Because this volume is concerned with the interdisciplinary field of biosocial research, it seems appropriate to begin here with a look at the way biologists (including psychiatrists and some psychologists) define certain concepts that may have different meanings in the context of social science, a context with which criminologists are often more familiar.

Definitions are useful to the extent that they provide common understanding on which to base communication and argument. Each of the sciences involved has its own technical terms not always easily understood by outsiders. When scientists from one field (e.g., biology) want to use terms referring to aspects of the subject matter of some other sciences (e.g., sociology), they often seem to be guided in their choice of expression solely by conventional or common-sense definitions of the concept in question. Sometimes they make this choice because they are not sufficiently acquainted with the technical meanings of a term as it is used in the other science and sometimes because the expression has no agreed-on technical meaning or application in the other science. The latter may be the case when the term “antisocial” is concerned.

What does “antisocial” mean?

Conventional definitions

Conventional definitions are acquired fairly unsystematically and unconsciously as people see or hear common terms being used repeatedly and consistently. The term “social” is used commonly enough in several contexts to have acquired a number of conventional definitions, and the prefix “anti” is commonly known to mean something like “opposite” or “against.”