AGE AND ITS RELATION TO CRIME IN TAIWAN AND THE UNITED STATES: INVARIANT,OR DOES CULTURAL CONTEXT MATTER?*

Current empirical and theoretical understanding of the relation between age and crime is based almost entirely on data from the United States and a few prototypical Western societies for which age‐specific crime information across offense types is available. By using Western databases, Hirschi and Gottfredson (1983) projected that the age distribution of crime is always and everywhere robustly right‐skewed (i.e., sharp adolescent peak)—a thesis that is both contested and widely accepted in criminology and social science writings. In the study described here, we tested this age–crime invariance thesis by comparing age–crime patterns in Taiwan (a non‐Western Chinese society) with those in the United States. In light of Taiwan's collectivist culture versus the U.S. individualist gestalt, we anticipated more divergence than homogeneity in their age–crime schedules. Our findings show robust divergence in Taiwan's age–crime patterns compared with U.S. patterns and the reverted J‐shaped norm projected by Hirschi and Gottfredson. Implications for research and theory on the age–crime relation and for studying human development or life‐course topics more broadly are discussed.     

AGE,PEERS, AND DELINQUENCY*

Hirschi and Gottfredson (1983; Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990) have argued that the age distribution of crime cannot be explained by any known variables. and they point specifically to the failure of sociological theories to explain this phenomenon. This paper examines a quintessentially sociological theory of crime—differential association—and evaluates its ability to explain the age distribution of crime. Analysis of data from the National Youth Survey on persons aged 11–21 reveals that peer relations (exposure to delinquent peers, time spent with peers, loyalty to peers) change dramatically over this age span, following much the same pattern as crime itself When measures of peer influence are controlled, the effects of age on self-reported delinquency are largely rendered insignificant. Additional analyses show that delinquent friends tend to be “sticky” friends (once acquired, they are not quickly lost) and that Sutherland's arguments concerning the duration and priority of delinquent associations are only partially correct.     

Constancy and change in the U.S. age distribution of crime: A test of the “invariance hypothesis”

The recent controversy over the age relationship with criminal behavior can be traced to Hirschi and Gottfredson's (Am. J. Sociol. 89, 552–584, 1983) failure to define invariance. In this paper, I distinguish two types of invariance—parametric andmathematical form— that explains both the pattern of stability claimed by Hirschi and Gottfredson and the pattern of variability observed in more recent research. I then directly test for each type of invariance using age-specific arrest data for index offenses in the United States from 1952 to 1987. The results are largely consistent with recent research showing variability in the characteristics (i.e., parameters) of the age distribution of crime, but at the same time, the results provide evidence for a persistent, underlying mathematical form to the age distribution of crime, regardless of year or offense type.     

Are Behavioral Measures of Self-Control and the Grasmick Self-Control Scale Measuring the Same Construct? A Meta-Analysis

The Grasmick attitudinal scale of self-control (Grasmick, Tittle, Bursik, & Arneklev, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 5–29, 1993) is one of the more commonly used measures in research on Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) self-control concept. What has yet to be determined is whether the Grasmick scale correlates as well with crime and delinquency as behavioral measures of self-control and whether the Grasmick scale correlates better with these behavioral measures than it does with crime and delinquency. A meta-analysis was performed on 13 samples obtained from published research where the Grasmick scale, a behavioral or consequences measure of self-control, and an estimate of crime or delinquency were all administered to participants. All analyses were computed with Comprehensive Meta-Analysis, Version 2 (Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2005) software. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that the Grasmick scale and behavioral/consequences measures of self-control achieved comparable correlations with concurrent measures of crime and delinquency but correlated no higher with each other than they did with crime and delinquency. Four possible interpretations of these results are considered: (1) the self-control concept advanced by Gottfredson and Hirschi is a tautology; (2) the attitudinal and behavioral/consequences measures of self-control are measuring different constructs; (3) self-control is a multidimensional construct; (4) self-report measures of behavioral self-control are inadequate for assessing low self-control.     

Evaluating the Dimensionality and Invariance of ”Low Self-Control”

According to Gottfredson and Hirschi's (1990) A General Theory ofCrime, all illegal activity is the manifestation of a single underlyingcause. The authors argue that inadequate child-rearing causes individualsto develop a similar type of propensity for criminal and analogousbehavior. Gottfredson and Hirschi label this characteristiclow self-control. Six dimensions, which can be identified intheir theory, are suggested to comprise a final low self-controltrait. Further, low self-control is proposed to be an invariantcharacteristic (i.e., its form does not change with the age of theindividual or context in which the person resides). In this research, weevaluate these two propositions. First, the six dimensions are measured andused to determine if a multidimensional model can explain another commonfactor—low self-control—in two samples of individuals (fromdifferent locales) with dissimilar mean ages. Second, low self-control inboth samples is tested for invariance. We test the proposed invariance oflow self-control by examining if the parameter values in a model, which isreflective of Gottfredson and Hirschi's conceptualization of thecharacteristic, differ across the two samples of individuals. The resultssupport both of Gottfredson and Hirschi's propositions. Lowself-control does appear to be a multidimensional characteristic whosedimensions represent another common factor. Low self-control also appears tobe an invariant latent trait that members of these two samplespossess. These tests help to clarify Gottfredson and Hirschi'sconceptualization of low self-control.     

Deconstructing “Force and Fraud”: An Empirical Assessment of the Generality of Crime

Gottfredson and Hirschi (A General Theory of Crime, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 1990) have proposed a general theory of crime to explain a set of behaviors they refer to as acts of force and fraud. Central to their theory is the claim that force and fraud are both manifestations of the individual's unrestrained pursuit of short-term gratification. At the same time, research from numerous disciplines suggests that the correlates of violence differ somewhat from those of property crime. The present study therefore uses data from the National Youth Survey to explore whether force and fraud can legitimately be viewed as manifestations of a single underlying construct among American adolescents. Overall, findings from confirmatory factor analyses suggest that they cannot. Rather, they suggest that multi-factor models of force and fraud improve significantly upon the fit of single-factor models and that force and fraud may therefore reflect overlapping, but empirically distinct, constructs.     

THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF SELF-CONTROL: TESTING THE GENERAL THEORY OF CRIME*

Gottfredson and Hirschi's recently introduced general theory of crime has received considerable empirical support. Researchers have found that low self-control, the general theory's core concept, is related to lawbreaking and to deviant behaviors considered by Gottfredson and Hirschi to be “analogous” to crime. In this article, we extend this research by assessing the effects of low self-control on crime and analogous behaviors and by using two distinct measures of self-control, an attitudinal measure and the analogous/behavior scale. Thus, following Gottfredson and Hirschi, we use analogous imprudent behaviors as outcomes of low self-control and as indicators of low self-control's effects on crime. We also examine an important but thus far neglected part of the theory: the claim that low self-control has effects not only on crime but also on life chances, life quality, and other social consequences. Consistent with the general theory, we found that both measures of self-control, attitudinal and behavioral, have effects on crime, even when controlling for a range of social factors. Further, the analysis revealed general support for the theory's prediction of negative relationships between low self-control and social consequences other than crime—life outcomes and quality of life.     

ON THE CAUSES OF "WHITE-COLLAR" CRIME: AN ASSESSMENT OF HIRSCHI AND GOTTFREDSON'S CLAIMS

This article assesses Hirschi and Gottfredson claims about patterns and explanations of White-collar crime. It points out several flaws in their analysis and shows (1) that the UCR offense categories of fraud and forgery are not appropriate indicators of white-collar or occupational crime because the typical arrestee in these categories committed a nonoccupational crime; (2) that the demographic distribution (age, sex, race) of these "white-collar" crimes is not the same as it is for most ordinary crimes; and (3) that the occurrence of these "white-collar" crimes is not relatively rare. The implications of the findings for research and theory on crime are also discussed.     

ORGANIZATIONAL OFFENDING AND NEOCLASSICAL CRIMINOLOGY: CHALLENGING THE REACH OF A GENERAL THEORY OF CRIME*

This article examines and critiques Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime, with particular respect to its applicability to organizational offending. We question their views that the theory is adequately general and that typologies of crime are therefore unnecessary for criminological theory. Gottfredson and Hirschi have employed the case of white-collar crime to support their arguments, but they have con strained the test of their theory by focusing on the white-collar offenses that most resemble conventional crime. When organizational offending is included in white-collar crime, empirical and theoretical limitations of their project emerge. These limitations include the matters of defining and counting the phenomena of interest, the nature of the interest that commonly underlies them, and the role of opportunity in them. A satisfactory theory of organizational offending requires an adequate account of all these matters and will look substantially different from Gottfredson and Hirschi's theory of crime.     

MULTIPLE ROUTES TO DELINQUENCY? A TEST OF DEVELOPMENTAL AND GENERAL THEORIES OF CRIME

General and developmental theories take very different approaches to the study of crime. General theories, like Gottfredson and Hirschi's recent theory of self-control, assume that crime can be explained with reference to a single or very limited set of explanatory factors. In addition, some general theories, like Gottfredson and Hirschi's, adopt a very static approach to causality. They presume that prior offending has no causal effect on current offending once time-stable criminal propensity is controlled, and they assume that the relationship between changes in life events and changes in offending are spurious. Recent developmental theories, like those proposed by Moffitt and Patterson, stand in stark contrast to Gottfredson and Hirschi's theory. These developmental theories are far more complex because they relax the assumption of general causality and adopt a more dynamic position about the relationship between changes in life circumstances and changes in crime. In this article we examine whether the added complexity of a developmental theory of crime is preferable to the more parsimonious general/static theory of Gottfredson and Hirschi. We find that the evidence is not faithful to either a pure static/general model or a pure developmental model of crime. Our findings appeal to a theoretical middle ground that assumes that pathways to crime are more similar than different and that allows for a causal effect of past offending and life experiences on future criminality. When viewed in the context of previous studies that have assessed offending over the life course, our results suggest that further theoretical development can profit from studying issues of measurement and sample composition.     

SELF‐CONTROL THEORY AND THE CONCEPT OF OPPORTUNITY: THE CASE FOR A MORE SYSTEMATIC UNION*

The purpose of this study is to advance the idea that low self‐control—one of the strongest known predictors of crime—likely has effects that are conditional on the supply of criminal opportunities. Some scholars initially interpreted the theory to make this exact prediction, but Gottfredson and Hirschi (2003) have rejected this interpretation. They have insisted that the simplistic nature of most crimes ensures that opportunities are limitless and that variation in opportunity simply reflects variation in self‐control. We trace the history of this uncertain position of opportunity in self‐control theory and argue that it should play a significant role in the theory, even if Gottfredson and Hirschi did not originally envision this. Next, we draw on routine activities theory and applications of it to individual offending to offer a theoretical statement of how opportunity should be incorporated into self‐control theory. Last, using data from a national sample of juveniles, we test the arguments that have been made. The analysis suggests that the effects of low self‐control on delinquency partially depend on the availability of criminal opportunities, as indicated by the time juveniles spend with their friends or away from the supervision of their parents.     

Developmental patterns of sex differences in delinquency among African American adolescents: A test of the sex-invariance hypothesis

This paper addresses a developmental issue concerning longitudinal patterns of sex differences in delinquency. Hirschi and Gottfredson argue that the age-delinquency relation is invariant across sex and that sex differences in delinquency are invariant over time as well. A combination of these two propositions generates a hypothesis, called here the sex-invariance hypothesis, that sex differences in delinquency are invariant over developmental stages of adolescents. To test the sex-invariance hypothesis, nine waves of panel data collected from a representative urban sample of African American adolescents are analyzed. The overall findings show that sex differences in delinquency tend to vary as the subjects grow older, rather than remain constant as the invariance thesis posits. Specifically, sex differences in delinquency peak at the age of 15 and thereafter declines with age. We also find that parental supervision significantly explains sex differences in delinquency for younger adolescence, but not for older adolescence.     

“A general theory of crime” and patterns of crime in Nigeria: An exploration of methodological assumptions

The general theory of crime proposed by Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) claims to be valid across time and space. That claim is assessed through an analysis of three categories of Nigerian crime — normal, political-economic, and riotous. Logical, empirical, and theoretical shortcomings in the theory are identified and discussed. Factually, many individuals who act imprudently (and criminally) in Nigeria do not seem to fit the low self-control characterization required under the theory. Logically and theoretically, unacknowledged value assumptions built into the theory undermine its claim to universality.     

Genetic influences on the stability of low self-control: Results from a longitudinal sample of twins

Gottfredson and Hirschi's theory contained two propositions that have been the source of an emerging line of empirical scrutiny. First, according to the general theory of crime, levels of self-control are largely determined by parental management techniques and not by biogenic factors. Second, Gottfredson and Hirschi argued that low self-control should remain relatively stable over the life course. Data from twins drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health were used to test these two hypotheses. The results of univariate model-fitting techniques revealed that genetic factors accounted for between 52 and 64 percent of the variance in low self-control, with the remaining variance attributable to the nonshared environment. Further, low self-control was stable over a two-year time period (r = .64). Bivariate Cholesky decomposition models indicated that the stability of self-control was determined almost exclusively by genetic factors, and that genetic factors also explained a moderate amount of change in self-control.     

THE STRUCTURAL SIMILARITY OF PROCESSES GENERATING CRIMINAL AND ANALOGOUS BEHAVIORS*

It is possible to distinguish between broad-domain theories that offer an explanation for all phenomena of interest to a discipline and narrow-domain theories that attempt to explain a subset of those phenomena. In criminology, this distinction has prompted theorists and researchers to confront the question of whether the same etiological process can explain variation in all types of criminal offending behavior or whether it will be necessary to adopt different theories to explain variation in different kinds of criminal behavior. One broad-domain theory, advanced by Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990), contends that a variable called “self-control” can account for variation in all kinds of criminal conduct as well as variation in many acts that are “analogous” to crime in some ways but are not actually criminal. Analogous behaviors include, among other things, smoking, drinking, involvement in accidents, gambling, and loitering. Using data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development (N = 369 males), we attempt to define operationally the concept of self-control with a set of variables measured at ages 8–9. We then examine the empirical association between this self-control measure and self-reported involvement in a variety of criminal and analogous acts during adolescence. In support of Gottfredson and Hirschi's position, our results indicate that self-control is associated with both outcomes and that the strength of the association is approximately equal. Contrary to the expectations of their theory, however, was our finding that the covariance between criminal and analogous behaviors could not be explained entirely by variations in self-control. This finding suggests that factors other than time-stable differences in criminal propensity do matter for criminal and legal, but, risky behaviors.     

Low Self-Control, Deviant Peer Associations, and Juvenile Cyberdeviance

Gottfredson and Hirschi??s (1990) general theory of crime and Akers?? (1998) social learning theory have received strong empirical support for explaining crime in both the physical and cyberworlds. Most of the studies examining cybercrime, however, have only used college samples. In addition, the evidence on the interaction between low self-control and deviant peer associations is mixed. Therefore, this study examined whether low self-control and deviant peer associations explained various forms of cyberdeviance in a youth sample. We also tested whether associating with deviant peers mediated the effect of low self-control on cyberdeviance as well as whether it conditioned the effect. Low self-control and deviant peer associations were found to be related to cyberdeviance in general, as well as piracy, harassment, online pornography, and hacking specifically. Deviant peer associations both mediated and exacerbated the effect of low self-control on general cyberdeviance, though these interactions were not found for the five cyberdeviant types examined.     

PARTICIPATION AND FREQUENCY DURING CRIMINAL CAREERS ACROSS THE LIFE SPAN*

Recent advances and debates surrounding general and developmental as well as static and dynamic theories of crime can be traced to the 1986 National Academy of Science's Report on criminal careers and the discussion it generated. A key point of contention has been regarding the interpretation of the age–crime curve. According to Gottfredson and Hirschi (1986), the decline in the age–crime curve in early adulthood reflects decreasing individual offending frequency (λ) after the peak. Blumstein et al. (1986) claimed that the decline in the aggregate age–crime curve also could be attributable to the termination of criminal careers, and the average value of l could stay constant (or increase with age) for those offenders who remain active after that peak. Using data from the Criminal Career and Life Course Study—including information on criminal convictions across 60 years of almost 5,000 persons convicted in the Netherlands—and applying a two-part growth model that explicitly distinguishes between participation and frequency, the study outlined in this article assessed the participation–frequency debate. Results suggest that the decline in the age–crime curve in early adulthood reflects both decreasing individual offending participation and frequency after the peak, that the probabilities of participation and frequency are significantly related at the individual level, and that sex and marriage influence both participation and frequency.     

The Effect of Attachment and Self-Control on Status Offending among Puerto Rican High School Students

This study tests the cross-cultural applicability of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime and self-control theory by examining self-reported status offenses among a sample of Puerto Rican adolescents. Data come from a 2005 sample of 298 youth ages 14–19, representing both the public and private school systems in Puerto Rico. Using a series of multivariate regressions, three hypotheses were tested. First, low attachment to parents, schools, peers, and church will positively and significantly predict status offenses among both public and private students. Second, low self-control will positively and significantly increase status offenses among each group. Finally, the effects of attachment on offending will be mediated by self-control. Results show support for both social control theory (via institutional attachment) and general theory of crime (via self-control). Both the measures of attachment and self-control contribute to explaining status offenses. Self-control partially mediates the effects of attachment on status offenses.     

Trends in victimization in schools and elsewhere, 1974–1981

Trends in the rate of victimizations of juveniles in three settings-schools, homes, and streets/parks-are examined monthly during the period 1974–1981. The relationship between in-school victimization rates and those occurring outside of school are analyzed with multivariate ARMA models informed by previous research on school victimization (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 1985) and an importation perspective on the source of crime and victimization in institutions such as schools. Results indicate that the overall in-school victimization rate remained relatively stable during this period but that victimization rates of juveniles in other settings had significant effects on in-school victimizations. This suggests that underlying causes of victimization in general are important determinants of victimization in schools. These results are limited, however, as we examine these sources of victimization only indirectly via relationships among the different victimization rates in dynamic models and by the aggregate nature of the monthly data from the National Crime Survey.     

DO PARENTS MATTER IN CREATING SELF‐CONTROL IN THEIR CHILDREN? A GENETICALLY INFORMED TEST OF GOTTFREDSON AND HIRSCHI'S THEORY OF LOW SELF‐CONTROL*

Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime (1990) has generated an abundance of research testing the proposition that low self‐control is the main cause of crime and analogous behaviors. Less empirical work, however, has examined the factors that give rise to low self‐control. Gottfredson and Hirschi suggest that parents are the sole contributors for either fostering or thwarting low self‐control in their children, explicitly discounting the possibility that genetics may play a key role. Yet genetic research has shown that ADHD and other deficits in the frontostriatal system are highly heritable. Our research thus tests whether “parents matter” in creating low self‐control once genetic influences are taken into account. Using a sample of twin children we find that parenting measures have a weak and inconsistent effect. We address the conceptual and methodological issues associated with the failure to address genetic influences in parenting studies.