Suchergebnisse

An impressive number of inquiries across an array of methodological specifications has demonstrated that deviant peers are an important correlate of various criminological outcomes, which include within‐ individual change and stability in offending behavior. Still, the causal mechanisms of peer influence arguably remain underdeveloped (Giordano, 2003; Warr, 2002). In an attempt to expand the dialogue on the nature of peer influence, this inquiry proposes that scholars would benefit from considering relative peer deviance in addition to exposure to deviant peers. Specifically, it argues that an imbalance in delinquency between friends helps to explain delinquency change/stability; therefore, exposure to deviant peers is not always risky and exposure to less deviant peers is not always protective. The analysis uses the Add Health data to construct within‐individual and across‐individual (delinquency) difference scores and relies on self‐reports rather than on perceptions for the best friends' delinquency. The results provide support for the premise that adolescents attempt to achieve delinquency "balance" with their best friend by changing behavior, net of raw peer deviance levels (i.e., objective exposure). The findings also suggest that balance is not achieved through selection, given that the deviance gap between the respondent and his or her best friend does not predict friendship stability. The discussion considers these results from a theoretical and empirical perspective and offers several avenues for future research.

The fact that most offenders have accomplices at some point in their criminal career is curious, given the risks associated with criminal cooperation. McCarthy, Hagan, and Cohen () offered the first formal theory of the decision to co‐offend, which addressed explicitly the uncertainties attached to the decision to engage in group crime. They posited that when offenders experience adversity, they become more risk seeking and oriented toward the chance for potential gain, which essentially outweighs the uncertainties attached to criminal cooperation. McCarthy, Hagan, and Cohen's analysis of street youth offered some empirical support for their premise but left open many important questions. The current study uses data from two different samples of incarcerated felons in Nebraska (N = 321 offenders) and Colorado (N = approximately 1,120 observations nested within approximately 640 offenders) that provide information on different forms of economic adversity. Logistic regression models provide some evidence for the association between adversity and co‐offending, but they are inconsistent. In contrast, a preference for excitement is a consistent and powerful predictor of offending.

AbstractResearch demonstrates that joining a gang is associated with amplified criminal behavior. Given that gang membership can be a transient and intermittent status, we question whether it has a consistent effect on offending regardless of whether an individual joins a gang for the first time or rejoins (for the second time). Using panel data from the Rochester Youth Development Study (N = 1,217 person‐periods nested within 177 individuals), we employ a within‐persons analysis via multilevel structural equation models with fixed slopes. First‐time membership is associated with increases over pregang periods in general, violent and property offending, as well as drug sales. Joining a gang for the second time is associated with significant increases in general and violent offending, as well as with drug sales, compared with the time out of the gang after first‐time membership. Finally, the total changes in offending associated with first‐ and second‐time gang membership seem to be comparable. Overall, the results suggest that gang membership, whether a new or repeat experience, is a salient life event and that intermittency is related to meaningful disruptions in offending pathways.

AbstractMore than 20 years after an expansion of juvenile transfer policies, questions remain regarding the specific deterrent effect of juvenile waiver given the singular focus on the court of jurisdiction and neglect of other critical aspects of the provision, such as the incapacitation experience. Prior research has also not been focused on identifying the mediating mechanisms that produce criminogenic, null, or deterrent effects. We use data from the Pathways to Desistance Study, propensity score methodology, and mediational analyses to examine how and why the waiver‐incapacitation experience is related to recidivism rates during emerging adulthood. We find that the prior focus on a binary "waiver effect" is potentially misleading as it masks meaningful variation. Furthermore, we find that the path to increased recidivism in emerging adulthood is indirect and we identify stymied educational attainment as a mediator. Our discussion is focused on the criminogenic effects of incapacitation for juveniles and its implications for juvenile transfer research. The discussion also calls for future research to explore treatment heterogeneity further.

Research has demonstrated that the presence of others shifts decision‐making about risky/deviant behavior. One reason for this shift could be changes in the anticipated experience of formal sanctions, informal costs, and rewards. To investigate this possibility, this study conducted two randomized controlled trials with hypothetical vignettes, in which a range of how many other people were also involved in the criminal act defined the treatment conditions. Across two samples of university students (Ns = 396 and 263), the results revealed that as the size of the involved group increased, the anticipated experience of sanction risk and several informal social costs associated with engaging in the act decreased, and the anticipated experience of two rewards increased. Additional analyses suggest that, with one exception in each data set, these changes are not only tied to the solo/group distinction.

The group nature of offending has been recognized as an inherent characteristic of criminal behavior, yet our insight on the decision to engage in group crime is limited. This article argues that a threshold model offers broad appeal to understand this decision. After discussing the basis of this model and its applicability to collective crime, we offer one example of the kind of research that could stem from this model. Specifically, by using survey data from 583 university students, this study asked respondents to self‐report thresholds for group theft and destruction of property. By experimentally manipulating characteristics of the hypothetical scenario used to measure thresholds, we investigated both the individual‐ and situational‐level correlates of these self‐reported thresholds. The discussion considers the results that emerge from a Tobit regression model and offers suggestions for future research that would provide further refinement of the threshold model.

There is reason to suspect that lower levels of exposure to criminogenic peer‐based risks help explain why immigrant youth are less involved in crime and violence. However, it also is possible that if and when they do encounter these risks, immigrant youth are more vulnerable to them than are native‐born youth. Drawing from literature on the adaptation experiences of immigrant adolescents, we hypothesize that immigrant youth will be relatively more susceptible to the effects of both 1) exposure to deviant peers and 2) unstructured and unsupervised socializing with peers when compared with their nonimmigrant counterparts.
Using a sample of approximately 1,800 adolescents from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) study, we find support for our first hypothesis but not the second.
Specifically, in both cross‐sectional and longitudinal models, we find that exposure to deviant peers has a greater impact on violence among immigrant youth than it does for native‐born youth. Furthermore, this pattern of results is supported with supplemental, sensitivity analysis using the AddHealth data. In contrast, there are no statistically significant differences across immigrant generation status with regard to the effect of informal socializing with peers on violence.

AbstractGang membership is believed to impede success in the legitimate economic market while simultaneously supporting success in the illegal market. We extend the study of the economic effects of gang membership by using a within‐ and between‐individual analytic design, decomposing gang membership into multiple statuses (i.e., entering a gang, continuously in a gang, leaving a gang, and inactive gang membership), examining legal and illegal earnings simultaneously, and accounting for factors endogenous to gang membership that may contribute to economic achievement. By using panel data from 1,213 individuals who participated in the Pathways to Desistance Study to conduct a multilevel path analysis, we find that active gang membership status is unrelated to legal earnings. Alternatively, entering a gang is associated with increased illegal earnings, attributable to changes in delinquent peers and drug use, whereas leaving a gang has a direct relationship with decreased illegal earnings. Our results indicate that the positive economic effect of gang membership (i.e., illegal earnings and total earnings) is short‐lived and that, on balance, the sum of the gang membership experience does not "pay" in terms of overall earnings.

AbstractThe impact of parenthood on leaving a street gang is not well understood. This is likely because researchers in prior studies have not accounted for multiple dimensions of gang exit, possible gender differences, and potential selection bias. In this study, we use a sample of 466 male and 163 female gang members from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth 1997 to consider the within‐individual relationship between changes in parenthood and changes in claiming gang membership and offending. These data offer the opportunity to consider gender differences and birth parity (i.e., first or second child). The results from a series of fixed‐effects models reveal that motherhood is associated with enduring reductions in both the odds of claiming gang membership and the rate of offending, whereas fatherhood has a temporary beneficial impact on gang membership and offending only for those fathers who reside with their children. In most cases, the beneficial effect of having a child rests in becoming a parent for the first time. On the whole, our study findings demonstrate that parenthood serves as a turning point for a particular group of noteworthy offenders—gang members.

Scholars have long argued that delinquency is a group phenomenon. Even so, minimal research exists on the nature, structure, and process of co‐offending. This investigation focuses on a particular void, namely the stability of 1) co‐offending and 2) co‐offender selection over time, for which divergent theoretical expectations currently exist that bear on issues central to general and developmental/life‐course theories of crime. By relying on individual‐level, longitudinal data for a sample of juvenile offenders from Philadelphia, we find that distinct trajectories of co‐offending exist over the course of the juvenile criminal career. This inquiry also develops an individualized measure of co‐offender stability, which reveals that delinquents generally tend not to "reuse" co‐offenders, although frequent offenders show a greater propensity to do so. The discussion considers the theoretical and policy implications of these findings as well as provides some avenues for future research.

AbstractScholars generally agree that offending decisions occur in social context, with some suggesting that choice models should explicitly integrate the notion that the deviant actions of others can incentivize offending. In this study, we investigate whether group settings can also disincentivize deviant action via reverse bandwagon effects, where individuals reverse their offending decision and express an intention to opt out of the criminal act. Based on survey data from three universities using hypothetical scenarios about theft and fighting, we find evidence of opt‐out thresholds. Our findings indicate that deviant groups can serve as both an incentive and a disincentive, and that the relationship between group size and the perceived utility of crime is more complicated than prior work has suggested. Moreover, we find that these self‐reported opt‐out thresholds vary across scenarios, indicating that socially interdependent decision‐making processes may be situation specific. In the end, the study underscores the importance of acknowledging the social context in offending decisions and highlights that group effects may be more complex and nuanced than previously discussed.

The life‐course approach to criminal career research has devoted a good deal of attention to the generality or specialization of offending behavior. Typically, extant research demonstrates versatility on the part of offenders, yet such findings could be attributable, at least in part, to time and measurement aggregation bias. This work uses a temporally disaggregated and individualized measure of diversity in offending to determine whether the previous findings of generality hold up to shifts in methodology. Using data from a sample of serious felons, results indicated that the magnitude of specialization is greater than in prior studies. Regression results indicated that certain demographic and local life‐circumstance variables are related to the extent of diversity. Theoretical and methodological implications are identified and discussed.