Gender Roles and Delinquency

Shover, Neal; Norland, Stephen; James, Jennifer; Thornton, William E.

doi:10.1093/sf/58.1.162

Cited by 54 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The role of parental and peer influence, morality, and success in school are all considered important factors by social theorists in creating a social bond and hence inhibiting delinquent acts (Hirschi, 1969). While the sex of the adolescent does not play a major role in accounting for the crime differential between males and females (Jensen and Eve, 1976;Shover et al, 1979), it was included to ensure a more complete model. The three religion measures that had the highest zero-order correlations with the weighted delinquency scale (personal prayer, respondent's church attendance, and salience) were included in the original regression analysis; however, their high intercorrelation precluded simultaneous inclusion in the regression equation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religiosity and Delinquency

Elifson

Petersen

Hadaway³

1983

Criminology

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the contradictory findings that have characterized the relationship between religion and delinquency. The data are based on interviews with 600 adolescents attending public school in the Atlanta, Georgia area. A wide variety of religious and delinquency measures were used, allowing a complete examinatirm of the relationship. The existence of a weak to moderate negative zero-order relationship was verified. Religious salience, belief in the power of personal prayer, and orthodoxy were found to be related w e strongly to delithan the most often-used variable, church attendance. Most important, in spite of the relatively strong zero-order relationship between a number of religiosity and delinquency measures, within a multivariate context religion0 contribution as an independent variable was not statistically significant. Possible explanations for this finding are discussed.The relationship between religiosity and delinquency has long been a subject of interest among sociologists, criminologists, and church professionals. At the outset, strong theoretical arguments were developed suggesting that religion promotes social control and encourages the development of moral values and the acceptance of societal norms and values (Davis, 1948: 371-373; Erikson, 1966: 3-19; Fitzpatrick, 1967: 315-330). Despite this orientation, conflicting empirical results have characterized the research in this area. While a number of studies indicated that involvement in formal religious activities was related to not engaging in delinquent activity (Travers and Davis, 1961;Miller, 1965;Rhodes and Reiss, 1970), others, including Kvaraceus (1944) and Hirschi and Stark (1969), reported that religiosity and delinquency are AUTHORS NOTE: We wish to thank Harwin L. Voss for his helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religiosity and Delinquency

Elifson

Petersen

Hadaway³

1983

Criminology

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The focus on labeled delinquent populations and the reliance on nonprobability and single-sex samples in research on the correlates of delinquent behavior make it difficult to determine why some youth are delinquent while others are not and why more boys are delinquent than girls (Ball and Lilly, 1976; Cernkovich and Giordano. 1979; Datesman and Scarpitti, 1975; Hennessy et al, 1978;Jensen, 1972; Mannarino and Marsh, 1978; Shover et al, 1979; Thompson and Lozes, 1976). Although these problems limit the research conducted with both sexes, they apply particularly to studies of girls, which have relied on case histories of labeled, and often institutionalized, offenders (Campbell, 1977; Chesney-Lind, 1973; Cloninger and Guze, 1970; Felice and Offord, 1971) and which are characterized by qualitative and moralistic judgments.…”

Section: Correlates Of Delinquent Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Family Correlates of Male and Female Delinquency

Canter¹

1982

Criminology

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines sex differences in family bonds as a possible explanation of sex differences in self‐reported delinquent behavior (SRD) among a national probability sample of 1725 adolescents. It was hypothesized that girls would report significantly stronger family bonds and significantly lower delinquency than boys. The findings provide limited support for these hypotheses. The expected sex differences in SRD were observed. males report significantly greater involvement in all forms of delinquent behavior. However, the expected sex differences in family bonds were not observed. Family bonds are modestly correlated with delinquency, but at comparable rates for males and females, and with evidence of their greater association among males in many cases. Theoretical and methodological explanations are suggested for the divergence of the observed findings from existing research.

show abstract

“…The dependent variables used in this study were count variables with very substantially larger numbers of respondents reporting no offending (48-80%); the distribution was not normal, so standard regression analyses were inappropriate (Atkins & Gallop, 2007;Flynn & Francis, 2009;Long, 1997), so zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) regression was used, which prevented biased estimates of standard errors and the associated increased Type I error rate (Cox, 1983;Yau, Wang, & Lee, 2003). ZINB modelling was also useful from a theoretical standpoint because estimating separate models for non-offenders (i.e., the "zeros") and offenders allowed for an exploratory comparison of the influence of each of the independent variables on crime as well as conformity, an important task in and of itself (Heimer & De Coster, 1999;Shover, Norland, James, & Thornton, 1979). Table 1 shows the general characteristics of the sample.…”

Section: Analytic Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the efficacy of reintegrative shaming for non‐predatory offending

Fitch

Nazaretian

Himmel

2018

Criminal Behav Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Since Braithwaite advanced reintegrative shaming theory about 25 years ago, the theory has almost invariably been retested only in relation to predatory offending. Few studies have tested the relevance of the theory for non‐predatory offending. Aim This study aims to explore the utility of reintegrative shaming theory in explaining non‐predatory crimes. Our main research question was: is acknowledgement of shame apportioned by others associated with reduction in non‐predatory offending? Methods We used zero‐inflated negative binomial modelling to analyse data from a national, longitudinal, population‐based study of 1,726 adolescents. Results Overall, peer shame acknowledgement at age 18–21 was a significant predictor of no non‐predatory offending at ages 21–27. Contrary to our expectation, however, similar recognition and incorporation of parental shame was not related to absence of such offending. Implications Our findings add further weight to the validity of reintegrative shaming theory, showing its broader value explaining criminal behaviour—and desistance from it—beyond the original model.

show abstract

Gender Roles and Delinquency

Cited by 54 publications

References 6 publications

Religiosity and Delinquency

Religiosity and Delinquency

Family Correlates of Male and Female Delinquency

Exploring the efficacy of reintegrative shaming for non‐predatory offending

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About