Life Stress, Anger and Anxiety, and Delinquency: An Empirical Test of General Strain Theory

Abstract

General strain theory (Agnew 1992) departs from traditional strain theories by emphasizing the role of the individual's affective responses to negative life experiences in fostering deviant behavior In this analysis, we examine the central hypotheses of general strain theory using data from a three-wave panel study of high school youths in the Boston metropolitan area (N = 939). Covariance structure models reveal that anger and hostility in response to negative life events do play a causal role in fostering more aggressive forms of delinquency, but are not significantly related to either nonaggressive delinquency or marijuana use. Furthermore, the conditional effects predicted by general strain theory, in which the impact of strain on delinquency varies by youths 'personal and social resources, are inconsistent. Discussion centers on the prospect of increasing the utility of general strain theory by further imbuing it with concepts and perspectives from the sociology of mental illness. After several years in which they were out of favor, the past decade has seen renewed interest in strain theories of deviance. This resurgence has been fueled in large part by Agnew's general strain theory (Agnew 1992), which departs from traditional strain theories (see

The moderating effects of religiosity on the relationship between stressful life events and delinquent behavior

“…Many of the main concepts pertaining to GST have been thoroughly tested, most specifically, the direct relationship between strain and delinquency. Overall, the research has consistently found a positive relationship between strain and delinquent behavior (e.g., Agnew, 2002;Agnew et al, 2002;Agnew & White, 1992;Aseltine et al, 2000;Brezina, Piquero, & Mazerolle, 2001;Hay, 2003;Paternoster & Mazerolle, 1994). Indeed, in almost every published test of GST, at least one measure of strain has been found to positively influence delinquency.…”

“…Research has failed to find consistent support for the conditioning hypothesis of GST in explaining delinquency (e.g., Agnew & White, 1992;Aseltine et al, 2000;Brezina, 1996;Hay, 2003;Hoffmann & Miller, 1998;Mazerolle & Maahs, 2000;Paternoster & Mazerolle, 1994;Piquero & Sealock, 2000;Robbers, 2004). A number of possible conditioning factors have been examined including social support (e.g., Robbers, 2004), self-esteem (e.g., Hoffmann & Miller, 1998), depression (e.g., Piquero & Sealock, 2000), anger (e.g., Hay, 2003), delinquent peer exposure (e.g., Piquero & Sealock, 2004), religiosity (e.g., Jang & Johnson, 2005), and others.…”

“…Several tests of GST relating to delinquency have included self-esteem as a conditioning variable (Aseltine et al, 2000;Brezina, 1996;Hoffmann & Cerbone, 1999;Hoffmann & Miller, 1998). Using data from a study conducted in a large midwestern city in the United States, Hoffmann and Miller (1998) performed a longitudinal test of GST that examined, among other things, the impact of self-esteem on the relationship between negative life events and delinquency.…”

“…Conversely, findings are mixed with regard to the role of conditioning effects on the strain-delinquency relationship. (e.g., Agnew, Brezina, Wright, & Cullen, 2002;Agnew & White, 1992;Aseltine, Gore, & Gordon, 2000;Hay, 2003;Mazerolle & Maahs, 2000;Piquero & Sealock, 2000).…”

Comprehensive assessment of youth violence in five Caribbean countries: Gender and age differences

“…This theory provides an explanation of why an individual commits a delinquent act when needs and/or goals go unmet (Gentle-Genitty, 2013). The theory suggests that deviant behaviors --which go against societal norms-arise from some discrepancy between personal goal motivation and opportunities for goal achievement (Agnew, 1992;Aseltine, Gordon, & Gore, 2000;Brezina, Piquero, & Mazerolle, 2001). The final theory informing the work is social disorganization theory.…”