A Note on Self-Concept as an Insulator Against Delinquency

Schwartz, Michael F.; Tangri, Sandra S.

doi:10.2307/2090970

Cited by 52 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the degree of powerlessness was measured through Neal and Seeman's scale (1964). Finally, self esteem was measured by a semantic differential scale (Schwartz and Tangri, 1965). These personality factors are helpful in the analysis of status in-consistency responses within Geschwender's framework of coping-noncoping techniques.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Consequences of Objective and Subjective Status Inconsistency

Baer

Eitzen

Duprey

et al. 1976

The Sociological Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The phenomenon of status inconsisitency, while having rich potential as an explanatory variable, has been beset with methodological problems and conflicting findings. Nelson has argued that the use of objective and subjective components of status inconsistency will allow for a more accurate test of its usefulness (1973). The present study, using a sample of 1971 male college graduates interviewed in 1974, analyzed the attitudinal and behavioral consequences of one type of status inconsistency (under‐rewarded) incorporating objective and subjective techniques. The tentative conclusions were: (1) the use of subjective measures of inconsistency validates this phenomenon as an explanatory variable; (2) the use of subjective measures minimizes the methodological criticisms of the objective approach; and (3) both objective and subjective measures of status inconsistency should be incorporated in future research.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Consequences of Objective and Subjective Status Inconsistency

Baer

Eitzen

Duprey

et al. 1976

The Sociological Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A questionnaire including a semantic differential scale devised by Schwartz and Tangri (4) was used in which the respondent was asked to rate himself on each of 10 sets of bipolar adjectives (e.g., I am: good ... bad; useful ... useless). These same scales were used to determine ea.ch boy's expectation of how his significant others evaluated him (my mother thinks I am .…”

Section: B Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Self-Concept of Delinquents in a Behavior Modification Treatment Program

1976

The Journal of Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Boys adjudicated for delinquent behavior and living in a setting guided by behavior modification principles were administered a questionnaire with a semantic differential measure of self-concept several times during their stay (N = 16). A control group of eighth grade boys (N = 82) was given this questionnaire once. As a group, the boys at admission had much more negative feelings about themselves than did the boys in the control group (p < .01). However, when the mean of the pretest group was compared with the mean of the posttest group (which was more positive in self-concept than the control group), the delinquent boys were found to have a much more positive self-concept at the completion of their stay (p < .01). This shift in self-evaluation was concomitant with a shift in how the boys perceived that significant others (mother, friends, and teachers) evaluated them.

show abstract

“…From the second perspective, socialization-control analyses-and particularly in the early and later development of containment theory (Reckless, 1967;Schwartz & Tangri, 1965)-self-concept was treated as a developing personality variable rather than as an interactional process intervening between individual and group-level events. A favorable selfconcept, as a mechanism of inner containment and as an insulator against deviance, was introduced to explain deviance along with the previously propounded social control factors (i.e., socially institutionalized structures of inducements and constraints).…”

Section: The Integrative Theory and Other Deviance Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of control theories (Briar & Piliavin, 1965;Hirschi, 1969;Polk & Halferty, 1966) and containment perspectives (Reckless, 1967;Reckless, Dinitz, & Murray, 1956;Schwartz & Tangri, 1965;Voss, 1969), impulses toward deviant responses are checked by a variety of socially induced factors. Control theories propose that such factors are related to a person's emotional commitment to the normative order based on earlier gratifications achieved in the course of the normative socialization process.…”

Section: Social Control/bonding Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%