1994
DOI: 10.1007/bf02221211
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reconsidering strain theory: Operationalization, rival theories, and adult criminality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
64
1
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 117 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
2
64
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The findings from this research routinely showed that delinquency was most likely when both aspirations and expectations were low (Agnew, 1985;Burton & Cullen, 1992) results which tended to offer support consistent with control theory. Research utilizing alternative measures of strain, such as perceived blocked opportunities (Burton & Cullen, 1992;Burton, Cullen, Evans, & Dunaway, 1994) or the disjunction between economic goals and educational means (Farnworth & Leiber, 1989) were more supportive of the perspective (although see Jensen, 1995), though results were weakened when competing theories were included in the analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The findings from this research routinely showed that delinquency was most likely when both aspirations and expectations were low (Agnew, 1985;Burton & Cullen, 1992) results which tended to offer support consistent with control theory. Research utilizing alternative measures of strain, such as perceived blocked opportunities (Burton & Cullen, 1992;Burton, Cullen, Evans, & Dunaway, 1994) or the disjunction between economic goals and educational means (Farnworth & Leiber, 1989) were more supportive of the perspective (although see Jensen, 1995), though results were weakened when competing theories were included in the analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Taken together, the theory remains relatively simple: an understanding of the levels of self-control within individuals provides insight into their propensity to offend such that those individuals with lower self-control would be more likely to engage in delinquency and crime. Indeed, empirical tests of Gottfredson and Hirschi's core theoretical hypotheses received extensive support within the criminological community Benson & Moore, 1992;Burton, Cullen, Evans, & Dunaway, 1994;Burton, Evans, Cullen, Olivares, & Dunaway, 1999;Cochran, Wood, Sellers, Wilkerson, & Chamlin, 1998;Evans, Cullen, Burton, Dunaway, & Benson, 1997;Gibbs & Giever, 1995;Gibbs, Giever, & Martin, 1998;Keane, Maxim, & Teevan, 1993;Longshore, Stein, & Turner, 1998;Longshore, Turner, & Stein, 1996;Nagin & Paternoster, 1993;Paternoster & Brame, 1998;Piquero & Tibbetts, 1996;Vazsonyi, Pickering, Junger, & Hessing, 2001;Wood, Pfefferbaum, & Arneklev, 1993).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Consistently, researchers have shown that delinquent peer association is a necessary measure to include in tests of self-control theory (Baron, 2004;Burton, Cullen, Evans, & Dunaway 1994;Burton et aI., 1998;Evans, Cullen, Burton, Dunaway, & Benson, 1997;Perrone et aI., 2004;Pratt & Cullen, 2000). These researchers have argued that concepts of self-control theory are not able to account for the connection between delinquent peer association and offending.…”
Section: Peer Association and Self-controlmentioning
confidence: 98%