Youth Gangs and Definitional Issues: When is a Gang a Gang, and Why Does it Matter?

Abstract

The recent explosion in gang research has highlighted the importance of consistent definitions for gang affiliation and gang-related crime. Definitional questions have assumed greater significance in the wake of broad-ranging prevention and intervention strategies. In this article, the authors utilize a sample of approximately 6,000 middle-school students to examine the youth gang phenomenon using five increasingly restrictive membership definitions. The least restrictive definition includes all youth who claim gang membership at some point in time. The most restrictive definition includes only those youth who are current core gang members who indicate that their gang has some degree of organizational structure and whose members are involved in illegal activities. The authors examine the differentially defined gang and nongang youths on various demographic characteristics, theretical factors, and levels of self-reported crime. The authors also address the theoretical and policy implications of shifting definitions of gang membership.

Delinquent youth groups and offending behaviour: Findings from the 2004 offending, crime and justice survey

“…The final criterion, relating to structural features, has been identified in other research (Winfree et al, 1994;Esbensen et al, 2001;Smith and Bradshaw, 2005;Communities That Care, 2005). 9 An analysis to look at the impact of using various criteria on prevalence and on group behaviour was conducted.…”

“…This approach has commonly been used in self-report offending surveys in the United States (eg. Esbensen et al, 2001;Hill et al, 2001;Thornberry and Burch, 1997) but it is problematic in that it relies on respondents' understandings and perceptions of 'gangs' which may vary considerably. For example, a respondent may participate in low-level delinquency with a group of friends but not consider this to be a 'gang' if they view gangs as more highly organised criminal networks.…”

“…Some gang researchers seem to accept that, at least in the US -where the term 'gang' perhaps has a more precise cultural meaning -the self-definition measure on its own, although imperfect, is not much worse from a construct and discriminant validity point of view than the use of self-definition measures in companion with additional filters specifying behavioural, cultural or structural features of gangs (Esbensen et al, 2001). In addition, since many researchers use additional criteria that vary from one study to the next, prevalence figures become difficult to compare once these additional criteria are taken into account.…”

Adolescent gang involvement: The role of individual, family, peer, and school factors in a multilevel perspective

“…In this study, gang affiliation was measured by students' response to one item, "Do you consider yourself a member of a gang?" Although the selfnomination technique represents a valid measure of gang involvement (that also has similarities with police reliance on gang members "claiming" membership; Esbensen et al, 2001), it may not capture some aspects of gang involvement and future research should use more comprehensive measures. For example, there may be important differences between being a member of a gang and engaging in violent acts or criminal behavior because of involvement in a gang.…”

Le processus de désaffiliation aux gangs. Le rôle des facteurs individuels et collectifs

“…Ces liens durables compliquent le processus et ne peuvent être minimisés. (Bjerregaard, 2002 ;Curry, 2000 ;Curry et Decker, 1998 ;Esbensen, Peterson, Taylor et Freng, 2009 ;Esbensen, Winfree, He et Taylor, 2001). Les informations recueillies au moyen de l'instrument sur l'affiliation aux gangs comprenaient : l'âge de la première affiliation, les motivations pour adhérer à un gang, les personnes qui les ont introduites, la description de leur initiation, la composition et le niveau d'organisation de leur gang et les conflits.…”