Social Bonding and Delinquency: A Comparative Analysis

Abstract

A multivariate analysis of social bonding themy of delinquency is presented which includes a comparison by rural-urban location. Findmgs indicate the bonding scales to be a stronger explanation of delinquency among rural youth, although lack of social bonding is also strongly implicated in delinquency committed by urban youth. Also, attachment to peers is positively associated with delmquency, while the conventionality of peers is inversely related to delinquent behavior. However, a strong racial influence on the connection between delinquency and the social bond was also observed. This racial influence appeared to operate independently of type of community, but a definitive conclusion could not be reached, given the characteristics of the sample and scale scores.

The Development of Delinquency and Perceived Friendship Quality in Adolescent Best Friendship Dyads

“…Supporting the social control theory, higher perceived friendship quality is found to be negatively associated with less delinquency in cross-sectional studies (Junger-Tas 1992;Lansford et al 2003;Rankin 1976;Swenson 2004). However, positive cross-sectional associations have also been found between perceived friendship quality and delinquency (Barton and Figueira-McDonough 1985;Conger 1976;Evans et al 1996;Gardner and Shoemaker 1989;Hindelang 1973;Shoemaker 1994), suggesting that a stronger bonding with friends is associated with more delinquency. Several cross-sectional studies (Baerveldt et al 2003;Johnson 2003;Matsueda 1982;Solomon 2006) found no significant correlations between friendship quality and adolescent delinquency.…”

Community policing in small town rural America: A comparison of police officer attitudes in Chicago and Baldwin county, Alabama

“…This literature describes differences between urban and rural areas that should affect the police service. Some researchers have proposed that higher social cohesion in rural areas, vis-a-vis urban areas, explains lower levels of juvenile delinquency (Gardner and Shoemaker, 1989) and homicide (Kowalski and Duffield, 1990) in rural America. Another approach insists that a general distrust of governmental institutions predisposes rural residents to rely more on informal social networks to resolve problems; whereas the same problems in urban areas are likely to come to the attention of the police (Smith, 1980;Weisheit, 1993).…”

The importance of rule fairness: the influence of school bonds on at-risk students in an alternative school

“…Although numerous past studies examined the relationship between students' school bonds and juvenile delinquency, this study is unique in two regards (Crosnoe, Johnson, and Elder 2004;Gardner 1989;Jenkins 1995Jenkins , 1997Krohn and Massey 1980;Rosenbaum and Lasely 1990;Stewart 2003;Welsh, Green, and Jenkins 1999;Zang and Messner 1996). Firstly, this study focuses on the effect of at-risk students' school bonds specifically on their classroom behaviour.…”

“…Numerous studies on school bonds include at-risk youth (Crosnoe, Johnson, and Elder 2004;Gardner and Shoemaker, 1989;Jenkins 1995Jenkins , 1997Krohn and Massey 1980;Rosenbaum and LasLey 1990;Stewart 2003;Welsh, Greene, and Jenkins 1999;Wiatrowski and Anderson 1987;Zang and Messner 1996), but a review of the literature reveals few, if any, studies include a sample comprised entirely of at-risk youth. This study uniquely builds on these findings on school bonds by focusing on examining the influence of these bonds on the classroom misconduct of at-risk youth in an alternative school.…”