Social Learning, Self-Control, and Offending Specialization and Versatility among Friends

被引:0
作者
John H. Boman
Thomas J. Mowen
George E. Higgins
机构
[1] Bowling Green State University,Department of Sociology
[2] University of Louisville,Department of Criminal Justice
来源
American Journal of Criminal Justice | 2019年 / 44卷
关键词
Offending specialization; Offending versatility; Self-control; Social learning; Friendships;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
While it is generally understood that people tend not to specialize in specific types of deviance, less is understood about offending specialization and versatility in the context of friendships. Using a large sample of persons nested within friendship pairs, this study’s goal is to explore how self-control and social learning theories contribute to an explanation for specialization and versatility in offending among friends. We estimate a series of multilevel, dyadic, mixed-effects models which regress offending versatility onto measures of perceptual peer versatility, self-reported peer versatility, attitudinal self-control, behavioral self-control, and demographic controls. Results indicate that higher amounts of perceptual peer versatility and peer self-reported versatility are both related to increases in versatility among friends. Lower levels of the target respondent’s attitudinal and behavioral self-control are also related to higher amounts of offending versatility. However, the peer’s self-control shares no relationship with offending versatility – a point which both supports and fails to support self-control theory’s expectations about how peer effects should operate. Learning and self-control perspectives both appear to explain offending versatility among friends. However, self-control theory’s propositions about how peer effects should operate are contradictory. The concept of opportunity may help remediate this inconsistency in Gottfredson and Hirschi’s theory.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 22
页数:19
相关论文
共 160 条
[1]  
Armstrong TA(2008)Are trends in specialization across arrests explained by changes in specialization occurring with age? Justice Quarterly 25 201-222
[2]  
Baron SW(2003)Self-control, social consequences, and criminal behavior: Street youth and the general theory of crime Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 40 403-425
[3]  
Beaver KM(2011)The stability of delinquent peer associations: A biosocial test of Warr’s sticky friends hypothesis Crime & Delinquency 57 907-927
[4]  
Gibson CL(2004)Self-control, perceived opportunity, and attitudes as predictors of academic dishonesty The Journal of Psychology 138 101-114
[5]  
Turner MG(2017)Do birds of a feather really flock together? Friendships, self-control similarity, and deviant behavior British Journal of Criminology 57 1208-1229
[6]  
DeLisi M(2016)The implications of using group-based offenses versus non-group-based offenses in peer deviance scales Deviant Behavior 37 1411-1428
[7]  
Vaughn MG(2018)Same feathers, different flocks. Breaking down the meaning of ‘behavioral homophily’ in the etiology of crime Journal of Criminal Justice 54 30-40
[8]  
Holand A(2012)On the operational validity of perceptual peer delinquency: Exploring projection and elements contained in perceptions Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 49 601-621
[9]  
Bolin AU(2004)Assessing the effect of adolescent employment on involvement in criminal activity Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 20 236-256
[10]  
Boman JH(1966)A differential association-reinforcement theory of criminal behavior Social Problems 14 128-147