NCJ Number
212724
Journal
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice Volume: 4 Issue: 1 Dated: January 2006 Pages: 3-33
Date Published
January 2006
Length
31 pages
Annotation
In examining why "bad" parenting fosters criminal behavior, this study tested the explanations of two rival theories: low self-control and differential association/social learning.
Abstract
The data used in this study were derived from a project that collected baseline data on school bullying and school violence. The sample was drawn from the six public middle schools that serve a metropolitan area in Virginia with a diverse population. On the day of the survey, 2,472 students completed the survey (81 percent response rate). The respondents who completed the survey closely matched the total population of students. A self-report instrument adapted from the National Youth Survey was used to create three scales that measured delinquent behavior. Measures of ineffective parenting pertained to parental monitoring and involvement, inconsistent punishment, parental reinforcement of aggression, and coercive parenting. The data also permitted the inclusion of two social and psychological variables that should intervene between ineffective parenting and juvenile delinquency: low self-control and aggressive attitudes. The study controlled for a number of factors that may be related to ineffective parenting, low self-control, aggressive attitudes, or juvenile delinquency. The analysis found that several parenting patterns affected both low self-control and aggressive attitudes. These included monitoring and involvement, as well as parental reinforcement of aggression. Both low self-control and aggressive attitudes predicted delinquent behavior and were found to mediate partially the effect of parenting measures on delinquency. Adolescents who had aggressive attitudes and low self-control were particularly likely to engage in criminal behavior. Taken together, the findings are inconsistent with the concept that internal controls and aggressive attitudes are mutually exclusive rather than complementary risk factors for delinquency. 5 tables, 11 notes, 111 references, and appended correlation matrix of independent and dependent variables and scale items