Abstract
Introduction
The prevailing approach in mainstream criminology toward understanding the etiology of crime has traditionally focused on identifying proximal causes of criminal behavior. Within this conceptual framework, scholars have emphasized risk factors such as associative patterns with delinquent peers, inadequate socialization processes during formative developmental stages, familial instability and dysfunction and community disorganization. These factors have formed the cornerstone of both theoretical explanations and preventive interventions in conventional criminology. While this perspective has undoubtedly made significant contributions to our comprehension of criminal behavior and informed numerous prevention strategies, it nevertheless presents certain epistemological limitations. Evolutionary criminology, building upon the theoretical foundations of evolutionary psychology, posits that beyond these immediate causal factors lies a deeper stratum of explanation rooted in our species' phylogenetic history. This emerging discipline maintains that natural selection and sexual selection have shaped not only the physical morphology of contemporary humans but also our psychological architecture. To elaborate, human evolution was not solely driven by physical adaptations such as encephalization or the development of bipedal locomotion. Equally crucial were psychological adaptations including sexual proprietariness, predator avoidance mechanisms, kin recognition and attachment systems and nocturnal anxiety responses. These psychological traits played instrumental roles in enhancing the inclusive fitness of our ancestors throughout their evolutionary trajectory. Consequently, any comprehensive analysis of human behavior - including criminal behavior - that fails to incorporate these evolutionarily informed perspectives remains fundamentally incomplete.
Methods
The current paper employs a rigorous meta-analytic methodology, systematically reviewing all peer-reviewed research published in indexed journals specializing in evolutionary psychology and criminology between 2004 and the present. Given both the relative paucity of evolutionary literature in criminological research and the specific focus of this study on domestic violence phenomena, particular care has been taken to ensure exhaustive coverage and accurate representation of all relevant scholarly works.
Results and Discussions
Epidemiological data collected across diverse cultural contexts reveals that approximately 30% of women worldwide experience physical intimate partner violence during their lifetime. Domestic research shows a similar, if not worse, situation. Some studies report that 66% of Iranian women have experienced various forms of domestic violence - verbal, physical, psychological, economic, and sexual. The trend has been increasing, rising from about 52,000 cases in 2009 to over 83,000 cases in 2018. Despite decades of multidisciplinary research aimed at elucidating the etiology of domestic violence, effective prevention remains an elusive goal. Traditional criminological explanations have predominantly emphasized socio-cultural determinants, including patriarchal ideological systems, Social learning of aggressive behavioral scripts and media influences modeling violent interpersonal dynamics. While these factors undoubtedly contribute to our understanding, they fail to provide a complete explanatory framework. Evolutionary criminology offers complementary insights by examining the ultimate causation of such behaviors through the lens of our species' evolutionary history. From an evolutionary perspective, the capacity for violence represents an adaptive psychological mechanism that has been selectively retained in the human behavioral repertoire. Numerous studies indicate that violence remains a persistent cognitive option for humans. For instance, a survey of 5,000 men and women revealed that 91% of men and 84% of women have seriously considered killing someone at least once in their lifetime. Notably, men consistently dominate these statistics - a global criminological pattern showing male overrepresentation in violent crimes specifically and criminal behavior generally. This phenomenon has at least two evolutionary explanations: A) Intersexual competition for resources throughout hominid evolution, meant that males who successfully maintained control over critical resources (e.g., nutrient-rich territories, high-quality shelter) through aggressive displays and physical dominance enjoyed greater reproductive success. This created an evolutionary arms race favoring males with enhanced capacities for territorial defense, resource acquisition and competitive confrontation. B) Intersexual selection pressures: In both polygynous mating systems (which characterized most of human evolutionary history) and more recent monogamous systems, males employed aggressive strategies to secure and retain high-fertility mates, prevent mate poaching by competitors and ensure paternity certainty. Paternity uncertainty is the core evolutionary mechanism in domestic violence. The phenomenon of male-perpetrated intimate partner violence finds its most parsimonious evolutionary explanation in the concept of paternity uncertainty. The unique nature of human internal fertilization created an adaptive problem for ancestral males: the impossibility of absolute certainty regarding genetic parentage. This evolutionary pressure selected for a suite of anti-cuckoldry adaptations, including: A) Mate guarding behaviors: These behaviors consist of actions a husband takes to prevent his wife from having sexual relations with other men by controlling and restricting her interactions and activities, encompassing a wide range of option like social isolation tactics, monitoring of partner's social interactions and emotional manipulation strategies. B) Preemptive aggression like punitive responses to perceived infidelity threats, escalated violence during periods of suspected conception and intensified control during pregnancy. C) Reproductive interference strategies like forced termination of pregnancies with uncertain paternity and neonaticide in cases of confirmed non-paternity. These hierarchically implemented strategies all serve a single purpose: reducing the likelihood of the mate's pregnancy by other males, thereby ensuring the male's genetic transmission to the next generation.
Conclusion
The evolutionary perspective does not posit that intimate partner violence represents an inevitable or morally justifiable outcome of our biological heritage. Rather, it provides a crucial missing dimension to our understanding by revealing the deep phylogenetic roots of these behavioral patterns. Modern manifestations of domestic violence can be understood as the maladaptive expression of evolved psychological mechanisms that were originally selected for in ancestral environments radically different from contemporary social contexts. This recognition allows for more nuanced theoretical models that integrate both proximate (sociocultural) and ultimate (evolutionary) causation, development of prevention programs that account for these deeply ingrained behavioral tendencies and more effective intervention strategies that target the psychological mechanisms underlying violent behavior. In other words, the integration of evolutionary perspectives with traditional criminological approaches offers the promise of greater explanatory power in understanding criminal behavior, more comprehensive prevention frameworks and more effective policy interventions. By acknowledging both the immediate social determinants and the evolutionary foundations of criminal behavior, we move closer to developing truly holistic solutions to the complex problem of domestic violence in modern societies.