Sheldon, William H.: Somatotypes and Delinquency

Some of the earliest criminological theories equated crime to the biological makeup of humans. Because some of the earlier biological studies either overstated the causal nature of biological variables or were completely disproved due to methodological shortcomings or antiquated statistical techniques, a majority of criminologists today dismiss the biological research on criminality without a second thought. James Q. Wilson and Richard J. Herrnstein suggest that many criminologists are not attuned to biological and psychological concepts involved with the causes of criminality due to their sociological training; “physical correlates of crime are often dismissed by most criminologists, for whom these are at best historical stages in the development of their subject” (p. 72). Because of this lack of understanding of the biological approach or the inherent bias of most sociological theories of criminality, the debate of whether or not criminals are characterized by a certain type of body-build has long been debated in the field of criminology. Hans Eysenck and Gisli Gudjonsson argued that the study of physique is a complex subject, due primarily to many different typologies and methods of measurement.

In the 1940s, William H. Sheldon attempted to study the relationship between human physique and criminality. Sheldon graduated from the University of Chicago with a Ph.D. in psychology in 1926 and with an M.D. in 1933. He held positions as a professor at the University of Oregon Medical School, where he was also the director of the constitution clinic, and the director of the Biological Humanics Foundation in Cambridge, Massachusetts. His work led him to the belief that the psychological foundation of humans was predominantly supported by biological underpinnings.

In this search to link physique and behavior, Sheldon developed the idea of the somatotype; this is a personal score that is determined by different measurements taken from a human body. Sheldon posited three types of extreme somatotype: mesomorphs who are athletically built, endomorphs who are overweight, and ectomorphs who are underweight. Sheldon suggested that these somatotypes corresponded directly to psychological states. That is, mesomorphs are active, dynamic, assertive, and aggressive; endomorphs are relaxed, comfortable, and extroverted; and ectomorphs are introverted, thoughtful, inhibited, and sensitive.

Here, Sheldon's body of work and the research linking somatotypes to criminality is examined. First, Sheldon's classification system and the research that resulted from initial studies on somatotypes are explored. Second, somatotypic classification methods produced to advance the work of Sheldon are discussed. Finally, the decline of somatotyping as both a function of measurement constraints and theoretical shortcomings is reviewed.