Social control theory: The salience of components by age, gender, and type of crime
Most social control theorists do not consider definitions of delinquency problematic. Beginning with the assumption that “crime” is a unitary concept, researchers have combined a variety of non-normative items to create additive delinquency scales. Rarely is consideration given to whether the causes...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
1988
|
| In: |
Journal of quantitative criminology
Year: 1988, Volume: 4, Issue: 4, Pages: 363-381 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Keywords: |
| Summary: | Most social control theorists do not consider definitions of delinquency problematic. Beginning with the assumption that “crime” is a unitary concept, researchers have combined a variety of non-normative items to create additive delinquency scales. Rarely is consideration given to whether the causes of crime differ for distinct types of criminal activity. Furthermore, the classic social control model does not predict that bonding variables operate differently for distinct age and gender categories. Consistent with the “structuring perspective,” the present research attempts to refine the social control model by specifying conditions under which the model predicts different forms of delinquency. This study examines social control theory using survey data from middle- and high-school students ( N =2926). Logit regression analysis revealed that the model which best explains personal crime differs from the model which best explains property crime. Also, certain components of the model were more powerful predictors of criminal behavior for different age-gender groups. The importance of model specification is demonstrated and the implications for social control theory are discussed. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-7799 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/BF01065345 |