Finn-Aage Esbensen

Community structure and drug use: From a social disorganization perspective

Social disorganization theory experienced a relative resurgence in the criminological literature during the 1980s. This new generation of research has expanded the work of Shaw and McKay by testing the relationship between neighborhood structure and delinquency through the use of self-report and victimization data. Confirmation of the theory has been widespread. In this paper we investigate variables mediating between social disorganization and adolescent drug use. We thus extend the research orientation to incorporate drug use and describe a preliminary attempt to examine how neighborhood structure affects behavior. The findings suggest that in the three distinct types of socially disorganized areas that were identified, there was no difference in rates of drug use but that different “mediating factors” appear to be operating in the three different types of communities.

Examining Developmental Trajectories in Delinquency Using Accelerated Longitudinal Research Designs

Use of an accelerated longitudinal research design, involving multiple overlapping birth cohorts, is illustrated by examining developmental transitions in delinquent behavior across the 7-through 17-year-old age period. Considerable movement between non-delinquent, minor, and serious offending statuses was observed across the age range. Also, the relationship between delinquency status at an early age and delinquency status at a fixed later age was quite weak. However, using patterns of delinquent behavior over several years, a relatively strong relationship between age of initiation and later offending status was observed. The findings suggest limitations of cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies that involve single measurement periods separated by several years in time. Also indicated is the need for multiple years of cohort overlap in constructing “synthetic cohorts” in accelerated designs and for greater attention to multiple-year patterns of behavior in examining risk factors and in descriptions of criminal careers.

Thoughts on Deterrence: Evolution of a Theoretical Perspective

Research on deterrence has proliferated in recent years. This article reviews the development of deterrence thought through four historical epochs, delineating the context and assumptions of each. Theoretical and empirical advance of the last two decades are summarized and critiqued.

Recent Developments in Criminological Theory

This chapter reviews several approaches to the understanding of crime. Integrated theoretical models, criminal careers research, and developmental criminology have emerged as new perspectives. Several factors underlie this theoretical development. First, the refinement of self-report methods of data collection has enabled researchers to obtain data directly from law violators. This has allowed for examination of direct links between personal characteristics and behavior. Second, the increased sophistication of statistical methods has permitted researchers to look simultaneously at the effect of a number of variables upon behavior. Third, the results of evaluations of individual theoretical perspectives failed to show high levels of explanatory power. The criminologists have achieved a higher level of understanding of the paths or processes that produce criminal behavior. Incapacitation and selective incapacitation provide quick-fix solutions to a complicated question. The criminal career research has identified a violent and/or highly criminal group of five or six percent of offenders. Developmental and life-course criminology transcends the traditional static examination of adolescence and young adulthood and focuses on life-course trajectories. It allows for closer examination of the interplay between childhood experiences and adult behavior.

Interviewer-related measurement error in attitudinal research: a nonexperimental study

Prior research efforts have attempted to identify the extent to which interviewers bias survey data. Interviewer characteristics such as age, sex, race and social class have been widely studied, as have the effects of certain interviewer attitudes. These previous works, however, have examined the effect of only one or two of these variables upon responses. The current research incorporates interviewer demographic variables, social distance measures, and interviewer attitudinal indicators into the analysis to ascertain their relative impact upon respondent attitudes. Findings include: (1) interviewer demographic characteristics and social distance measures have no significant effects upon responses; and (2) interviewer attitudes exert a statistically significant but small influence upon respondent attitudes.

Social Structure Theories of Crime

This chapter presents the sociological orientation that has dominated American criminology since the 1920s. This chapter examines social structure theories. These theories have three common characteristics. They portray crime as a product of deficiencies in the social structure, such as poverty and the lack of educational opportunity. Another feature is their focus on the lower-class milieu as the source of crime. Because they view crime as a lower-class problem, social structure theorists examine only the lower-class segments of society in seeking to explain crime. Some criminologists apply strain theories to white-collar offenses and others to explain increases in crimes by women. Third, this is a macro-theory tradition. Social structure theories are designed to account for variations in rates of crime among groups, not to explain individual-level criminality. Strain theory is one of the purest sociological approaches to understanding crime. It is rooted in Emile Durkheims concept of anomie. Strain or frustration is a product of failure that is to be disproportionately experienced within the lower class because of structural limitations on opportunities. This failure elicits innovative or deviant responses to meet culturally emphasized success goals, primarily the goals of material acquisition and higher status.

Individual Theories of Crime: A Biosocial Perspective

This chapter covers the positive paradigm, marked by its adherence to the scientific method and xadpresumption of determinism. Biological explanations of the causes of criminal behavior got off to a poor start because of crude methods of measurement, ethnocentric biases, and primitive xadtheoretical thinking. In the biosocial arena, it has been revealed that genetics may be related to antisocial behavior. It is likely that genetics influences ones psychology and cognitive skills, and these psychological xadconstructs in turn influence behavior. In addition, biological risk factors may lead to antisocial xadbehavior only when they are paired with a criminogenic environment. The xadmultiplicative biosocial model considers both nature and nurture in explanations of antisocial behavior. The environment can influence our brain functioning, and this may affect how we xadperceive and interact with our social world.

New Directions: Integration and a Life-Course Perspective

Integrated theoretical models provided the groundwork for the popular contemporary life-course or developmental perspective. Undergirding the emergence of integration was the refinement of xadself-report methods of data collection, the increased sophistication of statistical methods, and the fact that xadevaluations of individual theoretical perspectives failed to show high levels of explanatory power. By combining theories, criminologists have achieved a higher level of understanding of the paths or xadprocesses that produce criminal behavior. The criminal career research has identified a highly criminal group, but has not produced any prediction instrument to identify these individuals. Research xadsuggests the importance of social events on the rate of offending. Developmental and life-course criminoxadlxadogy have emerged as major criminological perspectives and hold considerable promise. This branch of research transcends the traditional static examination of adolescence and young adulthood and focuses on life-course trajectories. It allows for closer examination of the interplay between childhood experiences and adult behavior.

Social Reaction Theories of Crime

This chapter examines two broad theoretical perspectives regarding social reaction theories of crime. The first is labeling approach that focuses on the societal reaction to behavior and is concerned with understanding the consequences of this social response. The labeling perspective grew in popularity through the 1960s and 1970s but lost much of its appeal as research findings failed to substantiate its claims. The second is conflict theory that focuses on how the social and criminal justice systems respond differentially to persons suspected of violating the law. Conflict theorists question the legitimacy of the existing social structure, maintaining that the laws and the enforcement procedures are structured to benefit the rich and punish the poor. The new criminology consists of diverse and relatively distinct theoretical strains. Conflict theory provides the foundation for a much broader critical criminology, beginning with the radical era of the 1960s and 1970s.

Social Process Theories of Crime

This chapter examines social process theories. These theories analyze the social processes or interactions associated with crime. Most social process perspectives do not limit focus to any segment of the class structure. Social process theories most commonly attempt to explain how individuals become law violators. This focus on social interactions or processes experienced by individuals, as opposed to structural matters, represents a shift from macro-theory to micro-theory. A social psychological label is ascribed to the theories because they combine sociological (group) and psychological (individual) variables. Social process theories redress errors that arise when social structure theories are applied at the individual level. Social process theories do not approach crime. Their most important strength is their explanatory power cuts across social classes and economic strata. These theories are consistent with a pattern of crime and delinquency weighted toward members of the lower-class. The chapter discusses three forms of social process theories: learning, culture conflict, and social control. These approaches share the premise that groups influence the individual.