How to evaluate the atavistic form explanation for offending.

First of all, the word evaluate is used within exam questions to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the explanation. Attempt to define the atavistic form, but consider that the question doesn’t ask for a definition, but instead is asking for an evaluation. Stick to 3 or 4 paragraphs. The less paragraphs, the more expanded the answer should be. I used a PEAL paragraph format to structure an answer. Point (the stated strengths or weakness), Explain (describe said point), Analysis (this essentially is just an expansion on the definition), and finally the link. Link the strength or weakness directly to the explanation. For example, this is considered a strength of the atavistic form because... We can briefly run through each strength and weakness. A primary strength is that Lombroso shifted the emphasis of crime onto a more scientific theory, looking at evolution and genetics. Secondly, he also introduced the idea of criminal profiling, which is vital for forensic psychologists, by assuming people with certain characteristics are more likely to commit crimes. A weakness on the other hand, is that it is criticised for being deterministic, focusing specifically on behaviour being predetermined with no nurture impact. Finally, research was considered socially sensitive, as many of the features Lombroso identified as more likely to be criminal involved ethnic minorities. We can expand on each point if need be.