No abstract

This article assesses empirically whether Gottfredson and Hirschi's “general theory” can account for the “gender gap” in crime and, when rival theories are included in the analysis, can explain criminal behavior for both males and females. Based on a sample of 555 adults, the results indicate that the relationship of gender to crime becomes nonsignificant when self-control is introduced into the analysis. Further, when males and females are analyzed separately, self-control is related, albeit differently, to males' and females' criminal involvement. These results suggest that Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory should be incorporated into future empirical assessments of gender and crime.

Although often tested empirically on high school samples, differential association and social control theories have only infrequently been used to explain offending by felons. Based on a sample of 1,153 newly incarcerated felons, the authors examine the ability of differential association and social control theories to explain self-reported offending across types of crime and gender groups. Overall, the analyses lend support to both perspectives and suggest that they are “general” theories of crime. It also appears, however, that differential association theory has more consistent effects, especially for men. Parental attachment is a significantly stronger predictor of female than male participation in violent crime. These results indicate that future studies of criminal behavior risk being misspecified if they do not include measures of these “traditional” theories of crime.

The theory of low self-control has been shown to be a valid predictor of a wide variety of criminal and deviant behaviors. However, a limited number of studies were conducted to understand the relationship between low self-control and bullying and the effects of opportunity factors (i.e., parental supervision, association with other bullies, negative school environment, and disciplinary measures used by teachers) on bullying in the context of low self-control theory. The present study, using a sample of nearly 300 youths, examined the effects of low self-control and opportunity factors on various types of bullying behaviors. Results indicated that youths with low self-control were likely to physically and psychologically bully, consistent with the theory's prediction. When opportunity measures were introduced, they were stronger explanations of bullying than low self-control, especially association with other bullies and youth who experienced disciplinary measures by their teacher. Negative school environment was a significant predictor of psychological bullying but not for physical bullying. Theoretical and policy implications are discussed.

No abstract