The distinction between general and specific deterrence is widely recognized and accepted by deterrence researchers, and is used commonly to classify deterrence studies. However, the logical and empirical grounds for the distinction are not as clear as they might appear, and the conventional conception has done more to obfuscate than to clarify the deterrence process. Following a discussion of these issues, the authors propose a reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence, and apply it to several current controversies in the deterrence literature.

Although the association between delinquent friends and delinquent behavior is well established, the mechanism by which delinquency is socially transmitted remains unclear. Sutherland 3 theory of diflerential association holds that delinquency is a consequence of attitudes favorable to the violation of the law, attitudes that are acquired through intimate social interaction with peers. An analysis of data from the National Youth Survey indicates that peer attitudes do affect delinquency. But the effect of peers' attitudes is small in comparison to that of peers' behavior, and the effect of peers' behavior remains strong even when peers, attitudes and the adolescent's own attitude are controlled. Moreover, when the behavior and attitudes of peers are inconsistent, the behavior of peers appears to outweigh or override the attitudes of peers. These findings suggest that delinquency is not primarily a consequence of attitudes acquired from peers. Rather, it more likely stems from other social learning mechanisms, such as imitation or vicarious reinforcement, or from group pressures to conform.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract