Delinquency and Crime among Immigrant Youth—An Integrative Review of Theoretical Explanations

Abstract

Although classical theorists tend to believe that immigrant youth are more delinquent than native-born adolescents, the existing empirical studies have shown the opposite. The current paper first gives a comprehensive overview of major theoretical explanations for the relatively lower level of delinquency among immigrant youth, including cultural perspectives, strain theories, social control theory, social learning theory, and social disorganization theory. The main argument is that immigrant youth who have not yet acculturated to the youth subculture of the host society are more law-abiding due to protections from their traditional traits (i.e., being more realistic, stronger ties with family/schools, less access to delinquent friends, and higher level of collective efficacy in homogeneous neighborhoods). All these theories are also applied to explain the generational differences in terms of delinquency: compared to earlier generations, later generations of immigrant youth are often more delinquent because they are more acculturated and the protective factors from their origins wear off over time. The continuing public and political bias toward immigrant youth has been explained by social constructionists. We further discuss the necessity of a synthesis of these theoretical approaches and the importance to examine both internal and international migration under similar theoretical frameworks in the modern era.

The Trump Hypothesis: Testing Immigrant Populations as a Determinant of Violent and Drug‐Related Crime in the United States*

“…Namely, researchers usually find either no significant relationship between crime and immigration, or they find that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes compared to natives. These results hold steady across country‐level analyses (Tonry, ; Yeager, ), as well as national‐level (Chen and Zhong, ; Mears, ), city‐level (Bradshaw et al., ; Martinez and Lee, ; Ousey and Kubrin, ), and neighborhood‐level studies (Alaniz, Cartmill, and Parker, ; Sampson, Morenoff, and Raudenbush, ). A number of possible explanations for this phenomenon have likewise been suggested, such as immigrant self‐selection resulting in hard‐working individuals making a positive contribution to the host economy (Borjas, ; Cobb‐Clark, ; Model, ), immigrant optimism and determination in the face of hardship and disadvantage (Kao and Tienda, ; Martinez, ), and close family and community ties reducing the propensity to commit crime (Ousey and Kubrin, ; Sampson, Morenoff, and Raudenbush, ).…”

“…Given that research discounting the immigrant‐crime connection is almost as old as the declarations that immigrants disproportionately cause crime, this is an issue likely to remain in the public spotlight and continue to periodically flare up. The immigrant‐crime relationship, as noted by Sayad (2004:278–82) is a highly symbolic issue, one largely resistant to empirical evidence (Chen and Zhong, :220). As long as the United States continues to admit foreign nationals in any capacity, they are likely to remain a convenient target, especially during a campaign season with a crowded field of competitors.…”

Rural-to-Urban Migration, Strain, and Juvenile Delinquency: A Study of Eighth-Grade Students in Guangzhou, China

“…Overall, our findings confirmed previous research in observing that social and educational advantages often distinguishing native-urban (vs. migrant) students are limited in scope (Liang & Chen, 2007; Xu & Yu, 2013). In addition, the literature involving delinquency’s relationship with migration status presents mixed results (Chen & Zhong, 2013; S. H. Li et al, 2009).…”

“…Some researchers of delinquency, crime, and migration in China have argued that children and adolescents migrating to cities in fact exhibit less delinquency than their native-urban counterparts (Chen & Zhong, 2013). Their findings suggest that, when not acculturated to the urban host society, young internal migrants are relatively lawabiding, thanks to household traditions like strong ties to family, strong commitment to school success, and dearth of delinquent friends (or at least of access to them; Chen & Zhong, 2013). Other researchers, however, have observed migrant youth to take more risks than native-urban youth, including having sex and unprotected sex more often and using substances to a greater extent than urban-registered youth (S. H. Li et al, 2009).…”

Internal Migration, Social Exclusion, and Victimization

“…Immigrants would encounter serious difficulties to reconstitute their instrumental and emotional support networks if they are living with local social rejection (i.e., lack of local friends) and with weak coethnic ties (i.e., absence of relatives or hometown acquaintances). Instead of integrating into the mainstream society, such immigrants are likely to enter into an ''exclusion'' mode of acculturation and face many disadvantages due to their marginalization, such as poverty, stress, and a high rate of criminal offending and victimization (Chen and Zhong 2013;Forster et al 2015;Portes 1995;Weeks 2001;Zhou and Bankston III 1994). In sum, as an outcome of their immigration experience, some immigrants might be excluded by the social majority and pushed into risky routines and lifestyles.…”