IS AGE IMPORTANT? TESTING A GENERAL VERSUS A DEVELOPMENTAL THEORY OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR*

We tested competing hypotheses derived from Gottfredson and Hirschis (1990) general theory and Moffitt's (1993a) developmental theory of antisocial behavior. The developmental theory argues that different factors give rise to antisocial behavior at different points in the life course. In contrast, the general theory maintains that the factor underlying antisocial behavior (i.e., criminal propensity) is the same at all ages. To test these competing predictions, we used longitudinal data spanning from age 5 to age 18 for the male subjects in the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. Using reports from three sources (parents, teachers, and the boys themselves), we estimated second-order confirmatory factor models of antisocial behavior. These models provided consistent support for the developmental theory, showing that separate latent factors underlie childhood and adolescent antisocial behavior. Moreover, we found that these childhood and adolescent factors related in ways predicted by Moffitt's developmental theory to four correlates of antisocial behavior: Childhood antisocial behavior was related more strongly than adolescent antisocial behavior to low verbal ability, by per activity, and negative/impulsive personality, whereas adolescent antisocial behavior was related more strongly than childhood antisocial behavior to peer delinquency. The two underlying latent factors also showed the predicted differential relations to later criminal convictions: Childhood antisocial behavior was significantly more strongly associated with convictions for violence, while adolescent antisocial behavior was significantly more strongly associated with convictions for nonviolent offenses.     

The use of either the nose or outer ear as a means of determining the postmortem period of a human corpse.

Presented in this paper are the initial results involving the use of the nose or outer ear as temperature measurement sites to determine the postmortem period of the human corpse. Simple mathematical models for both sites are developed based on cooling curves of five corpses. Analysis of errors between actual and calculated postmortem intervals suggest that in its present form, the described methods would not be suitable for use in accurately determining the time since death of human corpses.     

Examining the empirical relationship between prison crowding and inmate misconduct: A meta-analysis of conflicting research results

Incarceration rates in the United States dramatically increased over the past several decades. This trend has drawn significant academic attention to prison overcrowding and its potential effect on inmate misconduct. The empirical relationship between inmate misconduct and overcrowding, however, is less than clear. To be sure, studies indicating positive, negative, and null relationships can all be found in the literature. The current research subjects this body of literature to a meta-analysis in an effort to: (1) clarify the direction and strength of the relationship between overcrowding and rates of prison misconduct across all studies, and (2) to uncover the degree to which variation in research outcomes can be attributed to methodological differences across studies. Results indicate that prison crowding has little substantive impact on inmate misconduct. Implications of the findings are discussed in detail.     

HELPING PEOPLE WITH LABOR MARKET PROBLEMS: AN OVERVIEW OF KEY POLICIES

Those in need of employment and training programs face a variety of difficulties. Accordingly, the federal response to labor market problems has encompassed a wide range of initiatives. These include preparing people for work (through skills training, the Job Corps, work experience programs); improving the functioning of the labor market (through matching workers with jobs, establishing a minimum wage, and the Targeted Jobs Tax Credit program); and preventing discrimination. Unresolved issues in these areas are examined. They include who should be targeted for federal assistance, which levels of government can best operate programs, how public versus private efforts should be balanced, how limited resources should be distributed, and how the welfare versus work question should be resolved.