Informal social control is a central concept in the contemporary social disorganization literature, and much attention has been directed at examining community characteristics related to variation in the quantity of informal social control across communities. However, considerably less attention has been paid to variation in forms of informal social control. This study examines the extent to which neighborhood characteristics are related to residents’likelihood of using two different forms of informal social control: direct informal social control (i.e., through direct intervention) and indirect informal social control (i.e., through mobilizing formal authorities). Data for this study are based on surveys of residents in 66 neighborhoods. The analysis uses hierarchical modeling to examine whether neighborhood characteristics central to contemporary social disorganization theory have similar effects on these two forms of neighborhood social control. Findings indicate that social ties increase the likelihood of direct informal social control but not indirect informal social control, whereas social cohesion and trust decreases indirect informal social control but does not have a significant effect on direct informal social control. Faith in the police is not found to affect either form of informal social control. These findings are discussed in terms of current issues in contemporary social disorganization theory.

No abstract

This study examines social disorganization theory using calls to the police during 1980 in 60 Boston neighborhoods. These data, based on complainant reports of crime rather than official police reports, allow further investigation of differences in findings based on victimization data and official crime data. The rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are regressed on poverty, mobility, racial heterogeneity, family disruption, and structural density. Interaction terms for poverty and heterogeneity, poverty and mobility, and mobility and heterogeneity are also explored. Results from this study support findings from recent victimization studies and earlier ecological studies using official counts of crime. Poverty and heterogeneity, along with family disruption and structural density, are found to be important ecological variables for understanding the distribution of crime rates among neighborhoods.

No abstract

Current criminological research rooted in social disorganization theory has primarily focused on structural disorganization and has largely ignored the role of cultural disorganization. This paper develops the theoretical role of cultural disorganization in the contemporary social disorganization model, integrating aspects of both the systemic model and a cultural attenuation model. This model is empirically examined using structural equation modeling. Survey data from residents in 66 neighborhoods in a Southern state provide the primary data. In part, the findings show that concentrated disadvantage and the level of social ties affect cultural strength, which in turn significantly affects informal social control. These findings demonstrate the relevance of weakened culture in explaining informal social control and call for further theoretical expansion of social disorganization models to include cultural disorganization.