyzing categories across the stories.
5. Case Studies - an intensive, holistic description and analysis, bounded unit. Conveying an understanding of
the case is the paramount consideration in analyzing the data. Data have usually been derived from interviews,
field observation, and documents.

Quantitative Research Method:

Quantitative research- according to Bhat (2017), is a systematic investigation of phenomena by gathering
quantifiable data performing statistical, mathematical or computation techniques. In other words, quantitative
research is used to quantify (calculate) the problem by way of generating numerical data that can be
transformed into usable statistics. It is used to quantify attitudes, opinions, behaviors, and other defined
variables- and generalize results from a larger sample population. Quantitative data collection methods include
various forms of surveys (online and paper surveys), face-to-face interviews, longitudinal studies, and
systematic observations

According to Bhat (2017), it has the following general types:

1. Survey Research - is the most fundamental tool for all quantitative research methodologies and studies.
This method asks questions to a sample of respondents, using various types like online polls, online surveys,
and paper questionnaires.
2. Correlation Research - this is conducted to establish a relationship between two closely knit entities and
how one impacts the other and what are the changes that are eventually observed.
3. Causal-Comparative Research- is used by researchers to draw conclusion about cause-effect equation
between two or more variables, where one variable is dependent on the other independent variables, e.g.
impact of drugs on teenagers.
4. Experimental Research- is usually bases on one or more theories. An analysis is done around proving or
disproving that statement. In experimental research, a controlled and uncontrolled participant will be used to
determine and gather the data.

CLASSICAL SCHOOL:
The new era, ushered in by the Enlightenment thinkers, led to the development of the Classical School.
Cesare Beccaria became known as the Father of Classical Criminology. At a very young age he authored his
most famous work, “On crimes and punishments” (1764). He was a member of an intellectual group known as
the Academy of Fists and the group would gather in secret to discuss the need for social reform. Beccaria is
most frequently referred to as a punishment reformer and he staunchly advocated the principle of "no crime
without law" and he specified the criteria for the enactment and administration of criminal codes. He felt
strongly about the separation of powers in criminal law due to the potential for abuse and misuse. Interestingly
he was one of the first people to suggest that the essence of crime was the harm that it did to society

This school of thought stated that a crime is based on the rational decision-making process of
motivated criminals. Followers of these concepts argued for a more rational approach to punishment, stressing
that the relationship between crimes and their punishment should be balanced and fair. This view was based
on the prevailing philosophy of “utilitarianism or Hedonistic Doctrine." According to this theory, actions are
evaluated by their tendency to produce advantage, pleasure, and happiness and to avoid or prevent mischief,
pain, evil, or unhappiness. In other words, under this philosophy, people want to achieve pleasure and avoid
pain. Crimes must therefore provide some pleasure to the criminal. It follows that to deter crime, one must
administer pain in an appropriate amount to counterbalance the pleasure obtained from crime.

The classical criminology theory believes that the purpose of all law is to produce and support the total
happiness of the community it serves. Since punishment is harmful, its existence is justified only if it promises
to prevent greater evil that it creates. Punishment, therefore, has four main objectives. These are:
1. To prevent all criminal offenses
2. When it cannot prevent a crime, to convince the offender to commit a less serious one.
3. To ensure that a criminal uses no more force than is necessary.
4. To prevent crime as cheaply as possible.

The classical criminology theory has several basic elements:

1. Crime in general could actually be deterred through the responsible and rational utilization of punishment.
2. The punishments inflicted should be just severe enough to outweigh any pleasures, either contemplated or
experienced, that could be derived from the commission of the criminal act.
3. In this way, the threat of punishment would deter most people from committing crimes in the first place.
4. The actual infliction of punishment would deter the offender from committing additional criminal acts.

The heritage left by the classical school is still very evident in today's perspective on crime and human
behavior. This is seen in the five-principles used by society in reacting to criminal activities:
1. The Principle of Rationality- human beings have free will and the actions they undertake are the result of
choice.
2. The Principle of Hedonism - pleasure and pain, or reward and punishment, are the major determinants of
choice.
3. The Principle of Punishment- criminal punishment is a deterrent to unlawful behavior, and deterrence is
the best justification for punishment.
4. The Human Rights Principle - society is made possible by individuals cooperating. Hence, society owes to
its citizen's respect for their rights in the face of government action.
5. The Due Process Principle - an accused should be presumed innocent until proven otherwise, and an
accused should not be subjected to punishment prior to guilt being lawfully established.

There is a view that intelligence and rationality are fundamental human characteristics and are the
basis for explaining human behavior. In this view, humans are said to be capable of understanding themselves
and of acting to promote their own best interest. Societies are formed because people rationally decide to
make them according to patterns that seem good to them - monarchies or republics, totalitarians dictatorships
or democracies. The key to progress is said to be intelligent behavior brought about by careful training and
education. Each person is said to be the master of his or her fate, possessed of free will rather than driven by
spirits or devils.

Crime is seen as a product of the free choice of the individual, who first assesses the potential benefits
of committing the crime against its potential costs. The rational response of society is to increase the costs and
to decrease the benefits of crime to the point that individuals will not choose to commit crime.

Summary of Principles of Classical School of Thought:

1. This view was based on the prevailing philosophy of the time, namely, "utilitarianism," which emphasized
that behavior occurs when the actor considers it useful, purposeful, and reasonable.
2. Social philosophers like Beccaria and Bentham began to rethink the prevailing concepts of law and justice.
3. They argued for an operational approach to punishment, stressing the relationship between crimes and their
punishment should be balanced and fair.
4. People have free will and choose to act in this regard.
5. Deterrence is based upon the notion of the human being as a "hedonist" who seeks pleasure and avoids
pain.
6. The swifter and more certain the punishment, the more effective it is in deterring criminal behavior.
7. Philosophers called for a more moderate and just approach to penal sanctions, which could substitute for
the cruel public executions designed to frighten people into obedience.

CLASSICAL THINKERS:

Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794)

Cesare Beccaria (whose Italian name was Cesare Bonesana, but who held the title Marchese di
Beccaria) was born in Milan, Italy. The eldest of four children he was trained at Catholic schools and earned, a
Doctor of Laws degree by the time he was 20.
 Beccaria's most important contribution was to consider crime as an injury to society. It was the injury to
society, rather than to the immediate individual, who experienced it, that was to direct and determine the
degree of punishment. Behind this thinking was the utilitarian assumption that all social actions should be
guided by the goal of achieving “the greatest happiness for the greatest number",

Beccaria claimed that although most criminals are punished based upon an assessment of their
criminal intent, they should be punished instead based upon the degree of injury they cause. The purpose of
punishment, he said, should be deterrence rather than retribution, and punishment should be imposed to
prevent offenders from committing additional crimes. Beccaria saw punishment as a tool to an end and not an
end, and crime prevention was more important to him than revenge.

As stated by Heidt and Wheeldon (2015), classical school theorists believed that in order to prevent
crimes and achieve deterrence, a number of conditions must be met. First, the punishment should be
calibrated at the appropriate severity level. In other words, the punishment must fit the crime and should be
comparable to the harm caused by the crime. Second, the chance of being detected must have a high level of
certainty, or the offender must have perceived that he or she is likely to be caught and punished. Third, the
punishment should take place shortly after the act or behavior, so the level of celerity or swiftness should be
high.

Major Tenets of the Classical School:

1. In the natural state, man was absolutely free. And in forming a government, he gave up natural liberties in
exchange for the security or protection given by government.
2. Laws of the state became means of preventing man from encroachment with others man's freedom.
3. Basis of social action on crimes is greatest happiness for the greatest number.
4. Punishment of crime, should be severe enough to overbalance the pleasure derived from the illegal act.
5. Punishment is justified only if it prevents crime through deterrence.
6. Demand for effective preventive methods.
7. Contented that all persons who violated special law should receive identical punishments regardless of age,
sanity, position, or circumstances.
8. Focused on two causes of crime:
a. Economic conditions- property crimes are committed by the poor out of necessity.
b. Cruel or Bad laws- promote criminality by diminishing the human spirit.

Jeremy Bentham (1748 - 1832)

Bentham is another founding personality of the classical school. He is an English Utilitarian philosopher
and lawyer who wrote the Introduction to. The Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), where he argued
"nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign master, pain and pleasure." He advocated
a philosophy of social control based on what he called the principle of utility. This guiding principle was for
government to seek to obtain the greatest happiness for the greatest number."

To reduce crime .or, as Bentham emphasized, "to prevent the happening of mischief,”. The pain of
crime commission must outweigh the pleasure to be derived from criminal activity. Bentham's claim rested
upon his belief, spawned from enlightenment thought, that human beings are fundamentally rational and that
criminals will weigh in their minds the pain of punishment against any pleasures thought likely to be derived
from crime commission. Bentham believed that individuals could weigh, at least intuitively, the consequences
of their behavior before acting, thus maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. Accordingly, the value of any
pleasure, or the tendency to avoid pain could be calculated by its intensity, duration, certainty and immediacy
or remoteness in time.

Utilitarianism /Hedonistic Calculus:

Bentham's perspective on human behavior had its roots in the concept of utilitarianism, which assumes
that all the person's actions are calculated. Utilitarianism is the doctrine that the purpose of all actions should
be to bring about the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. For Bentham, actions are
calculated in accordance with their likelihood of obtaining pleasure or pain. Bentham stated that an act
possesses utility if it "tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good or happiness or to prevent the
happening of mischief, pain, evil or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered.
Major Tenets:
1. Laws must be efficient, economical means of preventing crimes.
2. Prevention was the only justifiable purpose of punishment.
3. Recommended that penalties must be fixed to impose an amount of pain in excess of the pleasure - derived
from the criminal act.
4. Capital punishment should be restricted to offense, which in the highest degree shock the public feelings.

Consequently, theorists argue that people would choose to obey the law if the sanctions for violating it
are sufficiently severe and have a high probability of being imposed. Fundamental to the classical school's
perspective on the causes of crime is the concept known as hedonistic calculus". This term refers to people
acting in accordance with their desires to maximize pleasure and minimize pain.

The basic elements of hedonistic calculus can be summarized into the following:
1. In every society, people have free will to choose criminal or lawful solutions to meet their needs or settle
their problems.
2. Criminal solutions may be more attractive than lawful ones because they usually require less work for a
greater payoff; if left unsanctioned, crime has greater utility than conformity.
3. A person's choice of criminal solutions may be controlled by his or her fear of punishment.
4. The more severe, certain, and swift the punishment, the better able it is to control criminal behavior.

Bentham's other major contribution to Criminology was his suggestion that prisons be designed along
the lines of what he called a "Panopticon House," which was to be a circular building with cells along the
circumference that are clearly visible from a central location staffed by guards.

1. NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOL:
This school posits that the actor is no longer the isolated, atomistic rational man of pure reason. And
crime is the result of free will of men but was committed due to some compelling reasons.

The Neo-classical school stated that humans are creatures guided by reason, possessing free will, and
therefore are responsible for their acts and can be controlled by fear of punishment. Hence the pain from
punishment must exceed the pleasure obtained from the criminal act; then free will determines the desirability
of non-criminal conduct. The neo-classical school therefore represented primarily the modifications necessary
for the administration of the criminal law based on classical theory that resulted from practical experiences.
French society and United States deviated from Beccaria's framework in taking the intent of the offenders into
account. Such as in determining what type of charges should be filed against those accused of homicide?
Therefore, a new school of thought regarding the classical/ deterrence model developed which became known
as the Neo-classical school of Criminology.

The only significant difference between the neo-classical and classical schools of Criminology is that
the neoclassical considers contextual circumstances of the individual or situation that allow for increase or
decrease in the punishment. This was also the conclusion of the French Society that Beccaria's system was
neither fair nor effective in terms of deterrence. They came to acknowledge that circumstantial factors play an
important part in how malicious or guilty a certain defendant is in each crime, based on a number of contextual
factors. The French revised their laws to consider both mitigating and aggravating circumstances. This
neoclassical concept became the standard in all Western judicial systems

There are two neo-classical schools of thought existing today:

1. Neo classical school continues to build upon ideas inherent in the notion of a social contract and places an
emphasis on individual rights and due process.
2. Takes the form of three ideas that extend well beyond the calculus of determinate sentencing.
a. Criminal behavior is the result of free choice;
b. Criminal behavior is rewarding, and crime holds a number of attractions, from sensuality to monetary gain to
fame;
C. Criminal punishment is necessary for deterrence.
Arguments of Neo-Classical:
1: Children under 7 years of age were incapable of making their own decisions.
2. The insane and the feebleminded were incapable of freedom of action.
3. The courts should consider factors such as mitigating circumstances, incompetence, pathology and the past
record of offenders.

Just Deserts Model - the notion that criminal offenders deserve the punishment they receive at the hands of
the law and that punishment should be appropriate to the type and severity of crimes similar to the one for
which a particular offender is being sentence.

Specific Deterrence - a goal of criminal sentencing, which seeks to prevent a particular offender from
engaging in repeated criminality.

General Deterrence - a goal of criminal sentencing which seeks to prevent others from committing crimes
similar to the one for which a particular offender is being sentence.

Presently, there are eight key elements of classical and current-day neoclassical criminology:
1. Human beings are fundamentally rational, and most human behavior results from free will coupled with
rational choice.
2. Pain and pleasure are the two central determining factors of human behavior.
3. Punishment serves to deter law violators and as an example to others who might contemplate violating the
law.
4. The principles of right and wrong are inherent in our nature and cannot be denied.
5. Society exists to provide benefits to individuals that they would not receive living in isolation.
6. When people band together for the protection offered by society, they forfeit some of their personal
freedoms in order to enjoy the benefits of living among others cooperatively.
7. Certain key rights of the individual are necessary for the enjoyment of life, and governments that restricts
and prohibit the exercise of those rights should be disbanded.
8. Crime lessens the quality of the contractual bond that exists between individuals and their society.
Therefore, criminal acts cannot be tolerated by any members if everyone wants to receive the most benefit
from living in a cooperative society.

3. POSITIVE SCHOOL:
Positivism was developed as the scientific method in Europe. This movement was inspired by new
discoveries in biology, astronomy, and chemistry. They believe that the scientific method can be used to study
human behavior and clearly explain the cause of criminal behavior. The Italian or positive school made a
valuable contribution to criminology by stimulating thought and writing about crime and criminals. It focused on
the offender as an appropriate object of study, which the 18th century reformers had not done. Finally, the
work of the Italian school framed the so-called "nature-versus-nurture” debate (whether biological or social
factors create behaviors) that became a principal theme throughout the development of modern criminology.

The term positivism came from the writings of Auguste Comte, who proposed the use of the scientific
method in the study of society in his 1851 work "A System of Positive Polity." Comte believed that a new
"positive age" was dawning during which both society and human nature would be perfected, and his writings
were an attempt to bring that age to completion. Positivism holds that social phenomena are observable,
explainable, and measurable in quantitative terms. For the strict positivist, reality consists of a world of
objectively defined facts, which can be scientifically measured and ultimately controlled

The positivism can be thought of a school of thought resting on three interrelated philosophical
assumptions. The first assumption is that human behavior is controlled entirely by natural forces. This
assumption is in opposition to the view that spiritual forces and free will control our behavior and is often called
the assumption of determinism. The second assumption is that primary way to achieve an understanding of
human behavior is not through contemplation and introspection, but through recording and sharing scientific
observations. The third, positivism assumes that human mankind pools its observations and thereby gradually
comes to better understand the forces governing human actions.
Positivism has two main elements:
1. The first is the belief that human behavior is a function of internal and external forces. Some of these forces
are social, such as the effect of wealth and class, and others are political and historical, such as war and
famine. Other forces are more personal and psychological, such as an individual's brain structure and his or
her biological makeup or mental ability. Each of these forces influences human behavior.
2. The second aspect of positivism is embracing the scientific method to solve problems. Positivists rely on the
strict use of empirical methods to test hypotheses. That is, they believe in the factual, firsthand observation and
measurement of conditions and events.

The main theories under this school of thought are:

1. Man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid phenomenon, which conditions him to do wrong
despite, or contrary to his own volition.
2. Crime is an essentially social and moral phenomenon, and it cannot be treated and checked by the
imposition of punishment by thru the enforcement of individual measures.
3. Basis of criminal responsibility in his dreadfulness or dangerous state.

POSITIVIST PHILOSOPHERS:

Cesare Lombroso (1835 - 1909)

Lombroso was an Italian physician who spent much of his career nurturing the medical needs of men
incarcerated in military prisons. He is referred to as "Father of Modern Criminology" because he was the first
Criminologist who used the scientific method, particularly measurement and observation. He also utilized
generalization in his work. Other writers have referred to him as the Father of the Italian/positive School of
Criminology in recognition of the fact that 19th century positivism began in Italy.

He became interested in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. Working from ideas he derived from
evolutionary theory, he came to a novel proposal: “Many criminals, he said, might be evolutionary throwbacks
to more primitive forms of human lie. He referred to this as atavism." Lombroso concluded that roughly a third
of all incarcerated criminals had atavistic physical traits, or what he came to call stigmata. These stigmata
included such things as protruding brow ridges, twisted and flattish noses, unusually high cheekbones, and
asymmetrical facial features, long arms relative to the length of the trunk or legs, and an unusually large
coccyx (tailbone).

Major Tenets of Lombroso's Theory:

1. Applied the concepts of ATAVISM (throwback and reversal to an earlier trait of ancestors) for his ideas
about the evolution of crimes.
2. Criminals are biological throwback to a primitive or atavistic stage of evolution.
3. Conducted thousands of post-mortem exams of criminals and concluded that in effect criminals are a
subhuman species.
4. There are three classes of criminals, namely;
a. Born Criminals – atavism
b. Insane Criminals - idiots, imbeciles, demented, and paralyzed.
c. Criminaloids - not born with physical stigmata but who are of such mental make-up that they display
antisocial behavior.
5. Started reoriented thinking to the study of criminology by focusing on the offender, not the offense from
crimes to criminals.

Raffaele Garofalo (1852 - 1934)

An Italian lawyer and legislator, Garofalo became a prominent spokesman for the Italian School of
Criminology. Garofalo agreed with Lombroso that biological characteristics could help in the identification of
serious and persistent criminals. However, Garofalo focused on the brain rather than the external facial
and skeletal features, arguing, for example, that criminals had greater development in the rear portions of
their brains and slighter development of the frontal regions. In addition, Garofalo suggested that most of the
deficiencies exhibited by criminals would ultimately involve “moral abnormalities" rather than “physical
abnormalities”. He rejected the classical principle that punishment should fit the crime, arguing instead that it
should fit the criminals, with the only question to be considered at sentencing being the danger the offender
posed to the society.

Major Tenets:
1. To understand the criminal, it is necessary to have a meaningful definition of crime.
2. Distinguishes between two types of crimes:
a. Natural Crimes- those that violate two basic "altruistic sentiments (altruism is unselfish regards for a
devotion to the welfare of others.
 Pity - revulsion against the involuntary infliction of sufferings on others.
 Probity- respect, for the property rights of others.

b. Police Crime- do not offer altruistic sentiments but are called crimes by law.

According to Comte, societies pass through stages that can be grouped on the basis of how people try
to understand the world in which they live in. People in primitive societies consider inanimate objects as having
life (for example, the sun is a God); in later social stages, people embrace a rational, scientific view of the
world. Comte called this final stage the positive stage, and those who followed his writings became known as
positivists.

Besides playing an instrumental role in formulating the school of thought known as positivism, Comte
coined two concepts that are quite relevant to criminology: Sociology and Altruism.

Sociology - was the name given by Comte to the discipline that would scientifically study human social
behavior and human societies.

Altruism - refers to the tendency to be empathetic and self-sacrificing towards others.

Enrico Ferri (1856 - 1929)

Ferri developed his ideas in the course of his work as a university professor, trial lawyer, member of
Parliament, newspaper editor, public lecturer, and author. Along the way, Ferri spent a year studying with
Lombroso and become his lifelong friend. He published a book "Criminal Sociology". He believed that moral
insensibility combined with low intelligence were the criminal's most marked characteristics.

According to Ferri, the criminal has a defective resistance to criminal tendencies and temptations due to
the ill-balanced impulsiveness which characterizes children and savages. Given this conception of criminals,
his only rationale for punishment was social defense. This theory of punishment asserts that its purpose is not
to deter or to rehabilitate but to defend society from criminal predation. He reasoned that if criminals were not
capable of basing their behavior on rational calculus, how could they be deterred? Rather, criminals must be
locked up for as long as possible that they no longer posed a threat to society. He argued against penal
systems that stressed only punitive action, recommending crime prevention instead

Major Tenets of Ferri's Theory:

1. Considered crime as the "effect of multiple causes" that includes a large number of anthropological,
physical, and social factors.
2. Classified criminals as:
a. Born or instinctive- who carries from birth, through unfortunate heredity from his progenitor, a reduced
resistance to criminal stimuli and also an evident and precocious propensity to crime.
b. Insane - affected by clinically identified mental disease or by a neuropsychopathic condition, which groups
him with the mentally diseased.
c. Passional - who, in two varieties, the criminal through passion (a prolonged and chronic mental state) or
through emotion explosive and unexpected mental state) represents a type at the opposite pole from the
criminal due to congenital tendencies.
d. Occasional- who constitute the majority of lawbreakers and is the product of family and social milieu more
than of abnormal personal physio-mental conditions
e. Habitual - or a criminal by acquired habit, who is mostly a product of the social environment in which, due to
abandonment by his family, lack of education, poverty, and bad companions, already in his childhood begins
as an occasional offender.

Charles Buckman Goring (1870 - 1919)

He was an English physician who conducted a well-controlled statistical study of Lombroso's thesis of
atavism. Goring used newly developed but advanced mathematical techniques to measure the degree of
correlation between physiological features and criminal history. He examined nearly 3,000 inmates at Turin
prison beginning in 1901. He concluded that "the whole fabric of Lombrosian doctrine, judged by the standards
of science, is fundamentally unsound." Goring compared the prisoners with student at Oxford and Cambridge
universities, British soldiers, and non-criminal hospital patients and published his findings in 1913 in his lengthy
treatise “The English Convict: A Statistical Study.

4. FRENCH SCHOOL
It emphasized the interaction between social psychological factors; the importance of biological and physical
factors in crime causation. It posited that crime was socially defined and that it was socially determined.

According to Triplett (2018), in contrast to Lombroso's Italian School of Criminal Anthropology, the
general viewpoint of the French School was shaped less by the evolutionary theory of Darwin and more by that
of Jean-Baptiste Lamark. It emphasized the possible of environmental causes of human behavior. In essence,
the French School is better described as a multidisciplinary tradition that accepted sociological determinants,
bio-psychological propositions, and even a degree of free will.

MAJOR THINKER OF FRENCH SCHOOL:

Gabriel Tarde (1843 - 1904)

He was a French lawyer and sociologist. He emphasized that social factors were sufficient to explain
why crime varied overtime within each society. Tarde contended that some people learn to engage in crime
much and other people learn legitimate occupations and social customs.

Major Theories:
1. Criminal behavior is largely learned from what he called laws of imitation. This meant that people imitate
others with whom they have frequent contact essentially the same way people copy and come to prefer
different styles of clothing.
2. Viewed the professional criminals (murderer, pickpocket, and swindlers) as an individual who goes through
a long period of apprenticeship in much the same way as a lawyer, physician, or nurse.

5. SOCIALIST SCHOOL

Based on the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels that began around 1850, they emphasized
economic determinism. It concentrates on the need for quality among all citizens. Their theories are based
upon the basic idea that poverty causes people to be inclined to criminal activities.

Poverty- mean the condition of that group only whose income is low and therefore, the standard of living is not
enough to sustain normal health and efficiency.

6. CARTOGRAPHIC SCHOOL
This school is concerned primarily with the distribution of crimes in certain areas, both geographical and
social. This school viewed crime as a necessary expression of social conditions. One of these alternative ways
was associated with looking for geographical patterns in criminal behavior. Scholars who frequently employ
maps and other geographical information in their research are called cartographers.

MAJOR THINKERS OF CARTOGRAPHIC SCHOOL:

Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet (1796- 1874)

 L.A.J. Adolphe Quetelet was a Belgian mathematician who began together with a Frenchman, Andre -
Michel Guerry, the “cartographic school of criminology”. This approach made use of social statistics that
were being developed in Europe in the early nineteenth century. He was one of the first social scientists to use
objective mathematical techniques to investigate the influence of social factors, such as season, climate,
sex and age on the propensity to commit crime.

Quetelet's most important finding was that social forces were significantly correlated with crime rates. In
addition to finding a strong influence of age and sex on crime, Quetelet also uncovered evidence that season,
climate, population composition, and poverty were also related to criminality. He identified many of the
relationships between crime and social phenomena that still serve as a basis for criminology today

Major Theories:
1. Scientific law should be observed from several certain degrees of probability resulting from a number of
observations rather than in individual occurrences.
2. Introduced the use of quantitative techniques in the study of crimes.
3. Used moral statistics to establish scientific laws
4. Man has greater propensity for crimes than Women; young greater than old.

Andre-Michel Guerry (1802 - 1866)

A second prominent contributor to the cartographic school, he was a French lawyer. Guerry
meticulously shaped maps of various regions of France according to their crime rates. He was the first person
known to objectively test the hypothesis that crime was most prevalent among the poor and uneducated. He
concluded that property crimes were higher in wealthy areas, but violent crimes were much higher in poor
areas.

As stressed by Triplett (2018), Guerry's analysis indicated that area of France that tend to have the
fewest crimes against property also tend to have the most crimes against persons. Moreover, they showed that
several wealthiest and most economically developed areas have among the highest rates of crimes against
property.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN DEVIANT BEHAVIOR AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

From a criminological standpoint, crime represents a major form of deviant behavior. Deviant behavior
may refer to a broad range of activities that the majority in society may view as eccentric, dangerous,
annoying, bizarre, outlandish, gross, abhorrent behavior that does not conform to the expectations of a group,
community, or society. Criminal behavior on the other hand is behavior in violation of the criminal law of
society.

However, emphasized that many crimes are deviant or abnormal forms of behavior. He also stressed
that not all deviance, however, is criminal and some crimes are not seen as deviant by those who commit
them, or even by the significant segments of the population. Apparently, crime is not an isolated individual
activity, but is a social event. Every crime has a unique set of causes, consequences and participants.
Consequently, different people will have various interpretations regarding the who, what, when, where and why
crime happens.

Criminology is very much concerned with crimes or criminal behavior. These are behaviors which are
considered threats to the peace and order of society. These behaviors are considered crimes because there is
a law that defines them as such. Laws are "formal norms" in that they are formally written rules that govern
behavior considered to be offenses against the state. Conformity to laws is induced through a variety of formal
and external mechanism such as law enforcement agencies, punishment, etc.

Delisi and Beaver (2011) presented the "social push" model proposed by Raine, which highlighted the
key influence of genetic and environmental processes in giving rise to social and biological risk factors that
both individually and interactively predispose one to antisocial behavior
WHAT IS CRIME? There is no fixed definition of crimes: however, we can discuss them according to the
following concepts:

In its legal concept, crime (Reyes, 2012) is an act omitted or committed in violation of a public law
forbidding or commanding it. Another definition is an intentional act or omission in violation of criminal law
committed without defense or justification and sanctioned by law as a felony or misdemeanor. There is a
difference between an act committed and an act omitted. An act committed refers to a crime of commission,
which is the act performed is in violation of a law forbidding it. On the other hand, an act omitted refers to a
crime of omission, which happens when a person failed to perform an act that is commanded by law.

Crime (Walsh, 2012) is an intentional act in violation of the criminal law committed without defense or
excuse and penalized by the state. A crime is thus an act in violation of criminal law for which a punishment is
prescribed; the person committing it must have intended to do so and must have done so without legally
acceptable defense or justification.

Crimes are defined by criminal or penal laws that explicitly state what actions are prohibited, what
actions are required to be done and provides for the penalties or punishments to be imposed in case of
violation of laws, Without laws that prohibit an act, the act cannot be called a crime.

In its social definition, crime is an act, which a group regards as menacing sufficiently the fundamental
interests of a group in order to justify the formal reaction of restraining the violator. It is considered as behavior
that violates the norms of society, and in simplest term, antisocial behavior.

Rational choice theorists (Schmalleger, 2011) view crime in terms of Bentham's principle of maximizing
pleasure and minimizing pain. People will choose crime if they perceive that its pleasure exceeds the pain the.
might conceivably expect if discovered. The theory does not assume that we are all equally at risk to commit
criminal acts, or that we do not commit crimes simply because we do not want to.

However, while the theory recognizes the factors such as temperament, intelligence, class, family
structure and neighborhood impact our choices, it largely ignores these factors in favor of concentrating on the
conscious thought processes involved in making decision to offend. Rational Choice theory simply assumes
criminally motivated offenders will always be with us and focus on the process of their choices to offend. This
process is known as choice structuring and defined as the constellation of opportunities, costs and benefits
attaching to particular kinds of crimes. Thus, criminal events require that motivated offenders meet situation
that they perceive as an opportunity to acquire something they want.

Routine activities are defined as (Walsh, 2012) recurrent and prevalent activities which provide for
basic population and individual needs. In other words, they are the day-to-day activities characterizing a
particular community. This theory looks at crime from the points of view both offender and of crime prevention
efforts. A crime will only be committed when a motivated offenders believe that they have found something
worth stealing or someone to victimize that lacks a capable guardian.

WHAT CONSTITUTES A CRIME?

Walsh (2012) emphasized that the following factors constitute a crime. These factors co-exist for
without them, there will be no crime to be considered.
1. Corpus delicti- is a Latin term meaning body of the crime and refers to the elements of an act that must be
present in order to legally define it as a crime. All crimes have their own specific elements, which are the
essential constituent parts that define the act as criminal.
2. Actus reus - means guilty act or criminal conduct and refers the principle that a person must commit some
forbidden act or neglect somne mandatory act before he or she can be subjected to criminal sanctions. In
effect, this principle of law means that people cannot be criminally prosecuted for thinking something or being
something but only for doing something. This prevents government from passing laws criminalizing statuses
and systems of thought they don't like. For instance, although drunken behavior may be punishable crime,
being an alcoholic cannot be punished because being something is a status, not an act.
3. Mens rea - means guilty mind and refers to whether or not the suspect had a wrongful purpose in mind
when carrying out the actuS reus. Negligence, recklessness and carelessness that results in some harmful
consequences, even though not intended, do not excuse such behavior from criminal prosecution under mens
rea. Conditions that may preclude prosecution under this principle are self-defense, defense of others, insanity
and extreme duress or coercion.
4. Concurrence - means that the act (actus reus) and the mental state (mens rea) concur in the sense that the
criminal intention actuates the criminal act. For instance, if John sets out with his tools to rob Mary's apartment
and takes VCR, he has fused the guilty mind with the wrongful act and has therefore committed robbery.
However, assume John and Mary are friends who habitually visit each other's apartment unannounced. One-
day John decides to visit Mary, finds her not at home, but walks in and suddenly decides that he could sell
Mary's VCR for drug money. Although the loss to Mary is the same in both scenarios, in the latter's instance
John cannot be charged with robbery because he did not enter her apartment by force or fraud, the crucial
element needed to satisfy such a charged. In this case, the concurrence of guilty mind and wrongful act
occurred after lawful entry, so he is only charged with theft, less serious offense.
5. Causation - refers to the necessity to establish a causal link between the criminal act and the harm
suffered. This causal link must be proximate, not ultimate. Supposed Tony wounds Frank in a knife fight. Being
macho, Frank attends to the wounds himself. Three weeks later, the wounds become severely infected and
results in his death. Can Tony be charged of murder? Although the wounding led to Frank's death (the ultimate
cause), Frank's disregard for the seriousness of his injury was the most proximate (or direct) cause of his
death. And yet Tony is still criminally liable for homicide.
6. Harm - refers to the negative impact a crime has either on the victim or on the general values of the
community. Although the harm caused by the criminal act is often obvious, the harm caused by many so called
victimless is often less obvious. Yet some victimless crimes can cause more social harm in the long run than
many crimes with obvious victims.
However, Tibbetts (2015) mentioned another concept that can constitute a crime when present, Mala
Prohibita. Mala prohibita has the literal meaning of "evil because prohibited." This term acknowledges that
these crimes are not inherently evil acts; they are bad only because the law says so. In the Philippines, mala
prohibita acts are defined and penalized under special penal laws like illegal gambling, fencing, drugs
possession, etc.

HOW DO CRIMINOLOGISTS VIEW CRIME?

In understanding criminal behavior, it normally depends on what is one's perception about crimes. As
stated by Siegel (2012), criminologists usually aligned themselves with one several schools of thoughts or
perspectives. Each of these perspectives maintains its own view of what constitute criminal behavior and what
causes people to engage in criminality. In addition, the multi-disciplinary nature of the field of criminology,
issues on what is the nature and definition of the crime itself are cause of some disagreement among
criminologists.

Crime does not occur in a vacuum; criminal activity is diversely created and variously interpreted. This
means that different people will have various interpretations regarding crime. Like other social events, crime is
fundamentally a social construction. However, agreeing that crime is a social construction does not lessen the
impact of victimization experienced by people affected by crime. Crime has a measurable cost to individual
victims and to society. Although a given instance of criminal behavior may have many causes, it may also carry
with it different meanings.

There may be one meaning for offenders, another for victims and another meaning to different
agencies of criminal justice system. In view of this, social interest groups all interpret law breaking behavior
from their own unique point of view. Traditionally, criminologists view crime in different ways.

THREE VIEWS OF CRIME:

In defining crime, (Siegel, 2013) criminologists align themselves with one of several schools of thought
in their field. Each perspective maintains its own view of what constitutes criminal behavior. There are three (3)
common concepts of crime used by criminologists. The definition of crime affects how Criminologists view the
causes and control of illegal behavior and shapes their research orientation.

In explaining crime and crime behavior, professional criminologists usually align themselves with one of
several schools of thought or perspectives in their field. Each perspective maintains its own view of what
constitutes criminal behavior and what causes people to engage in criminality.
CONSENSUS VIEW:
1. The law defines crime.
2. Agreements exist on outlawed behavior.
3. Laws apply to all citizens equally.

CONFLICT VIEW:
1. The law is a tool of the ruling class.
2. Crime is politically defined concept
3. Real Crimes are not outlawed
4. The law is used to control the underclass

INTERACTIONIST VIEW:
1. Moral entrepreneurs define crimes.
2. Crimes are illegal because society defines them that way
3. Criminal labels are life-transforming events.

The Consensus View:

According to this view ((Siegel, 2013). crimes are considered behaviors that are essentially harmful to
most citizens living in society and therefore have been controlled or prohibited by the existing criminal law. It
implies that the criminal law represents the consensus of public opinion and there is general agreement about
which behaviors society needs to control and which should be beyond state regulation. Therefore, crimes are
behaviors believed to be repugnant to all elements of society. The substantive criminal law, which is the written
code that defines crimes and their punishments, reflects the values, beliefs, and opinions of society's
mainstream. The tern consensus is used because it implies that there is general agreement among a majority
of citizens on what behaviors should be outlawed by the criminal law and henceforth viewed as crimes.

The eminent criminologist Edwin Sutherland and Donald Cressey have taken the popular stance of
linking crime with the criminal law; that "Criminal behavior is behavior in violation of the criminal law. It is not a
crime unless it is prohibited by law. Criminal law is defined as a body of specific rules regarding human
conduct which have been promulgated by political authority, which apply uniformly to all members of the
classes to which the rules refer, and which are enforced by punishment administered by the state." This
approach to crime implies that it is a function of the beliefs, morality, and rules established by the existing legal
power structure

As explained by Taylor (2016), the consensus approach, individuals are socialized to accept the morals
and values of society, and in so doing become a law-abiding citizen. Parents are responsible for instilling these
morals and values through the process of socialization. Furthermore, the consensus view provides a common
perception of what is considered to be right or wrong and behaviors that contravene the law.

The Conflict View:

Under this view, the law is controlled by the rich and powerful who shape its content to ensure their
continued economic domination of society. According to Siegel (2013) this view supports that criminal law is
created and enforced by the ruling class as a mechanism for controlling dissatisfied and disenfranchised
members of society.

Apparently, the law is the instrument that enables the wealthy to maintain their position of power and
control the behavior of those who oppose their ideas and values or who might rebel against unequal
distribution of wealth. It depicts society as a collection of diverse groups - owners, workers, professionals, and
students - who are in constant and continuing conflict. Groups able to assert their political power, use the law
and the criminal justice system to advance their economic and social position. Criminal laws, therefore, are
viewed as acts created to protect the "haves and the have-nots."

According to the conflict view, the definition of crime is controlled by those who possess wealth, power,
and position. Crime is shaped by the values of the ruling class and not by an objective, moral consensus that
reflects the needs of all people. Crime, according to this definition, is a political concept designed to protect the
power and position of the upper classes at the expense of the poor. Rather than being class neutral, criminal
law reflects and protects established economic, racial, gendered, and political power and privilege. Conflict
criminologist often compare and contrast the harsh penalties exacted on the poor for their "street crimes"
(burglary, robbery, and theft) with the minor penalties the wealthy receive for their white-collar crimes
(securities violation and other illegal business practices), which cause considerably more social harm. While
the poor go to prison for minor law violations, the wealthy are given lenient sentences for even the most
serious breaches of law (Siegel, 2013, p. 13).

Eyen crimes prohibiting violent acts, such as armed robbery, rape, and murder, may have political
undertones. Banning violent acts ensures domestic tranquility and guarantees that the anger of the poor and
disenfranchised classes will not be directed at their wealthy capitalist exploiters. According to this conflict view
of crime, "real" crimes would include the following acts (Siegel, 2013, p. 13):

1. Violations of human rights due to racism, sexism, and imperialism

2. Unsafe working conditions
3. Inadequate childcare
4. Inadequate opportunities for employment and education
5. Substandard housing and medical care
6. Crimes of economic and political domination
7. Pollution of the environment
8. Price-fixing
9. Police brutality
10. Assassinations and war-making
11. Violations of human dignity
12. Denial of physical needs and necessities, and impediments to self-determination
13. Deprivation of adequate food
14. Blocked opportunities to participate in political decision making

The Interactionist view:

The interactionist view, of crime traces its antecedents to the symbolic interaction school of sociology,
first popularized by pioneering sociologists George Herbert Mead, Charles Horton Cooley, and W. I. Thomas.
This position states that (Siegel, 2013. p. 14):

1. People act according to their own interpretations of reality; through which they assign meaning to things;
2. They observe the way others react to it, either positively or negatively; and
3. They reevaluate and interpret their own behavior according to the meaning and symbols they have learned
from others.

According to this perspective, there is no objective reality. People, institutions, and events are viewed
subjectively and labeled either good or evil according to the interpretation of the evaluator. In this view, the
definition of crime reflects the preferences and opinions of people who hold social power in a particular legal
jurisdiction. To the interactionist, crime has no meaning unless people react to it negatively. The one-time
criminal, if not caught or labeled, can simply return to a “normal' way of life with little permanent damage.

The process in which people are defined or labeled as criminal is also subjective. One person is viewed
as an unrepentant hard- core offender and sent to a maximum-security prison. Another, who has committed
essentially the same crime, is considered remorseful and repentant and given probation in the community.
Though their acts are similar, the treatment they receive is quite different.

Howard Becker (Siegel, 2013) argued, “the deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been
applied; deviant behavior is behavior people so labeled." According to the interactionist view, the definition of
crime reflects the preferences and opinions of people who hold social power in a particular legal jurisdiction.

These moral entrepreneurs wage campaigns (moral crusades) to control behaviors they view as immoral and
wrong (e.g., abortion) or, conversely, to legalize behaviors they consider harmless social eccentricities (e.g,
carrying a handgun for self- protection; smoking pot). Because drug use offends their moral sense, it is
currently illegal to purchase marijuana and hashish, while liquor and cigarettes are sold openly, even though
far more people die of alcoholism and smoking than from drug abuse each year.

Even the definition of serious violent offenses, such as rape and murder, depends on the prevailing
moral values of those who shape the content of the criminal law. For example, Florida has implemented a
"stand your ground law" that legalizes the killing of an unarmed thief or intruder if the person is found in the
owner's parked car; in other states, shooting an unarmed person merely because he or she was sitting in your
car might be considered murder. Fifty years ago, a man could not be prosecuted for raping his wife; today,
every state criminalizes marital rape. In sum, the definition of crime is more reflective of prevailing moral values
than of any objective standard of right and wrong. The interactionist view of crime is similar to the conflict
perspective; both suggest that behavior is outlawed and considered criminal when it offends people who hold
social, view, the interactionist perspective does not attribute capitalist economic and political motives to the
process of defining crime. Laws against pornography, prostitution, and drugs are believed to be motivated
more by moral crusades than by economic values (Siegel, 2013, p 14).

LEGAL CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES: The following are the legal classifications 2013) crimes based on the
Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.

A. ACCORDING TO LAW VIOLATED:

1. FELONY - an act or omission punishable by law which is committed by means of dolo (deceit) or culpa fault)
and punishable under the Revised Penal Code. Felonies committed by means of dolo are called intentional
felonies, while those committed by means of culpa are called culpable felonies.
2. OFFENSE - an act or omission in violation of a special law
3. INFRACTION - an act or omission in violation of a city or municipal ordinance

B. AS TO THE MANNER OF COMMISSION:

1. By means of dolo or deceit when the act was done with deliberate intent;
2. By means of culpa or fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or
lack of skill.

AS TO THE STAGES IN THE COMMISSION OF CRIMES:

1. Consummated crime- when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present.
2. Frustrated crime - when the offender has performed all the acts of execution which will produce the felony
as a consequence but which nevertheless do not produce it, by reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.
3. Attempted crime- when the offender commences the commission of a crime directly by overt acts and does
not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident
other than his own spontaneous desistance.

D. ACCORDING TO PLURALITY:
1. Simple crime - single act constituting only one offense.
2. Complex crime - single act constituting two or more grave felonies or a necessary means for committing
the other.

E. ACCORDING TO GRAVITY:
1. Grave felonies - those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or afflictive penalties.
2. Less grave felonies - those to which the law attaches correctional penalties.
3. Light felonies - those to which the law attaches the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
p200.00.

CRIMINOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES

Meanwhile, Guevara and Bautista (2013) presented the following criminological classification of crimes:

A. ACCORDING TO THE RESULT OF THE CRIME:

1. Acquisitive crime - the offender acquires something by committing the crime like theft and robbery.
2. Extinctive crime - the consequence of the act is destruction, damage or even death like arson, physical
injury, murder, homicide and malicious mischief.

B. ACCORDING TO THE TIME OR PERIOD OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME

1. Seasonal crime - committed only during a certain period of the year such as violation of election laws and
tax laws.
2. Situational crime- committed only when the situation is conducive to its commission, meaning, there is
opportunity to commit it. Examples are robbery if there is nobody in the house, physical injury or homicide can
happen in drinking spree.

C. ACCORDING TO THE LENGTH OF TIME OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME:

1. Instant crime -committed in the shortest possible time like theft.
2. Episodic crime- committed by a series of acts in a lengthy space of time like serious illegal detention.

D. ACCORDING TO THE PLACE OR LOCATION:

1. Static crime - committed in only one place such as theft and robbery.
2. Continuing crime -committed in several places like abduction.

E. ACOCORDING TO THE USE OF MENTAL FACULTIES:

1. Rational crime - committed with intent and the offender is in full possession of his sanity, meaning, he
knows what he is doing and understand the consequences of his actions.
2. Irrational crime - committed by an offender who does not know the nature and quality of his act on account
of the disease of the mind; offender is suffering from any form of mental insanity, disorder or abnormality.

F. ACCORDING TO THE TYPE OF OFFENDER:

1. White-collar crime - committed by a person belonging to the upper socio-economic class in the course of
his occupational activities such as insurance fraud, medical malpractice and falsification of documents.
2. Blue-collar crime - committed by ordinary professional criminal to maintain his livelihood like pick
pocketing, snatching.

CRIME VOLUME AND CRIME RATE:

Crime volume- is the number of crimes reported as to its classification, whether index or non-index at given
period.

Crime Rate- is the measure of the rate of occurrences of crimes committed in a given area and time.

Crime Solution Efficiency Rating - is the measure of the rate of solved crimes.

In the legal sense, a criminal is any person who has been found to have committed a wrongful act in
the course of the standard judicial process and has received a final verdict of his guilt. In the criminological
sense, a person is already considered a criminal the moment he committed a crime. While socially, a criminal
is one who violated a social norm or one who did anti- social act. He is also a person who violated rules of
conduct due to behavioral maladjustment.

GENERAL CLASSIFICATIONS OF CRIMINALS:

On the basis of etiology:
1. Acute criminals - persons who violate criminal law because of the impulse of the moment, fit of passion or
anger.
2. Chronic criminals - persons who acted in consonance with deliberated thinking.
a. Neurotic criminals - persons whose actions arise from the intra-psychic conflict between the social
and anti-social components of his personality. The individual is suffering from mental disorder
b. Normal criminals - persons whose psychic organization resembles that of a normal individual
except that he identifies himself with criminal prototype. He looks up to people who are criminals

On the basis of behavioral system:

1. Ordinary criminals - the lowest form of criminal career; they engage only in conventional crimes which
require limited skill. They do not stick to crimes as a profession but rather pushed to commit crimes due to
great opportunity.
2. Organized criminals - these criminals have a high degree of organization that enables them to commit
crimes without being detected and committed to specialized activities which can be operated in large scale
businesses. They associate with other criminals to earn a high degree of organization to enable them to
commit crimes easily without being detected by authorities.
3. Professional criminals - these are highly skilled and able to obtain considerable amount of money without
being detected because of organization and contact with other professional criminals. They are usually those
who practice crime as a profession to maintain a living.

On the basis of activities:

1. Professional criminals - those who earn their living through criminal activities. Their criminal activities are
constant in order to earn skill and develop ability in their act.
2. Accidental criminals - those who commit criminal acts because of unanticipated circumstances.
3. Habitual criminals - those who continue to commit criminal acts for such diverse reasons due to deficiency
Of intelligence and lack of control.
4. Situational criminals - those who are not criminals but get in trouble with legal authorities because they
commit crimes intermixed with legitimate economic activities.

On the basis of mental attitude:

1. Active criminals - are those who commit crimes due to aggressiveness.
2. Passive inadequate criminals - are those who commit crimes because they are pushed to it by reward or
promise,
3. Socialized delinquents - are criminals who are normal in behavior but defective in their socialization
process or development.

As to gravity of offense:
1. Habitual criminals- are those who, within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the same crimes whether serious or less serious is found guilty of any of the said crimes or a third
time offender.
2. Recidivist criminals- are those who, at the time of his trial for.one crime, shall have been previously
convicted by the final judgment of another crime, under the same title of the Revised Penal Code.

CRIME PATTERNS- In analyzing crimes, it is noteworthy to examine recurring crime-patterns to understand

the nature of crime. One of the best way to determine crime pattern is to analyze crime statistics. This crime
statistic will show when certain crimes are at peak and when at its lowest. According to Gupta (2019) crime
statistics attempt to provide a statistical measure of the level, or amount of crime prevalent in societies. There
are many forms of measuring crime, including household surveys, or checking hospital of insurance records,
but the term “crime statistics" usually refers to figures compiled by the police and similar law

UNDERSTANDING CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR:

Another sub-area of the study of criminology involves research on specific criminal types and patterns:
violent crimes, theft crimes, public order, organized crime and so on. Numerous attempts have been made to
describe and understand particular crime types. Marvin Wolfgang's 1958 study “pattern in criminal homicide" is
a landmark analysis of the nature of homicide and the relationship between victim and offender. Wolfgang
discovered that in many instances victims caused or precipitated the violent confrontation that led to their
death, spawning the term victim precipitated homicide.

Furthermore, Edwin Sutherland's analysis of business related offenses also helped coin the phrase
"white-collar crime" to describe economic crimes activities of the affluent. Criminologists are constantly
broadening the scope of their inquiry because new crimes and crime patterns are constantly emerging.

Criminal behavior is the product of a systematic process involving complex interactions between
ecological, micro-level, and macro-level factors that occur over the life course. From conception onward, the
cognitive, affective, and physical attributes that people develop are influenced strongly by:
1. Their personal behavior and physical processes;
2. Interactions with other people, groups, and institutions; and
3. Interactions with the physical environment.

As stressed by Siegel (2015), criminologists are constantly broadening the scope of their inquiry
because new crimes and crime patterns are constantly emerging. Whereas 50 years ago, criminologists have
focused their attention in understanding rape murder, robbery, etc., now they are looking into understanding
stalking, cybercrime crimes, trafficking in person or human smuggling, terrorism and environmental crimes. For
example, a number of criminologists are now doing research in terrorism and terrorist personality in order to
discover why some young people are easily radicalized and join terror groups. Among the findings are:

a. Mental illness is not a critical factor in explaining terrorist behavior. Also, most terrorists are not
"psychopaths."
b. There is no "terrorists personality" nor is there any accurate profile-psychological or otherwise of terrorists.
c. History of childhood abuse and trauma and themes of perceived injustices and humiliation often are
prominent in terrorist biographies, but these elements do not really help to explain terrorism.

The Role of Early Life Experiences:

In the study of Villa (1994), in understanding criminal behavior, it is necessary to apply a "generational
time scale" in order to holistically understand the causes of individual criminal behavior. Generational theory
was developed by William Strauss and Neil Howe the describes a theorized recurring generation cycle. Villa
also emphasized that early life experiences appear likely to have an especially strong influence on the
development of criminality because individuals acquire traits sequentially. The traits we possess at any
juncture are the result of the cumulative cognitive, affective, physical, and social effects of a sequence of
events that began at conception. As a result of these events, individuals acquire a strategic style over the
course of their lives. Some individuals develop criminality, a style that emphasizes the use of force, fraud, or
stealth to obtain resources and is characterized by self-centeredness, indifference to the suffering and needs
of others, and low self-control. Some of the other important factors, however, include parenting and family
management practices associated with how children are monitored, disciplined, and provided with positive
reinforcement as well as with problem-solving styles and the level of parental involvement with children. Also
important are educational success, nutrition, and complex interactions between genes and environment. Even
the "goodness of fit" between a child's temperamental style and parental demands and preferences can be
important. Two especially important developmental factors are whether an environment helps or hinders a
child's attempt to cope with his or her temperamental propensities and parent’s ability to cope with or redirect
the behaviors of a difficult child.

Furthermore, Villa stressed that systematic relations between children and adult can have important
effects on development. Because these relations are dynamic and can be self-reinforcing, interactions between
a child's behavior and parental and family environmental factors can have cumulative effects on one another
over time. Children are placed at increasing risk of becoming involved in crime by factors such as economic
hardships, living in high-crime neighborhoods, serious parenting deficits, and family disruption. These risks,
however, appear to be buffered by factors such as an easy temperament, scholastic competence, educated
mothers, and the presence of grandparents or older siblings who serve as alternative caregivers. The relative
importance of risk and protective factors varies according to life stage, gender, and social environment.

Similarly, demographic stressors such as poverty, lack of education, and high-crime neighborhood, as
well as family stressors such as unemployment, marital conflict, and divorce, all tend to influence development
by disrupting family management practices. Growing up in a disrupted or dysfunctional family is associated
strongly with a child's antisocial behavior, of which crime is one type.

With this premise, Villa argued that it is possible to reduce the concentration of criminality in a
population by improving early life experiences and channeling child and adolescent development. "Nurturant"
strategies, however, such as educational, health care, and child care programs that address the roots of
criminality early in the life course, seldom have been employed for crime control by government entities.
Three Theories of Criminal Behavior:
From a criminological perspective, there are three broad theoretical models of criminal behavior: (a)
psychological, (b) sociological, and (c) biological. For purposes of this book, a summary will be provided.
However, a more detailed discussion will be provided in the upcoming work of the authors on "The Theories of
Crime Causation".

According to Seiken (2016), all infer different methods of control, but it is difficult to completely separate
the three categories as it is generally accepted that all three of the factors play a role in the expression of
behavior. Moreover, psychological science consists of several disciplines including biological psychology and
social psychology, so psychological principles could be applied across all three domains.

Psychological Approaches:
There are many different psychological models of criminal behavior ranging from early Freudian notions
to later cognitive and social psychological models. There are several fundamental assumptions of
psychological theories of criminality (and human behavior in general). These are:
1. The individual is the primary unit of analysis in psychological theories.
2. Personality is the major motivational element that drives behavior within individuals.
3. Normality is generally defined by social consensus.
4. Crimes then would result from abnormal, dysfunctional, or inappropriate mental processes within the
personality of the individual.
5. Criminal behavior may be purposeful for the individual insofar as it addresses certain felt needs.
6. Defective, or abnormal, mental processes may have a variety of causes, i.e., a diseased mind, inappropriate
learning or improper conditioning, the emulation of inappropriate role models, and adjustment to inner conflicts.

According to Seiken (2016), given these six principles to establish psychological explanations of
criminal behavior, it can be inferred that traditional imprisonment, fines, and other court sanctions are based on
operant learning models of behavior for crime control. Operant learning models are based on the utilitarian
concepts that all people wish to maximize pleasure and minimize pain or discomfort. Skinnerian based social
psychological theories of reinforcement and punishment are influential in this model of criminal control although
the idea of punishment for crime has a much longer history. However. Skinner himself recognized that
punishment was generally ineffective in behavior modification and that reinforcement worked better.

Sociological Approaches:
As stressed by Seiken (2016), sociological and psychological principles of criminality are intertwined
and technically not independent. As with psychological theories, there are numerous sociological formulations
of the cause and control of criminality, sociological notions of criminality cab be defined:
1. Attempting to connect the issues of the individual's criminality with the broader social structures and cultural
values of society, familial, or peer group.
2. How the contradictions of all of these interacting groups contribute to criminality?
3. The ways these structures cultures and contradictions have historically developed.
4. The current processes of change that these groups are undergoing.
5. Criminality is viewed from the point of view of the social construction of criminality and its social causes.

Criminality results from the failure to properly socialize individuals and by unequal opportunities
between groups. Durkheim believed that crime was an inescapable fact of society and advocated maintaining
crime within reasonable boundaries. A feature of sociological theories is that society "constructs" criminality.
Thus, certain types of human activity are harmful and are judged so by society as a whole. But it is also true
that there are other behaviors recognized by society as criminal" that do not result in harm to others and are
therefore criminalized without sufficient ground, these are the so-called "victimless" crimes. These include drug
use, prostitution, etc.

Biological Approaches:
Biological theories of criminality basically purport that criminal behavior is the result of some flaw in the
biological makeup of the individual. This physical flaw could be due to:
1. Heredity
2. Neurotransmitter dysfunction
3. Brain abnormalities that were caused by either of the above, improper development, or trauma.

UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSION AND VIOLENCE:

AGGRESSION:
Violence and aggression and violence go hand-in-hand. However, it must be made clear that not all
aggression is violent in the physical sense. Aggression is defined as behavior perpetrated or attempt with the
intention of harming one or more individuals physically psychologically or to destroy an object.

Some criminologists argue that aggression has been instrumental in helping people survive. Through
centuries of experience, humans learned that aggressive behavior enabled them to obtain material goods,
lands, and treasures; to protect property and family; and gain prestige, status, and power. Furthermore, the
study of aggression is necessary to explain and answer fundamental question in the study of crime and
criminal behavior. Is human aggression instinctive, biological, learned, or some combination of these
characteristics?

Some criminologists believe that aggressive behavior is basically biological and genetic in origin, a
strong residue of our evolutionary past. If aggression and violence represent a built- genetically programmed
aspect of human nature, we may be forced toward a pessimistic conclusion. At best, human can only hope to
hold our natural, aggressive urges and drives temporarily ln check. Society must design the environment and
community in such a way as to discourage violence, including administering immediate and aversive
consequences (punishment) when it is displayed. However, aggressive behavior will not always qualify as
criminal. For example, a law enforcement officer using reasonable force to subdue an assailant is displaying
aggressive behavior but is not criminal. A person who reasonably perceives himself or herself in grave danger
of serious bodily harm and defended against an aggressor, without disproportionate force, is not committing
crime.

If, on the other hand, we believe that aggression is learned and is influenced by a wide range of
situational, social, and environmental variables, we can be more optimistic. Aggression is not an inevitable
aspect of human life. To understand the complexity of aggression Bar please refer to figure 1.

Table 1. Varieties of Human Aggression

Active Passive
Direct Indirect Direct Indirect

Physical Punching/ hitting Practical joke Obstructing Refusing to perform

Booby trap passage a necessary task
(Pranks)
Verbal Insulting the victim Malicious gossip Refusing to speak Refusing consent

In essence, one must always remember that all violent behaviors are aggressive but not all aggressive
behavior is violent. Spreading malicious, false information about someone or stalking are both aggressive but
neither is violent.

Hostile and Instrumental Aggression:

There are two types of aggression: Hostile and Instrumental

These two are distinguished by their goals, or the rewards they offer the perpetrator. Hostile
(expressive) aggression occurs in response to anger-inducing conditions, such as a real or perceived insults,
physical attacks, or one’s own failure. The aggressor's goal is to make a victim suffer. Most criminal homicides,
rapes, and other violent crimes directed at harming the victim are precipitated by hostile aggression. The
behavior is characterized by the intense\ and disorganizing emotion of anger. Anger is an arousal state elicited
by certain stimuli, particularly those evoking attack or frustration.
 Instrumental aggression begins with competition or desire for some object or status possessed by
another person like jewelry, money, territory, love, etc. The perpetrator tries to obtain the desired object
regardless of the cost. Instrumental aggression is usually a factor in robbery, theft, and various "white-collar
crimes". The perpetrator's obvious goal in property crimes is to obtain item of value. Usually, there is no intent
to harm anyone. However, if someone or something interferes with the perpetrator's objective, he or she may
feel forced to harm the victim or risk losing the desired goal. In that sense, a robbery may lead to murder, but
the aggression represented is still instrumental. Moreover, instrumental aggression is also usually a feature of
calculated murder committed by a gun-for- hire.

In essence, aggression is a simple direct way of solving immediate conflicts. If someone is not going in
your way, approaching the social environment in a threatening, hostile manner is the most direct way of
confronting your tormentors. In the study of Eron and Huesmann concluded that diminished intellectual
competence and poor social skills have an early effect in increasing the likelihood that a child will adopt
characteristically more aggressive styles of behavior to resolved conflicts.

Overt and Covert Acts of Aggression:

It was recommended by Loeber and Stouthammer-Lober that researchers of aggression and violence should
be mindful of two types of aggression: (a) Overt and (b) Covert. Accordingly, these two types of aggression are
different in: (a) Behavioral pattern, (b) Emotion, (c) Cognition, and (d) Development. Overt aggression usually
involves direct confrontation with' victims and administration of physical harm or threats of physical harm.
Covert aggression, on the other hand does not involved direct confrontation but relies on concealment,
dishonesty, or sneaky behavior. In many instances, overt aggression decreases with age, while cover
aggression increases with age as indicated below:

Table 2. Overt and Covert Aggressive Actions:

Aggression Behavior Patterns Emotions Cognitions Development

Overt Direct confrontation with Anger, high level of Lacks of social Aggression begins
victims; generally arousal and cognitions for early, especially in
decreases with age violence coming up with boys.
non-aggressive
solutions.
Covert Concealment, dishonesty, Less emotion; Relies on cognitive Can evolve as well
sneaky behavior; increases crimes such as capabilities, such learned strategy to
with age fraud, robbery, as planning escape punishment
theft deceitfulness

Reactive and Proactive Forms of Aggression:

Doge, Lochman, Harnish, Batesm and Pettit have suggested that another way of classifying aggression
in children and adult, is to make distinction between reactive and proactive aggression. Reactive aggression
includes anger expression, temper tantrums, and vengeful hostility and more generally "hot- blooded"
aggressive acts. Reactive aggression is sometimes called “impulsive aggression" because of its link to
various aspects of poor impulse control (Myers, et. Al., 2018) suggest that exposure to violence can disrupt a
youth's ability to regulate emotions and behavior, leading to reactive aggression in response to real or
perceived provocation. Further, it was emphasized in their research that youth exposed to violence has
provided a number of explanations for how traumatic events can make it difficult for youth to learn to regulate
their behavior, leading to frequent impulsive acts. For example, youth who experience dangerous
environments can become chronically over aroused and hyper vigilant to threats, which interferes with their
ability to pay attention to other important aspects of the environment and to adequately consider the
consequences of their behavior. This explanation would also support that exposure to violence was related to
reactive aggression through the indirect effects on anxiety as well.

Proactive aggression on the other hand, includes bullying domination, teasing, name-calling and
coercive acts in other words more "cool blooded aggressive actions. Reactive aggression appears to be a
reaction to frustration and is associated with a lack of control due to high rates of arousal. In general, reactive
aggression is a hostile act displayed in response to a perceived threat or provocation. Proactive aggression, by
contrast, is less emotional and more driven by expectation of rewards. Proactive aggression is unprovoked,
deliberate goal-directed behavior used to influence rewards. Reactive aggression has its theoretical roots in
the frustration-aggression model proposed by Berkowitz. The theoretical roots of proactive aggression are
found in social learning theory, wherein aggression is acquired behavior that is controlled and maintained by
reinforcement

As stated by Ostermeijer, Lappenschaar, Van der Meer Popma, Rommelse, Scheepers, and Buitelaar
(2017) in their study, the variable-based analyses demonstrate that proactive and reactive aggression can be
distinguished. In fact, three distinguishable but strongly correlated factors of aggression were identified. The
original proactive factor and reactive aggression was divided into two different forms:
a. Reactive aggression due to internal frustration" and
b. Reactive aggression due to provocation.

These three forms of aggression show, besides similar and overlapping behavioral associations, also
some specific associations; namely lower associations with internalizing problems and higher associations with
conduct disorder (CD) in proactive aggression; higher associations of anxiety, ADHD and internalizing
problems were found in the reactive aggression due to internal frustration.

However, even though proactive and reactive aggression can be distinguished at the variable-based
level, the clinical relevance of these findings is challenged by the person-based analysis showing proactive and
reactive aggression are mainly driven by aggression severity. If proactive aggression is present (in combination
with reactive aggression), clinical levels of conduct disorder and externalizing behavior problems are reported.
This suggests the presence of proactive aggression can be seen as a severity marker that needs extra
awareness of clinicians. Also, age effects are important to consider in clinical practice. Findings suggest that
reactive aggression is a more “normal" phenomenon at younger age and when not diminishing with age it may
be a marker for the most severe aggression in older adolescents. Although it seems reasonable that subjects
showing high levels of proactive and reactive aggression, and younger adolescents who are at risk of
developing more severe reactive aggression warrant more intensive respectively preventative treatment than
those showing reactive aggression only, future research should address the question of differential responsivity
to treatment.

In essence, reactively aggressive children as compared with proactively aggressive children, display
greater problems in social and psychological adjustment. Psychological adjustment problem includes a lack of
emotional control when angry, accompanied by sleep disorders, depressive symptoms, and personality
disorders. Reactive and proactive aggression originate from different social experienced and develop
independently. Reactive aggression develops in relation to a harsh, threatening, and unpredictable
environment or abusive or cold parenting. Proactive aggression, on the other, develops as a result of exposure
to aggressive role models who value the use of aggression to resolve conflict or advance personal interests.

General Aggression Model and i3 Theory:

General Aggression Model (GAM):

According to Bartol and Bartol (2017), in an attempt to integrate the common features of various
theories of aggression, DeWall, and Anderson propose the general aggression model (GAM). GAM provides
the only theoretical framework of aggression and violence that explicitly incorporates biological, personality
development, social process, basic cognitive processes, short- term and long-term processes, and decision
processes. Although the model attempts to include most if not all the factors that can. influence aggression and
violence, it draws heavily on social- cognitive and social learning theories that have been developed over the
past 40 years by social, personality, cognitive and development psychologists.

As explained by Allen, Anderson and Bushman (2018), the General Aggression Model (GAM) is a
comprehensive, integrative, framework for understanding aggression. It considers the role of social, cognitive,
personality, developmental, and biological factors on aggression. Proximate processes of GAM detail how
person and situation factors influence cognitions, feelings, and arousal, which in turn affect appraisal and
decision processes, which in turn influence aggressive or nonaggressive behavioral outcomes. Each cycle of
the proximate processes serves as a learning trial that affects the development and accessibility of aggressive
knowledge structures. Distal processes of GAM detail how biological and persistent environmental factors can
influence personality through changes in knowledge structures. GAM has been applied to understand
aggression in many Contexts including media violence effects, domestic violence, intergroup violence,
temperature effects, pain effects, and the effects of global climate change.

In addition, as revealed by study of Lange, Rinderu and Bushman (2017), in the General Aggression
Model, two types of input variables can influence whether a person acts aggressively: personal variables
(e.g., genetic predispositions, trait aggression, gender, attitudes about violence) and situational variables
(e.g., alcohol, violent media, provocation, hot temperatures). According to the model, there are three possible
routes to aggression and violence:
a. Angry feelings
b. Aggressive thoughts
c. Physiological arousal

Together these three routes constitute an individual's present internal state, which encourages or
discourages aggression and violence. However, these routes are not mutually exclusive or even independent.
For example, someone who has aggressive ideas might also feel angry and have elevated blood pressure.
High temperatures appear to operate through all three routes. For example, high temperatures make people
angry, increase aggressive thoughts, and increase physiological arousal (e.g. heart rate, blood circulation,
perspiration). This unexplained arousal by the heat can be mislabeled as "anger," especially in situations
involving provocation and thus lead to reactive aggression. Anderson stressed that this might help explain why
a minor provoking social event, such as an accidental bump in a hot crowded bar, can lead to the trading of
insults, punches, and possibly even bullets.

Similarly, Bartol and Bartol (2017) stated that the General Aggression M Modelalso theorizes that
violence often occurs because of an escalation cycle which begins with an initial triggering event that may
serious or relative benign. The triggering event can influence any kind of dyad, including two people, two
groups, two religions, or two nations. In these situations, one person or group considers retaliation for the
incident to be justified or mild, whereas the other group believes the retaliation to be unjustified and severe.
The cycle often persists through several iteration of violent actions. In the study of DeWall and Anderson, it
was hypothesized that one explanation for the persistence of the retaliation cycle is "fundamental attribution
error." Fundamental attribution error means behavior of others as due to dispositional factors (he's mean), and
their own negative behavior as due to situational factors (it was the right thing to do, considering the
circumstance).

I3 Theory:
As stated by Bartol and Bartol (2017), General Aggression Model (GAM) and Theory (l-cube theory)
has been recently developed. Similar to the GAM, IP theory is designed to provide an organized structure for
understanding (a) the process by which a given factor promotes aggression, (b) how multiple risk factors inter-
relate to create or reduce aggression. I° theory organizes the many aggression risk factors into three (3)
categories.
1. Instigating triggers- these are discrete incidents that arouse tendencies or predispositions that are
conducive to aggression.
2. Impelling forces- are forces that increase the likelihood of an aggressive action following the instigating
triggers
3. Inhibiting forces- are factors that increase the likelihood that aggression will be mitigated or contained.

VIOLENCE:
Violent crimes have big impact on society. Violent crimes can divide public opinion whether the violent
is act is intentional or provoked. Violence is an act of physical force that causes or is intended to cause harm.

Violence is a relatively common type of human behavior that occurs throughout the world. People of
any age may be violent, although older adolescents and young adults are most likely to "engage in violent
behavior. Violence has a number of negative effects on those who witness or experience it, and children are
especially susceptible to its harm

As stressed by Siegel (2012), violent crime can divide a community, damage reputation, and cause
lifelong harm. It tells people that no matter where they go, they may encounter violent acts, even at a faculty
meeting, or in their kitchen. Nor is violence committed solely by gangs, drug dealers, armed robbers, etc. An
individual can also be attacked by their own sister, brother or work colleagues. Millions of violent crimes occur
each year some are expressive violence acts that vent anger, or frustration and some are instrumental
violence acts designed to improve the financial or social position of the criminals, for example, through armed
robbery or murder for hire. No matter its cause,' interpersonal violence takes a terrible toll. It causes people to
live in fear, staying home at night and avoiding dangerous neighborhoods. It can also bring disorder to whole
communities, disrupting services and driving down real estate values, further destabilizing areas already
reeling from the shock of violent crimes.

Similarly, Siegel stated that people who are involved in violent episodes may be suffering from severe
mental abnormalities. In a classic work, psychologist Dorothy Otnow Lewis showed that kids who kill m may be
suffering from multiple symptoms of psycho- logical abnormality: neurological impairment (e.g., abnormal
EEGs, multiple psychomotor impairments, and severe seizures), low intelligence, and psychotic symptoms
such as paranoia, illogical thinking, and hallucinations. In her book "Guilty by Reason of Insanity", Lewis found
that death row inmates have a history of mental impairment and intellectual dysfunction.

Furthermore, Siegel stated that abnormal personality structures, including such traits as depression,
impulsivity, aggression, dishonesty, pathological lying, lack of remorse, borderline personality syndrome, and
psychopathology, have all been associated with various forms of violence. It comes as no surprise to
psychologists that many murderers kill themselves shortly after committing their crime.

There is also evidence that personality disturbance is linked to some physical trait or characteristic.
Neuroscientists claim to have found differences in both the limbic system and the prefrontal cortex of the brain
that separates aggressive, violent people from the more level-headed and reasonable. According to this view,
if some defect or injury impairs communication between the limbic system and the frontal cortex, a person
might not be entirely able to moderate his or her emotional reactions.

Considering this association, it is not surprising that a recent (2009) survey examining the association
between early incidence of animal cruelty and later involvement with violence found that aggressive men had a
long history of torturing and killing animals. Animal cruelty has been associated with a number of psychiatric
disorders, including antisocial personality disorder.

Furthermore, Siegel stated that criminologists have a variety of views on violence. Some believe that
violence is a function of human traits and makeup. Others point to improper socialization and upbringing.
Violent behavior may be culturally determined and relate to dysfunctional social values.

SOURCES OF VIOLENCE:
1. Personal traits and makeup
2. Cultural values/subcultures of violence
3. Exposure to violence
4. Socialization and upbringing
5. Substance abuse
6. Evolutionary factors/human instinct

1. Human Instinct - Sigmund Freud believed that human behavior is shaped by two instinctual drives: Eros,
the life instinct, which drives people toward self-fulfillment and enjoyment, and Thanatos (the death instinct),
which produces self-destruction. Thanatos can be expressed externally (e.g., violence and sadism) or
internally (e.g., suicide, alcoholism, or other self-destructive habits).
2. Substance Abuse - Substance abuse has been associated with violence on both the individual and social
levels: substance abusers have higher rates of violence than non-abusers; neighborhoods with high levels of
substance abuse have higher violence rates when compared to areas with low use rates. A direct association
has been found between community levels of crack cocaine and heroin use and the incidence of street
robberies. High use areas may also face social disorganization, poverty, and unemployment, factors that
further escalate violence rates.

Substance abuse influence violence in three ways:

a. Psychopharmacological relationship – violence may be the direct consequence of ingesting mood-
altering substances. Binge drinking for example, has been closely associated with violent crime rates. Heavy
drinking reduces cognitive ability, information processing skills, and the ability to process and react to verbal
and nonverbal behavior. As a result, miscommunication becomes more likely and the capacity for rational
dialogue is compromised. It is not surprising that males involved in sexual assaults often claim that they were
drinking and misunderstood their victims' intentions.
b. Economic compulsive behavior - drug users resort to violence to obtain the financial resources to support
their habit. Studies conducted in the United States and Europe show that addicts commit hundreds of crimes
each year.
c. Systemic link - violence escalates when drug- dealing gangs flex their muscle to dominate territory and
drive out rivals. Studies of gangs that sell drugs show that their violent activities may result in a significant
proportion of all urban homicides. Drug dealers also are more likely to use firearms in their daily activities.
Felson and Bonkiewicz studied the drug-violence nexus, they found relatively high levels of gun possession
among traffickers who handle stashes of moderately large market value drugs, who have central roles in the
drug trade.

3. Socialization and Upbringing - Another view is that improper socialization and upbringing are responsible
for the onset of violent acts. Absent or deviant parents, inconsistent discipline, physical abuse, abuse, and lack
of supervision have all been linked to persistent violent offending.
Although infants demonstrate individual temperaments, who they become may have a lot to do with
how they are treated during their early years. Some children are harder to soothe than others; in some cases,
difficult infant temperament has been associated with later aggression and behavioral problems. Parents who
fail to set adequate limits or to use proper, consistent discipline reinforce a child's coercive behavior.

4. Exposure to Violence- People who are constantly exposed to violence in the environment may adopt
violent methods themselves. Children living in areas marked by extreme violence may eventually become
desensitized to the persistent brutality. Much of the difference in violent crime rates between whites and racial
minorities can be explained by the fact that the latter are often forced to live in high-crime neighborhoods,
which increases their risk of exposure to violence. Areas where people have little confidence in the police and
are therefore reluctant to call for help a condition common in the minority community- may also experience
higher levels of violent behavior.

5. Cultural Values/ Subculture of Violence - Violence may be the product of cultural beliefs, values, and
behaviors that develop in poor and disorganized neighborhoods. To explain this phenomenon, criminologists
Marvin Wolfgang and Franco Ferracuti formulated the famous concept that some areas contain an
independent subculture of violence.
The subculture of violence’s norms is separate from society's central, dominant value system. In this
subculture, a potent theme of violence influences lifestyles, the socialization process and interpersonal
relationships. Even though the subculture's members share some of the dominant culture's values, they expect
that violence will be used to solve social conflicts and dilemmas. In some cultural subgroups, then, violence
has become legitimized by custom and norms. It is considered appropriate behavior within culturally defined
conflict situations in which an individual who has been offended by a negative outcome in a dispute seeks
reparations through violent means
6. Personal Traits- Research have shown that a significant number of people involved in violent episodes may
be suffering from mental abnormalities. Young people convicted of murder have been shown to suffer sings of
neurological impairment such as abnormal electroencephalograms (EEG's), multiple psychomotor impairment,
and sever seizure; low intelligence as measured on standard IQ test; psychotic close relatives; psychotic
symptoms such as paranoia, illogical thinking, hallucinations mental impairment an intellectual dysfunction;
animal cruelty. Other elements of personality associated with violence include depression, impulsivity,
aggression, dishonesty, pathological lying, lack of remorse, borderline personality syndrome, and
psychopathology. Aggressive men have been found to have a long history of torturing and killing animals.
Animal cruelty has been associated with a number of psychiatric disorders, including antisocial personality
disorder.

CAUSES OF VIOLENCE:
According to Siegel (2015), criminologists have a variety of views on violence. Some believe that
violence is a function of human traits and make-ups. Other points to improper socialization and upbringing.
Violent behavior may be culturally determined and relate to destructive social values.

The study of violence is indeed necessary as these are commonly committed not just by strangers but
also within the family, intimate partners, among children, etc. Understanding violence will provide some form of
intervention to minimize if not to prevent the occurrence of violence in society.

Researchers seem to agree on is that violence is multi- causal, meaning that no single factor is
responsible for violent behavior. Instead, violence results from a combination of factors, including those
originating in the violent person's social or cultural environment and those representing immediate situational
forces. Researchers regarding violence have examined multiple factors within a person that may contribute to
violence, including genetic predisposition, neurochemical abnormalities (e.g., high testosterone levels),
personality characteristics (e.g.lack of empathy for others), information - processing deficits (e.g., the tendency
to view others' actions as hostile), and the experience of abuse or neglect as a child

EFFECTS OF VIOLENCE:
Regardless of its cause, violence has a negative impact on those who experience or witness it.
Violence can cause physical injury as well as psychological harm. Several psychological disorders, including
post-traumatic stress disorder, dissociative identity disorder, and borderline personality disorder, are
associated with experiencing or witnessing Violence, Other psychological symptoms, such as depression,
anxiety, and mood swings (see bipolar disorder), are common in victims of violence.

Similarly, the study of Mrug and Windle (2010) revealed that violence exposure within each setting of
community, school or home has been linked with internalizing and externalizing problems. Although many
children experience violence in multiple contexts, the effects of such cross contextual exposure have not been
studied. Violence exposure at home and school had the strongest independent effects on internalizing and
externalizing outcomes. Witnessing community violence attenuated the effects of witnessing home violence on
anxiety and externalizing problems, perhaps due to desensitization or different norms or expectations
regarding violence. However, no comparable attenuation effects were observed for victimization across
contexts.

However, Siegel (2012), stressed that children seem to be particularly susceptible to the negative
effects of violence. Those who experience or witness violence may develop a variety of problems, including
anxiety, depression, insecurity, anger, poor anger management, poor social skills, pathological lying,
manipulative behavior, impulsiveness, and lack of empathy. As such examples show, some children may
respond to violence in "internalizing ways, such as by developing feelings of insecurity, anxiety, and
depression, whereas others may react in "externalizing ways, such as by feeling angry and behaving in an
antisocial manner. Although some of the effects of violence may manifest themselves during childhood, others
may not appear until adulthood. For example, abused girls are more likely than non-abused girls to have
substance-abuse problems as adults.

Mckelvey, Whiteside-mansell, Bradley, Casey, Conners- Burrow (2011), revealed in their study that
social learning theory of Bandura theorized that children develop cognitive models of interpersonal
relationships through observing and modeling relationships in their environments. Social learning theory states
that when children are exposed to violence, they learn that violence and aggression are appropriate and are
more likely to include those behaviors into their repertoire. The relationships modeled within the home are even
more salient than those more distal to the child, such as in the community, for predicting children's outcomes.

In the study of Spillsbury, Belliston, Drotar, Drinard, Kretsmer, Greeden, Fnannery and Driedman
(2007), research has revealed that a range of factors can influence children's exposure to domestic violence as
well as the impact of exposure on their behavior and psychological development. For example, evidence
suggests that the risk of witnessing domestic violence may be inversely related to child and/or parent age and
family socio-economic status, and directly associated with caregiver use of drugs. Research concerning the
effects of domestic violence on children suggests that increased severity and frequency of violent events are
linked to greater psychological problems. Although the importance of the type of exposure to domestic violence
(e.g., witnessed versus victimized) has not been well established, preliminary evidence suggests that children
who witness domestic violence and who are themselves abused exhibit greater behavior problems than th0se
witnessing violence only. Research has also suggested a graded or dose- response relationship between the
number of types of childhood adverse experiences (e.g., child abuse, witnessing of violence directed towards
mother) and both risk behavior (e.g., drug use, smoking) and disease (ischemic heart disease, cancer, skeletal
fractures) in adulthood.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND VIOLENCE:

According to Blackburn (1998), a traditional assumption is that violent individuals lack internalized
controls. Thus, psychodynamic and early learning theorists saw individual differences as residing in the
acquisition of emotional inhibitions restraining harmful behavior, such as anxiety, guilt, empathic concern, and
tolerance for frustration. However, where traditional approaches focus on affective aspects, current theories
emphasize the role of cognitive appraisals and inferences, and recent research pays more attention to factors
which facilitate aggression, such as anger arousal, and to the cognitive processes which mediate facilitation or
inhibition.

Violent offenders as unable to trust because of role-playing deficits, unable to feel as manifest in acting
out to defend against pain, unable to fantasize as shown in impulsivity and lack of empathy, and unable to
learn as shown by failure to generalize from experience. This represents the psychodynamic view, and also the
traditional concept of psychopathic personality. The association of aggression with psychopathy is supported
by the study of f Hare and McPherson, who found that most prisoners meeting Cleckley's criteria had a history
of serious violent crimes, and were more likely to be aggressive in prison. Serin (1991) similarly found that high
scores on Hare's Psychopathy Checklist among prisoners were associated with more frequent violent
offending, as well as with self-reported aggressiveness and impulsiveness. Correlational studies also indicate
that aggressiveness is associated with a broad personality dimension of unsocialized aggression or
psychopathy, which includes impulsivity and extra punitive hostility (Blackburn, 1998).

According to Blackburn, in another study of Tedeschi, suggests that low self-esteem makes a person
vulnerable to threat, but people with low self-esteem may also adopt coercive means of influence because they
lack non-coercive skills with which to achieve power and status. There is some evidence that aggression is
associated with deficiencies in social skills. For example, the study of Kirchner, Kennedy and Draguns (1979)
observed that in role-played responses to conflict situations, offenders were more aggressive than non-
offenders but lacked nọn-aggressive assertive skills. However, not all aggressive offenders show social skill
deficits.

THE FAMILY VIOLENCE PERSPECTIVE:

According to the study of Warner (2010), researchers adhering to the family violence perspective
analyze violence within the whole family, giving equal attention to violence perpetrated by women and men, as
well as violence by parents against children. Here the unit of analysis is the family, not the relationship
between men and women. This perspective views the family as a system responding to stress and conflict
from the broader social structure. The family violence perspective is not completely at odds with the feminist
perspective, as both perspectives attribute violence to societal causes.

In the feminist perspective, men are socialized that it is acceptable to use violence against women; in
the family violence perspective, individuals (not just men) are socialized to view that it is acceptable to act out
frustration and aggression towards family members. From the study, three causes of family violence. First, the
vulnerability of the family to certain stressors (e.g., economic, health-related, etc.), coupled with the privacy of
the familial institution can exacerbate members' underlying propensities toward violence. Second, society
continues to view violence as an acceptable problem-solving method. Third, family violence results from an
intergenerational transmission of violence, whereby when parents use physical force to punish children, they
socialize their children into the acceptability of violence. These scholars perceive the household as having the
potential to be a particularly violent place.
WORKPLACE VIOLENCE:
As emphasized by Siegel (2015), workplace violence is now considered the third cause of occupational
injury or death. The typical offender is a middle-aged white male who faces termination in a worsening
economy. A number of factors, precipitate workplace violence. One suspected cause is a management style
that appears cold and insensitive to workers. As corporation cut their staffs because of an economic downturn
or workers are summarily replaced with cost-effective technology, long-term employees may become irate and
irrational; their unexpected layoff can lead to violent reactions. However, as further explain by Siegel, not all
workplace violence is triggered by management-induced injustice. In some incidents, co-workers have been
killed because they refused romantic relationship with the assailants or reported them for sexual harassment.
Others have been killed because they got a job the assailant coveted. Irate clients and customers have also
killed because of poor service.