Juvenile delinquency: an integrated approach Essay

deform A bedraggled Y bug outhThe c leaveness tap adjudicated or scrutinyd change by reversal, a 14-year-old, a deserted youth, for motor vehicle theft and placed him on formal probation for six-spot months. He and a good friend took without permission a gondola that belonged to turns father. They were pulled oer by the police for driving erraticallya classic case of joyriding. sprain was already a familiar figure in the puerile accost. When pile was 12, he was referred to the court for deviant sex for an chance in which he was caught engaging in sexual activity with a 14-year-old girl. The new court dealt with this iniquity informally. A probation fashionr met with kink and his p arnts to work out an agreement of informal probation that included conditions or rules, merely no petition into court.Not long after this first offense, change by reversal was taken into custody by the police for curfew violation and, on a separate occasion, vandalismhe and his good fr iend had gotten wino and knocked d cause m any(prenominal) mailboxes along a rural road. In both of these instances, Rick was taken to the police station and released to his p arnts.Even though Ricks first formal appearance in recent court was for the auto theft charge, he was already soundly-known to the police and probation departments. Rick was a really likable kid he was pleasant and individualable. He expressed a great deal of remorse for his woebeg ace acts and seemed to genuinely desire to change. He had a lot going for him he was goal-directed, intelligent, and athletic. He interacted well with some others, including his p atomic arrive 18nts, teachers, and peers. His better friend, an Ameri chamberpot Indian boy who lived on a nearby reservation, was the same age as Rick and had many similar personal and kindly characteristics.Not surprisingly, the boy likewise had a rattling similar offense record. In accompaniment, Rick and his friendwere often companions i n abuse, committing many of their inattentive acts together. Rick was the adopted son of older p bents who loved him greatly and saw much ability and potential in him. They were truly perplexed by the trouble he was in, and they struggled to understand why Rick contractd in tatterdemalion acts and what needed to be done about it. Rick, too, seemed to really c atomic number 18 about his parents. He fagged a good deal of time with them and apparently enjoyed their company. Because Rick was adopted as an infant, these parents were the people he considered family.Rick attended school regularly and earned good grades. He was not disruptive in the classroom or elsewhere in the school. In fact, teachers shrouded that he was a very affirmatory student both in and out of class and that he was academically motivated. He did his homework and turn over in assignments on time. He was overly actively involved in sportsfootball, wrestling, and track and field.Ricks six months of formal p robation for auto theft turned into a devilyear period as he move to get involved in remiss acts. Through regular meetings and enforcement of probation conditions, his probation incumbent tried to work with Rick to break his pattern of immorality. Such efforts were to no avail. Rick continued to offend, resulting in an al close routine series of court hearings that led to the extension of his probation supervision period.The Study of fresh depravityThe continuing pattern of evil included a long list of property and status offenses minor in possession of alcohol, numerous curfew violations, continued vandalism, minor theft (primarily shoplifting), and continued auto theft, usually involving joyrides in his fathers car.Ricks final offense was criminal mischief, and it involved extensive destruction of property. Once a fix, Rick and his best friend borrowed his fathers car, got drunk, and drove to Edina, an affluent suburb of Minneapolis. For no apparent reason, they parked th e car and began to walk along France Avenue, a major road with office buildings along each side. After travel a while, they started throwing small rocks toward buildings,seeing how close they could get. Their range increased quickly and the rocks soon reached their targets, breaking numerous windows.The fun turned into thousands of dollars worth of window breakage in a large number of office buildings. Because of the scale of damage, Rick faced the possibility of world placed in a state facts of life school. As a potential loss of liberty case, Rick was provided with re showation by an attorney. This time, the recent courts adjudication summons equaled formal procedures, including involvement of a prosecutor and a defense attorney. In the overture hearing, Rick admitted to the petition (statement of charges against him), and the case was continued to a later date for zest (sentencing). In the meantime, the judge ordered a sensitivity report.The predisposition report is desig ned to individualize the courts disposition to flare-up the offender. The investigation for the report uses multiple sources of discipline, including information from the arresting officer, parents, school personnel, coaches, employers, friends, relatives, and, nigh main(prenominal)ly, the offending youth. The predisposition report tries to retrace and justify the pattern of upstart depravity and past invite recommendations for disposition based on the investigation. In Ricks case, the predisposition report attempted to accurately take up and explain his saturnine pattern of property and status offending, and it offered a recommendation for disposition.Finding no information to justify otherwise, the probation officer recommended that Rick be committed to the Department of Corrections for placement at the Red Wing evoke Training School. Depending on ones view augur, the state training school re dedicateed either a last ditch effort for rehabilitation or a means of punis hment through cut back freedom. Either way, Rick was viewed as a chronic juvenile offender, with little hope for reform.It was one of those formative experiences. I coauthor Jim Burfeind was fresh out of college and newly hired as a probation officer. I was meeting with dickens experienced attorneysone the defense, the other the prosecutor. Al close in unison, it seemed, they turned to me and asked, wherefore did Rick do this? wherefore did he weaken such a persistent pattern of vice? They wanted to make feel of Ricks criminality, and they wondered how thejuvenile court could best respond to his case. I had be come about familiar with Rick totally in the previous few weeks when his case was reassigned to me as part of my growing caseload as a new probation officer. Now, meeting with the attorneys to gather information for the predisposition34 puerile DELINQUENCY AN interconnected onrushreport, I was being asked to explain Ricks pattern of delinquent mien to deuce legal experts who had far more experience in the juvenile justness schema than I did. I was, after all, new to the job. How could I possibly know enough to offer an rendering? I as well as had the daunting responsibility of making a recommendation for disposition that the judge would most likely follow completely. Ricks future was at stake, and my recommendation would determine the disposition of the juvenile court. As I attempted to respond to the attorneys sitting in front of me, my mind was flooded with questions.The swear outs to these questions became the basis for my predisposition reportan attempt to explain Ricks delinquent style and, based on this understanding, to recommend what should be done through court disposition. The questions with which I wrestled included the followingIs involvement in wickedness third estate among adolescentsthat is, are most youths delinquent? Maybe Rick was just an unfortunate kid who got caught.Are Ricks offenses fairly typical of the types of offenses in which youths are involved?Will Rick grow out of delinquent behavior?Is Ricks pattern of offending much the same as those of other delinquent youths?Do most delinquent youths induce with status offenses and then persist and escalate into serious, instant offending? (Status offenses are acts, such as truancy and running away, that are considered offenses when committed by juveniles scarcely are not considered crimes if committed by adults.) Is there a rational component to Ricks sin so that punishment by the juvenile court would deter further vice?Did the fact that Rick was adopted have anything to do with his involvement in delinquency? Might something about Ricks genetic makeup and his biological family lend some insight into his behavior?What role did Ricks use of alcohol play in his delinquency? Are there family factors that powerfulness consort to Ricks involvement in delinquency?Were there aspects of Ricks school experiences that might be link to to his delinquency?What role did Ricks friend play in his delinquent behavior? Did the youth courts formal adjudication of Rick as a delinquent youth twain years earlier label him and make him more likely to continue in delinquent behavior?Should the juvenile court retain jurisdiction for serious, repeat offenders like Rick?What should the juvenile court try to do with Rick punish, deter, or rehabilitate him? Should the juvenile court hold Rick little responsible for his acts than an adult because he has not fully matured?The Study of Juvenile Delinquency perhaps this list of questions seems a little overwhelming to you now. We dont present them here with the expectation that you entrust be able to resoluteness them. Instead, we present them to prompt you to think about what causes juvenile delinquency and to hold you an idea of the types of questions that drive the scientific study of delinquent behavior. end-to-end this set aside, we address these types of questions as we define d elinquency consider the nature of delinquent offenses, offenders, and offending and present a soma of theories to explain delinquent behavior. We go past to Ricks story and these questions in Chapter 14. After reading the next 12 chapters, you should have the tools necessary to think about and respond to these questions in a whole new light. Understanding Juvenile DelinquencyThe questions that shape the scientific study of juvenile delinquency constitute attempts to define, describe, explain, and respond to delinquentbehavior. Rather than being asked with regard to a particular case like Ricks, the questions that inspire the study of juvenile delinquency are cast more broadly in order to understand delinquent behavior as it occurs among adolescents. An understanding of delinquent behavior builds upon explanations that have been offered in theories and findings that have been revealed in question. The primary character of this book is to cultivate an understanding of juvenile de linquency by integrating possibility and investigate. Throughout the book, we focalize on the central roles that hypothesis and seek play in the study of delinquency, because these twain components form the core of any scientific inquiry.Before we go any further, we essential define what we mean by juvenile delinquency. This interpretation is far more complicated than you might think. In the next chapter, we offer a thorough parole of the neighborly construction and transformation of the archetype of juvenile delinquency. present we offer a brief work definition of juvenile delinquency as actions that outrage the righteousness, committed by a person who is under the legal age of majority. Our exploration of juvenile delinquency reflects the four basic labours of the scientific study of delinquencyto define, describe, explain, and respond to delinquent behavior.The first two major sections of this book are devoted to defining and describing juvenile delinquency, the t hird section to explaining delinquent behavior, and the final section to contemporary ways of responding to juvenile delinquency. Responses to delinquent behavior, however, should be based on a thorough understanding of delinquency. Thus, an understanding of juvenile delinquency must come first.The Study of Juvenile DelinquencyThe first section of this book describes the historical transformation of the concept of juvenile delinquency and the methods and selective information sources interrogationers use to study involvement in delinquent behavior. We begin by underdeveloped a working understanding of what we commonly call juvenile delinquency (Chapter 2). This includes not only the social, political, and frugal changes that led to the social construction of juvenile delinquency as a legal term, but also the contemporary transformations that have dramatically altered how we as a societyjuvenile delinquencyActions that violate thelaw, committed by aperson who is under thelegal age of majority.56 puerile DELINQUENCY AN INTEGRATED APPROACHview, define, and respond to juvenile delinquency. We then explore how interrogationers measure delinquency (Chapter 3). We describe the look process, various methods of gathering data and doing research on juvenile delinquency, and sources of data on crime and delinquency.The Nature of DelinquencyThe second section of this book presents a trilogy of chapters in which we describe the nature of delinquent offenses, offenders, and patterns of offending. Any attempt to explain juvenile delinquency must first be able to accurately describe the problem in terms of these three dimensions. Chapters 4 through 6 report research findings that describe the extent of delinquent offenses (Chapter 4), the social characteristics of delinquent offenders (Chapter 5), and the developmental patterns of delinquent offending (Chapter 6).Explaining derelict mienThe third section of this book examines a variety of explanations of delinquency th at criminologists have proposed in theories and examined in research related to those theories. These chapters are organized in terms of the major themes that run through seven distinct crowds of theories. One group of theories, for example, emphasizes the importance of peer group persuades on delinquency. These theories, called social learning theories, address how delinquent behavior is learned in the context of peer group relations (Chapter 11).Six other themes are also considered the question of whether delinquency is chosen or determined (Chapter 7) the role of individual factors, including biological characteristics and personality, in explaining delinquent behavior (Chapter 8) situational and routine dimensions of delinquency (Chapter 9) the importance of social family relationships, especially family relations and school experiences, in controlling delinquency (Chapter 10)the structure of society, and how societal characteristics motivate individual behavior (Chapter 12) and social and societal responses to delinquency (Chapter 13). We also apply these various explanations to Ricks case, which opened this chapter, and examine compound hypothetic approaches (Chapter 14). Throughout the book, as we present supposititious explanations for delinquency, we weave together theories and the most relevant research that criminologists have conducted to test those theories.Responding to Juvenile DelinquencyThe final section of this book comprises a single chapter that describes contemporary juvenile nicety (Chapter 15). We have deliberately chosen to keep the discussion of juvenile justness in one chapter, in order to provide an undivided view of its structure and process. The formal system of juvenile justice includes police, courts, and corrections. that a substantial amount of juvenile delinquency is dealt with informally, sometimes by agencies outside the system. Juvenile justice encompasses efforts at prevention, together with informal and formal a ction taken by the traditional juvenile justice system.Formal procedures, such as taking youths into custody and adjudicating them as delinquent youths, are central to the task of responding to juvenile delinquency. that informal procedures designed to prevent delinquency and divert youths from the juvenile justice system are far more common.The Study of Juvenile Delinquency ontogeny and Evaluating Theoriesof DelinquencyIn 1967, two noted sociologists, Travis Hirschi and Hanan Selvin, observed that theories of delinquency suggest a sequence of steps through which a person moves from law abiding behavior to . . . delinquency.1 criminological theories try to identify and describe the make out causative factors that make up this sequence of steps hint to delinquent behavior. In doing so, theories of delinquency emphasize genuine factors as being causally important and then describe how these factors are interrelated in producing delinquent behavior. Stated s require a theory is an explanation.2Components of TheoriesLike other scientific theories, theories of delinquency are composed of two basic parts concepts and propositions. Concepts insulate and categorize features of the world that are thought to be causally important.3 Different theories of juvenile delinquency incorporate and emphasize different concepts. For example, the theories of delinquency we consider in later chapters include concepts such as personality traits, intelligence, routine activities of adolescents, relationship ties (called attachments), associations with delinquent friends, and social disorganization of neighborhoods.Concepts require definition.4 Definitions serve two functions they clarify concepts and provide common understanding, and they describe how concepts will be calculated for the purpose of research. Propositions tell how concepts are related. Scientific theories use propositions to make statements about the relationships between concepts.5 Some propositions imply a p ositive linear relationship in which the concepts increase or decrease together in a relatively straight-line fashion.6 For example, some theories offer the proposition that the number of delinquent friends is positively related to delinquent behavior as the number of delinquent friends increases, so does the likelihood of delinquency.In a cast out linear relationship, the concepts vary in opposite directions. For instance, one theory offers the proposition that level of attachment and delinquency are negatively related as attachment increases, delinquent behavior decreases. Relationships between concepts mayalso be curvilinear. Here, too, the concepts vary together, either positively or negatively, but after reaching a true level, the relationship moves in the opposite direction. For example, researchers have found that parental discipline is related to delinquency in a curvilinear fashion.7 Delinquent behavior is most frequent when parental discipline is either wanting or exces sive, but it is least common when levels of discipline are moderate.If you think of parental discipline as a continuum, delinquency is highest on the two ends of the discipline continuum, when discipline is lax or excessive, and lowest in the middle, when discipline is moderate. Different theories may offer competing propositions. One theory may propose that two concepts are related in a particular way, whereas another theory may claim that they are unrelated. For example, one of the major issues in delinquency theory is the role of the family in explaining delinquent behavior. One major theory contends that the family is essentially unrelated to delinquent behavior and that delinquent peers are an important factor in explaining delinquency. another(prenominal)theory An explanationthat makes a systematicand logical argumentregarding what isimportant and why.concepts Isolated featuresof the world that arethought to be causallyimportant.propositions Theoreticalstatements that tell how concepts are related.78theory of delinquencyA set of logically relatedpropositions that explainwhy and how selectedconcepts are related todelinquent behavior.JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AN INTEGRATED APPROACHinfluential theory proposes the opposite relationship, arguing that family relations are powerfully related to delinquency, whereas peer relations are less important in explaining delinquency.8 To summarize, a theory of delinquency is a set of logically related propositions that explain why and how selected concepts are related to delinquent behavior.9 A theory offers a logically developed argument that original concepts are important in make delinquent behavior. The purpose of theory, then, is to explain juvenile delinquency. trains of Explanationlevel of explanation Therealm of explanationindividual, microsocial, ormacrosocialthatcorresponds to the types ofconcepts bodied intotheories.Theories of delinquency operate at three different levels of explanation individual, microsocial, and macrosocial.10 On the individual level, theories focus on traits and characteristics of individuals, either innate or learned, that make some people more likely than others to engage in delinquent behavior. The microsocial level of explanation considers thesocial processes by which individuals become the kinds of people who commit delinquent acts.11 Criminologists have emphasized family relations and delinquent peer group influences at this level. Some microsocial theories also point to the importance of the structural context of social interaction.12 Race, gender, and social class, for example, influence social interaction not only within families and peer groups, but in virtually all social contexts.As a result, the note of make between social process and social structure is not always clear, nor is it always useful as a means of categorizing theoretical explanations.13 At the macrosocial level, societal characteristics such as social class and social cohesiveness are empl oy to explain group variation in rates of delinquency.14 For example, poverty, together with the absence seizure of community social control, is central to several explanations of why gang delinquency is more common in lower-class areas.15 The level of explanationindividual, microsocial, or macrosocialcorresponds to the types of concepts incorporated into a theory.16 Individual-level explanations tend to incorporate biological and psychological concepts.Microsocial explanations most often use social psychological concepts, but may incorporate structural concepts that influence social interaction. Macrosocial explanations draw extensively on sociological concepts. Theories can be combined to form integrated theories (see Chapter 14), which sometimes merge different levels of explanation into a single theoretical framework.Assessing suppositionWe have proposed that concepts and propositions are the bare essentials of theory.17 These components, however, do not automatically produce a valid explanation of delinquency. We can begin to prize the validity of theorythe degree to which it accurately and adequately explains delinquent behaviorby gainful attention to several key dimensions of theory.18 We highlight these dimensions (e.g., clarity, consistency, testability, applicability) in the following list of questions. We invite you to ask yourself these questions as you evaluate the theories of delinquency we present in later chapters and consider how well they explain delinquent behavior.1. abstract clarity How clearly are the theoretical concepts identified and defined?19 How well do the concepts and propositions fit togetherhow compatible, complementary, and congruent are they?20The Study of Juvenile Delinquency2. Logical consistency Does the theoretical argument develop logically and consistently? Do the concepts and propositions depict a causal process leading to delinquency? 3. Parsimony How concise is the theory in terms of its concepts and propositions ? This question concerns economy of explanation. Generally, simpler is better. So if two theories explain delinquency equally well, we should favor the theory that offers the more concise explanation with the smaller number of concepts.4. Scope What is the theory attempting to explain?21 Some theories try to explain a wide variety of criminal acts and criminal offenders. Others focus on particular types of offenses or offenders. What question is the theory designed to answer? Theories of delinquency usually address one of two basic questions (1) How and why are laws made and obligate? and (2) Why do some youths violate the law?22 Far more theories try to answer the second question than the first.235. Level of explanation At what level (individual, microsocial, or macrosocial) does the theory attempt to explain delinquency? 6. Testability To what extent can the theory be tested corroborate or disproved by research evidence? It is not enough for a theory simply to make sense by ident ifying key concepts and then offering propositions that explain how these concepts are related to delinquency.24 Rather, theories must be constructed in such a way that they can be subjected to research verification.257. Research validity To what extent has the theory been supported by research evidence? 8. Applicability and usefulness To what extent can the theory be applied a great deal? In other words, to what extent is the theory useful in policy and practice?These questions reflect key concerns in assessing theory. In the end, theory is the foundation for the accumulation of knowledge, and it is indispensable for an understanding of juvenile delinquency. However, theory must be tested through research. Together, theory and research constitute the two basic components of a scientific approach to juvenile delinquency. Purposes of Delinquency ResearchDelinquency research serves two vital purposes to generate or develop theory, and to test theory.26 In Chapter 3, we discuss resear ch methods and sources of data used in the study of delinquency. Here we briefly describe the two purposes of research as it relates to theory.Generating TheoryResearch is sometimes used to gain sufficient information about juvenile delinquency to theorize about it.27 Despite the old adage, the data speak for themselves, research findings about delinquency require interpretation, and it is this interpretation that yields theory. As a result, the development of theoretical910inductive theorizing Thedevelopment of theoryfrom research observations.JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AN INTEGRATED APPROACHexplanations of delinquency requires a long, hard look at the facts ofdelinquency (repeated and consistent findings), in order to isolate and identify key concepts and then explain how these concepts are related to delinquent behavior. Along this line, move intoald Shoemaker defines theory as an attempt to make sense out of observations.28 The difficult task of making theoretical sense of research o bservations is sometimes referred to as grounded theory or inductive theorizing.29 In the process of inductive theorizing, research involves collecting data and making empirical observations, which are then used to develop theory. For example, Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, whose work we discuss more fully in later chapters, spent their entire careers attempting to uncover the most important empirical findings about juvenile delinquency.They referred to their task as Unraveling Juvenile Delinquencythe title of their most important book.30 The Gluecks work was heavily criticized for being atheoretical, or without theory.31 Their research, however, was clearly directed at providing empirical observations that would allow for the development of a theoretical explanation of delinquency, even though they never developed such a theory.32 In recent years, their data and findings have become the basis for an important new theory called life-course theory, which we describe in Chapter 10.Testin g Theorydeductive theorizingThe evaluation oftheoretical statementsthrough research.Research also provides the means to evaluate theory and to choose among alternative theories.33 In contrast to inductive theorizing, deductive theorizing begins with theoretical statements and then attempts to test the validity of theoretical predictions.34 As we already discussed, theories advance explanations of delinquency in which propositions identify certain concepts and describe how they are related to delinquent behavior.These theoretically predicted relationships can be tested through research and either verified or disproved. For example, one simple proposition of differential association theory (presented in Chapter 11) is that attitudesfavoring delinquency are learned in the context of intimate personal groups.35 The predicted relationship visualised here is that youths develop attitudes from peer group relations, and delinquent behavior is then an expression of these attitudespeer group relationsdelinquentattitudesdelinquentbehaviorIf research findings support the theoretical propositions tested, then the theory is verified or confirmed. If research findings are not consistent with the predicted relationships, then the theory is disproved. Different theories often offer different predictions. To continue with the previous example, differential association theory and social puzzle theory (presented in Chapter 10) provide competing predictions about the relationships between peers, attitudes, and delinquent behavior.In contrast to differential association theory, social bond theory contends that attitudes are largely a product of family relationships.36 Delinquent attitudes result in delinquent behavior. Associations with delinquent peers then follow from delinquent behavior as youths seek out friendships with others like themselves. The relationships predicted by social bond theory are as followsThe Study of Juvenile Delinquencydelinquentattitudesdelinquentbehavior delinquentpeer groupAs this brief example illustrates, theories have empirical implications, and one purpose of research is to enable scholars to choose among competing theories.37 The preceding discussion of the two purposes of delinquency research implies that the processes of inductive theorizing and deductive theorizing are completely distinct. The former is used to generate or develop theory the latter is used to test theory. We must acknowledge, however, the complexity of the relationship between theory and research, and note that the distinction between the two purposes of research is not necessarily clear-cut. Even within the process of deductive theorizing, for example, an element of inductive theorizing exists.In deductive theorizing, researchers begin with theoretical predictions and then use empirical observations to test those propositions. The research results may lead to modification or refinement of the theory being tested. The latter part of this process, in which o bservations are construe and may result in a revised statement of theory, is consistent with the process of inductive theorizing. Although the relationship between theory and research is complex, it is clear that the development of theory and the performance of research go hand in hand.38 Summary and ConclusionsThe scientific study of juvenile delinquency attempts to describe and explain delinquent behavior through theory and research. Theory seeks to provide a systematic and logical argument that specifies what is important in causing delinquency and why. Like other scientific theories, theories of delinquencyare composed of concepts and propositions. It is necessary to assess the validity of theories, including those we apply to explain delinquency. We provided a series of questions that you can use to evaluate the theories of delinquency we present in later chapters.The second basic component of the scientific method is research. In relation to theory, research serves two purpos es to generate theory and to test theory. Research is sometimes used to gain sufficient information about juvenile delinquency so that it becomes possible to theorize about it. The development of theory from research observations is called inductive theorizing.39 Research is also used to evaluate or test theory in a process called deductive theorizing. As we noted earlier, the primary purpose of this book is to cultivate an understanding of juvenile delinquency by integrating theory and research.This chapter has offered an overview of the key elements of a scientific approach to juvenile delinquency, commission especially on theory. We describe research methods in Chapter 3. With this basic understanding of theory and its relationship to research, we can begin our study of juvenile delinquency on solid ground.The first two sections of this book present criminologists efforts to define and describe juvenile delinquency, the third major section presents explanations of juvenile delin quency that have been offered in theory and tested in research, and the fourth section considers contemporary responses to delinquency. Throughout the book, we present theoretical explanations of delinquency together with the most relevant research that has tested those theories.1112CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS1. fixate theory without using the words concept or proposition. 2. Why does a scientific approach to juvenile delinquency depend on theory? 3. Develop your own example of inductive theorizing. Develop your own exampleof deductive theorizing.4. As you read Ricks story at the beginning of this chapter, what factors seemed most significant to you in considering why Rick engaged in delinquency? Why?SUGGESTED READINGGibbons, Don C. Talking closely abhorrence and fells Problems and Issues in Theory Development in Criminology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall, 1994. glossinessconcepts Isolated features of the world that are thought to be causally important. deductive theorizing The evaluation of theoretical statements through research. inductive theorizing The development of theory from research observations. juvenile delinquency Actions that violate the law, committed by a person who is under the legal age of majority.level of explanation The realm of explanationindividual, microsocial, or macrosocialthat corresponds to the types of concepts incorporated into theories.propositions Theoretical statements that tell how concepts are related. theory An explanation that makes a systematic and logical argument regarding what is important and why.theory of delinquency A set of logically related propositions that explain why and how selected concepts are related to delinquent behavior.REFERENCESAkers, Ronald L. criminological Theories Introduction, Evaluation, and Application. 4th ed. Los Angeles, CA Roxbury, 2004.Babbie, Earl. The Practice of Social Research. 8th ed. Belmont, CA Wadsworth, 1998. Bohm, Robert M. A underseal on Crime and Delinquency Theory. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA Wadsworth, 2001. Cloward, Richard A., and Lloyd E. Ohlin. Delinquency and Opportunity A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York unload Press, 1960.Cohen, Albert K. Delinquent Boys The Culture of the Gang. New York Free Press, 1955. . Deviance and Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall, 1966. Cohen, Bernard P. Developing sociological Knowledge Theory and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall, 1980.13Curran, Daniel J., and Claire M. Renzetti. Theories of Crime. 2nd ed. Boston, MA Allyn and Bacon, 2001.Gibbons, Don C. The Criminological Enterprise Theories and Perspective. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall, 1979. . Talking About Crime and Criminals Problems and Issues in Theory Development in Criminology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall, 1994.Gibbons, Don C., and Marvin D. Krohn. Delinquent Behavior. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall, 1991.Gibbs, Jack P. The State of Criminological Theory. Criminology 25 (1987)821840. Glaser, Barney, and Anselm L. S traus. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. bread, IL Aldine, 1967. Glueck, Sheldon, and Eleanor Glueck. Unraveling Delinquency. Cambridge, MA Harvard University, 1950.Hepburn, John R. Testing Alternative Models of Delinquency Causation. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 67 (1976)450460.Hirschi, Travis. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA University of California Press, 1969. Hirschi, Travis, and Hanan C. Selvin. Delinquency Research An Appraisal of Analytic Methods. New York Free Press, 1967.Jensen, Gary F Parents, Peers, and Delinquent Action A Test of the Differential Association Per. spective. American sociological limited review 78 (1972)562575. Laub, John H., and Robert J. Sampson. The SutherlandGlueck Debate On the Sociology of Criminological Knowledge. American Journal of Sociology 96 (1991)14021440. Sampson, Robert J., and John H. Laub. Crime in the devising Pathways and Turning Points Through Life. Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press, 1993.Shaw, Clifford R., and H enry D. McKay. Juvenile Delinquency and Urban AreasA Study of Rates of Delinquency in Relation to Differential Characteristics of Local Communities in American Cities. Rev. ed. Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1969.Shoemaker, Donald J. Theories of Delinquency An Examination of Explanations of Delinquent Behavior. 4th ed. New York Oxford University Press, 2000.Short, James F Jr. The Level of Explanation Problem Revisited. Criminology 36 (1998)336. .,Stark, Rodney. Sociology. 7th ed. Belmont, CA Wadsworth, 1998. Stinchcombe, Arthur L. Constructing Social Theories. New York Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1968. Sutherland, Edwin H., Donald R. Cressey, and David F Luckenbill. Principles of Criminology. eleventh ed. .Dix Hills, NY General Hall, 1992.Turner, Jonathan. The social organisation of Sociological Theory. Rev. ed. Homewood, IL Dorsey Press, 1978. Vold, George B., Thomas J. Bernard, and Jeffrey B. Snipes. Theoretical Criminology. 5th ed. New York Oxford University Press, 2002.EN DNOTES1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.Hirschi and Selvin, Delinquency Research, 66.Bohm, Primer, 1.Turner, Structure of Sociological Theory, 23.Bohm, Primer, 2. See Bernard P. Cohen, Developing Sociological Knowledge, 140148, for a full discussion of concept definition. Vold, Bernard, and Snipes, Theoretical Criminology, 4.Bohm, Primer, 2.Glueck and Glueck, Unraveling Delinquency.Sutherland, Cressey, and Luckenbill, Principles of Criminology, 211214 and Hirschi, Causes of Delinquency, 140146.Stark, Sociology, 2 and Curran and Renzetti, Theories of Crime, 2. Short, Level of Explanation.Albert K. Cohen, Deviance and Control, 43 and Gibbons, Criminological Enterprise, 9. Sampson and Laub, Crime in the Making Sutherland, Cressey, and Luckenbill, Principles of Criminology and Short, Level of Explanation. Akers, Criminological Theories, 45.1414. Albert K. Cohen, Deviance and Control, 43 Gibbons, Criminological Enterprise, 9 and Akers, Criminological Theories, 4.15. Shaw and McKay, Juvenile Delinquency Albert K. Cohen, Delinquent Boys and Cloward and Ohlin, Delinquency and Opportunity.16. Short points out, in The Level of Explanation Problem Revisited (3), that the level of explanation corresponds to the unit of observation and the unit of analysis. 17. Our discussion of delinquency theory comprising concepts and propositions makes theory seem simple and straightforward. But we must admit that, among social scientists, there is still no agreed-upon view of what theory is (Bernard P. Cohen, Developing Sociological Knowledge, 170). See also Gibbs, State of Criminological Theory.18. Drawn from Bernard P. Cohen, Developing Sociological Knowledge, 191192. 19. Shoemaker, Theories of Delinquency, 9.20. Akers, Criminological Theories, 67 and Shoemaker, Theories of Delinquency, 9. 21. Akers, Criminological Theories, 67 and Curran and Renzetti, Theories of Crime, 3. 22. Akers, Criminological Theories, 26. Renowned criminologist Edwin Sutherland defined criminology as the study o flaw making, law breaking, and law enforcement (Sutherland, Cressey, and Luckenbill, Principles of Criminology, 3).23. Akers, Criminological Theories, 4. Gibbons (Talking About Crime, 911, 7376) describes two key criminological questions Why do they do it? and the rates question. The first question addresses the origins and development of criminal acts and careers, and the second question addresses organizations, social systems, social structures, and cultures that produce different rates of behaviors of interest (9). See also Gibbons, Criminological Enterprise, 9 Gibbons and Krohn, Delinquent Behavior, 8586 and Short, Level of Explanation, 7. 24. Akers, Criminological Theories, 7.25. Stinchcombe, Constructing Social Theories.26. Bernard P. Cohen, Developing Sociological Knowledge, vii, 10 and Stark, Sociology, 3. 27. Stark, Sociology, 3.28. Shoemaker, Theories of Delinquency, 7.29. Glaser and Straus, Discovery of Grounded Theory and Babbie, Practice of Social Research, 4, 6064. 30. Glueck and Glueck, Unraveling Delinquency, 1950.31. Gibbons and Krohn, Delinquent Behavior, 8384.32. Laub and Sampson, SutherlandGlueck Debate and Sampson and Laub, Crime in the Making. 33. Bernard P. Cohen, Developing Sociological Knowledge, 10. 34. Babbie, Practice of Social Research, 4.35. Sutherland, Cressey, and Luckenbill, Principles of Criminology, 8889. 36. Jensen, Parents Hepburn, Testing Alternative Models and Hirschi, Causes of Delinquency. 37. Stark, Sociology, 2 and Bernard P. Cohen, Developing Sociological Knowledge, 10. 38. Gibbons, Talking About Crime, 7.39. Stark, Sociology, 3.