Adolescent Offending and the Segregation of Poverty in Urban Neighbourhoods and Schools: An Assessment of Contextual Effects from the Standpoint of Situational Action Theory

Abstract

Contextual research on adolescent offending is primarily based on the idea that residential areas provide a major ecological setting that (indirectly) shapes observed differences in adolescent offending. The social disorganisation/collective efficacy perspective has tried to explain why structural disadvantage of residential areas affects residents' involvement in offending. On the other hand, contextual research has also been conducted within the school setting. This separate contextual approach is problematic as it does not reflect the reality of adolescents' lives. Adolescents are exposed to different ecological settings. They are also exposed to many other settings that may provide opportunities to offend, as outlined in the situational action theory (SAT) of crime causation. This study contributes to the literature on the urban context of offending in three ways. First, the effects of adolescents' residential neighbourhood and school context on adolescent offending are assessed simultaneously. Second, this study elaborates on SAT from a cross-level point of view. Third, this contribution makes use of non-hierarchical multilevel modelling, which is a statistically correct method of testing hypotheses that involve multiple contexts. Our study revealed the existence of small contextual effects of school-level disadvantage, whereas the effect of neighbourhood-level disadvantage is entirely due to neighbourhood composition.

A Multilevel Study on Ethnic and Socioeconomic School Stratification and Health‐Related Behaviors Among Students in Stockholm

“…Obviously, this study does not show how this comes about; it only highlights the importance of creating a school atmosphere in which it is self‐evident to intervene if someone is being harassed or bullied. Moreover, and in a similar vein to what has been said with regard to creating cohesive neighborhoods, it seems likely that such interventions are influenced by levels of trust within schools.…”

“…The theory postulates that structural disadvantage decreases social cohesion and social control within a neighborhood. The lack of effective control in disadvantaged neighborhoods is in turn considered to make these neighborhoods less resistant to the invasion of criminal subcultures, which has been the main outcome in these types of studies . Here, control refers to the willingness of residents to intervene for the common good.…”

Keeping delinquency at bay: The role of the school context for impulsive and sensation-seeking adolescents

“…Similar to the research on neighbourhood effects on crime, school-level factors such as low mean parental socioeconomic status and ethnic heterogeneity among pupils have been associated with increased delinquency (Barton et al, 2010; Kirk, 2009; Le and Stockdale, 2011; Sellstrom and Bremberg, 2006). A disadvantaged school setting, for example concentrated poverty in the school, has also been associated with adolescent delinquency (Oberwittler, 2007; Pauwels, 2011). In the same vein as the aforementioned social disorganization theory, these factors have been suggested to increase delinquency by reducing social cohesion and social control at school (Barton et al, 2010).…”

“Down Woodward”: A Case Study of Empowering Youth to See and Disrupt Segregation Using Photovoice Methods

“…Segregation, along with other systemic forms of racial oppression, shapes the contexts that inhibit or promote developmental outcomes among marginalized youth of color (García Coll et al, 1996). Residential segregation contributes to social and economic inequality (Lichter et al, 2012; Pauwels & Lieven, 2011), educational (Rumberger & Palardy, 2005), and health disparities (Williams & Collins, 2013) that disproportionately affect youth of color. Research also suggests that segregated urban areas are a place of paradox that both structure racial inequality and socially isolate residents of color in ways that buffer them from overt racial prejudice, which limits their capacity for critical race consciousness (Rendón et al, 2018).…”