Using victimization data from 57 neighborhoods, this article examines the relationship between neighborhood characteristics and rates of violent crime and burglary. We argue that Shaw and McKay's social disorganization theory provides a meaningful point of departure for examining the uneven distribution of criminal victimization across social units. Measures of three central theoretical elements in Shaw and McKay's social disorganization perspective (poverty, residential mobility, and racial heterogeneity), and variables from the subculture of violence, social control, and opportunity perspectives are included in this research. Results indicate that core components of Shaw and McKay's theory are important in explaining neighborhood victimization rates, although their influence is more conditional than direct and varies by type of crime. Evidence also emerges that supports social control models of aggregate criminal activity. Additionally, we examine whether parameters of macromodels of criminal activity vary across levels of urbanization. The implications of our findings for macrotheories of criminal activity are discussed.

This study seeks to improve on previous research on the relationship between dropping out of school and later involvement in delinquency. Using data from the first two waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, the analysis addresses two problems with prior studies in this area: (1) By controlling for many variables that may account for observed dropout‐delinquency associations, it is possible to explore the possibility that the relationship may be spurious. (2) By examining the effects of different reasons for dropping out, the study avoids the assumption that dropouts are a homogeneous group. Results indicate that the effect of dropping out of school on later offending is more complicated than previous research leads one to believe. In addition, dropping out does not always enhance the likelihood of a person's later delinquent involvement.

No abstract

The analysis in this study tests the proposition that middle-class dropouts are more likely to engage in delinquency as a result of dropping out than lower class dropouts. This article also seeks to test social control and strain theory explanations for the observed dropout-delinquency relationships. This is done by examining the intervening processes as specified by, and which are unique to, each theory. Using data from a large-scale nationally representative probability sample, the analysis examines differences in the likelihood of offending based on the reasons for dropping out and across the two social class groups (distinguished in terms of their position relative to the poverty line). Results support the position that dropping out is more likely to be associated with higher levels of involvement in delinquency for middle-class than for lower-class youths. In addition, support for strain theory or social control theory is dependent on the reasons for dropping out of school. Implications of these results are discussed.

In their best-selling book, The Bell Curve, Herrnstein and Murray argue that IQ is a powerful predictor of a range of social ills including crime. They use this “scientific reality” to oppose social welfare policies and, in particular, to justify the punishment of offenders. By reanalyzing the data used in The Bell Curve and by reviewing existing meta-analyses assessing the relative importance of criminogenic risk factors, the present authors show empirically that Herrnstein and Murray's claims regarding IQ and crime are misleading. The authors conclude that Herrnstein and Murray's crime control agenda is based on ideology, not on intelligent criminology.