THE INTERACTIONIST PERSPECTIVE Some Things Hagan Didn't Tell Us

This paper is concerned with the implications of Hagan's negative assessment of the contributions of symbolic interactionism to the study of deviance. The logic of evaluating selected seminal works without reference to recent contributions of the symbolic interactionists in deviance and other areas is challenged.     

Injustice in Robes: Iniquity and Judicial Accountability*

The paper addresses the question of judges' moral responsibility in an unjust society. How is the “moral” judge to reconcile his perception of justice with a malevolent law? Upon what grounds might judges, and perhaps other public officials, be held morally responsible for their acts or omissions? Does a positivist approach yield a more satisfactory resolution than a natural law or Dworkinian analysis? Could inclusive positivism offer any clues as to how this quandary might be judiciously resolved?     

ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF PAST TO FUTURE PARTICIPATION IN DELINQUENCY

Among the best documented empirical regularities in criminology is the positive association between past and future delinquency and criminality. In this paper, we examine alternative interpretations of this association. One is that prior participation has a genuine behavioral impact on the individual. Prior participation may, for example, reduce inhibitions against engaging in delinquent activity. Such an effect is termed state dependence. A second explanation is that individuals differ in unmeasured delinquent propensity and this unmeasured propensity is persistent over time. This second explanation is a consequence of population heterogeneity. Using a three-wave panel data set, we attempt to distinguish these two interpretations of the positive association between past and future delinquency. Our results suggest that the positive association is principally due to a state-dependent influence. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are also discussed.     

PERSONAL CAPITAL AND SOCIAL CONTROL: THE DETERRENCE IMPLICATIONS OF A THEORY OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN CRIMINAL OFFENDING*

A large and growing literature links stable individual differences established early in life to deviant behavior through the life course. This literature challenges basic premises of modern sociological and economic theories of deviance that emphasize explanatory factors that are more proximate in time and external to the individual. In this paper we present and test a theory designed to link rational choice and social control theories with two leading examples of theories that emphasize stable individual differences (Wilson and Herrnstein, 1985; Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). Based on appeals to the economic theory of investment, we argue that individuals who are more present oriented and self-centered invest less in social bonds and therefore are less deterred from committing crime by the possibility of damage to such bonds. Thus, our theory, which builds from key constructs of the Gottfredson-Hir-schi and Wilson-Herrnstein theories, departs from those theories with the contention that social control does matter.     

GUN CONTROL AND POLITICAL POWER

Most of the debate over gun control policy has slighted the possible relationship between such policies and the distribution of political power. Five political functions of firearms control laws are discussed and examples are provided.     

DOES DROPPING OUT OF SCHOOL MEAN DROPPING INTO DELINQUENCY?*

Approximately one third of U.S. high‐school freshmen do not earn their high‐school diploma on time. For African‐American and Hispanic students, this figure nearly reaches one half. The long‐term economic consequences of dropping out of school for both the student and the larger community have been well documented. It has also been argued that school dropouts put themselves at a higher risk for delinquent and criminal behavior when they leave school. Although it seems plausible that dropping out might increase the potential for delinquent conduct, another view states that dropping out is simply the final event in a long, gradual process of disenchantment and disengagement from school. Dropouts show evidence of school failure and developmental problems years in advance. It has been argued, therefore, that the actual event of finally leaving school has no causal effect on criminal or delinquent behavior because it has been so long in coming. In this article, we examine the effect of leaving school early, and the reason for dropping out, on delinquent behavior with the use of panel data models from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 Cohort (NLSY97). Through an appeal to identity theory, we hypothesize that the effect of dropping out is not uniform but varies by the reason for leaving school, gender, and time. This conjecture receives only partial empirical support. Implications for future work in the area are discussed.     

ON THE USE OF PANEL RESEARCH DESIGNS AND RANDOM EFFECTS MODELS TO INVESTIGATE STATIC AND DYNAMIC THEORIES OF CRIMINAL OFFENDING

There is a long-standing debate in criminology about the relative impact of static versus dynamic factors on criminal behavior. Researchers interested in estimating the impact of dynamic factors like prior offending or association with delinquent peers on criminal offending must control for static factors like intelligence, family background, or self-control, which could plausibly be correlated with criminal offending and the dynamic factor itself. Unfortunately, as a practical matter, it is not possible to observe all of these static factors. Statisticians and econometricians have shown that it is possible to identify the collective effect of static factors even though they cannot be observed. To achieve this objective, however, it is necessary to account for stable, unobserved individual characteristics through the use of "fixed-effect" or "random-effect" estimation. Criminologists often use random-effect estimators in these situations. We describe some of the assumptions that are necessary to develop valid inferences when time-varying covariates are used. Then, we use simulation evidence and an empirical application to show that bias can result when they are violated.