2015
DOI: 10.6000/1929-4409.2015.04.06
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Family Structures in Pennsylvania and its Effect on Delinquent Acts: A Data Analysis

Abstract: This paper examines the effect of family structure on delinquent acts. Specifically, whether living arrangement (with both parents, one parent, etc...) has any impact on the type of delinquent act (person or drug) committed. Data for over 2,700 juveniles who committed a substantiated delinquent act in Pennsylvania were examined for possible effects. Two family structure variables had a significant relationship with drug offenses (one in the negative direction), and one family structure variable was associated … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 35 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…White delinquents were less likely to have their case handled formally than non-white white youths, which is also similar to previous research (Kovera, 2019;Leiber & Fix, 2019). Finally, being raised by a single mother was a significant predictor of formal juvenile court involvement compared to all of the other parental living situations, which is also not an uncommon theme in the literature (Demuth & Brown, 2004;Verrecchia & Arp, 2015;Verrecchia & Wood, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…White delinquents were less likely to have their case handled formally than non-white white youths, which is also similar to previous research (Kovera, 2019;Leiber & Fix, 2019). Finally, being raised by a single mother was a significant predictor of formal juvenile court involvement compared to all of the other parental living situations, which is also not an uncommon theme in the literature (Demuth & Brown, 2004;Verrecchia & Arp, 2015;Verrecchia & Wood, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%