Juvenile Delinquency in a Rurban County

Ball, Richard A.; Lilly, J. Robert

doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1971.tb00759.x

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, a relatively small effect size of neutralizations as a predictor of deviance has been found (Ball 1966;Ball and Lilly 1971;Hirschi 1969;Hollinger 1991;Thurman 1984). This might stem from a variety of reasons.…”

Section: Previous Studies Of Neutralization Theorymentioning

confidence: 90%

Neutralization theory and online software piracy: An empirical analysis

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accompanying the explosive growth of information technology is the increasing frequency of antisocial and criminal behavior on the Internet. Online software piracy is one such behavior, and this study approaches the phenomenon through the theoretical framework of neutralization theory. The suitability and applicability of nine techniques of neutralization in determining the act is tested via logistic regression analyses on cross-sectional data collected from a sample of university students in the United States. Generally speaking, neutralization was found to be weakly related to experience with online software piracy; other elements which appear more salient are suggested and discussed in conclusion.

show abstract

Section: Previous Studies Of Neutralization Theorymentioning

confidence: 90%

Neutralization theory and online software piracy: An empirical analysis

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ball found differences in the neutralization scores of both institutionalized and non-institutionalized youth, of youth who reported court-appearances and those who did not, as well as of those who scored both high and low on self-reported delinquency. In a later study, Ball (1977Ball ( , 1983Ball and Lilly 1971) measured neutralization acceptance and self-reported delinquency in girls and boys, both when they were sixthand when they were ninth-graders. The acceptance of neutralization and self-reported behavior correlated at the second time of measurement, but at the first, this correlation could only be found among the boys.…”

Section: One-shot Studiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Predicting Deviant Behavior by Neutralization: Myths and Findings

Fritsche

2005

Deviant Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Akers' (1998) take on differential reinforcement (comprising notions of social learning as well as cognitive self-definitions) seems a particularly apt explanatory mechanism here for how neutralizations as well as guilt-free mind-sets are adopted by offenders, as is Hirschi's (1969) conception of social bonding. The notion that conditioning factors (such as association with delinquent others) moderate the effect of neutralization on delinquency has been empirically tested 492 VOLKAN TOPALLI in previous studies of neutralization theory (see Agnew 1994;Ball 1977;Ball and Lilly 1971). It seems reasonable to assume that if delinquent others can encourage the use of neutralizations they can also dissuade considerations of guilt altogether.…”

Section: "That's How I Was Raised Up": Learning To Ignore Guiltmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Seductive Nature of Autotelic Crime: How Neutralization Theory Serves as a Boundary Condition for Understanding Hardcore Street Offending

Topalli

2006

Sociological Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1957 Sykes and Matza introduced Neutralization Theory as a response to the prevailing criminological wisdom that offenders engage in crime because they adhere to an oppositional subcultural rule set that values law breaking and violence. Sykes and Matza rejected this perspective arguing that, despite their involvement with offending, delinquents maintain a strong bond to conventional society and want to perceive themselves as "good." To resolve their contemplated law breaking with this desired self-identity, they employ neutralization techniques designed to assuage anticipated guilt. Subsequent research indicates that the original formulation of the theory is limited to explaining the behavior of conventionally attached individuals and fails to address the decision-making processes of nonconventionally oriented individuals such as criminally embedded street offenders. The current paper argues that, for a core group of such offenders, guilt is not an issue at all because their crimes are not only considered acceptable, but attractive and desirable. In-depth, semistructured interviews conducted with 191 active, noninstitutionalized "hardcore" street offenders indicate they discount guilt not through neutralizations but by attaching normative definitions to their crimes (as either mundane, inevitable, or enjoyable) that preclude them from eliciting guilt in the first place. In addition, these interviews detail the manner in which such outlooks develop among hardcore offenders and how they are maintained in a manner that supports further offending.

show abstract

Juvenile Delinquency in a Rurban County

Cited by 15 publications

References 6 publications

Neutralization theory and online software piracy: An empirical analysis

Neutralization theory and online software piracy: An empirical analysis

Predicting Deviant Behavior by Neutralization: Myths and Findings

The Seductive Nature of Autotelic Crime: How Neutralization Theory Serves as a Boundary Condition for Understanding Hardcore Street Offending

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About