Social Class and Delinquent Behavior in a National Youth Panel: 1976–1980

Abstract

This article addresses the question of whether or not a more adequate measure of self-reported delinquency applied to a representative national sample would reveal class differences in r l e l i m that have not been found in earlier self-report studies. The methodolopacal criticisms of earlier self-report m asures are reviewed, a new self-report measure is described, annual sex-by-class-spei$fic prevalence and incidence rates based on this neu, memre are presented for a national youth panel for the years 1976 through 1980, and the implications of the class findings are discussed. Class differences in both prevalence and incidence are found for serious offenses. For males, class differences are also found in the incidence of nonseriolGs offeyes and global deli-.Class differences are w e pervmve and stronger when using an incidence as opposed to a prevalence measure. Criticisms of earlier selfreport measures appear+tified, calling into Question conclusions about the distribution of delinquency in the adolescent population which are based on prim self-report data. Boulder, Colorado At the heart of the current controversy over the relationship between delinquency and social class are some fundamental questions about the conceptualization and measurement of delinquency. Conceptually, most researchers acknowledge that self-reported measures are more direct measures of delinquent behavior than arrest records. However, studies AUTHORS'NOTE: Thisstudywassupporkd bg GrantMH27552frmthe Center for Studies of Crime and Deli-,

Gender differences in partner violence in a birth cohort of 21-year-olds: Bridging the gap between clinical and epidemiological approaches.

“…The present study indicates that at least as many women as men are violent toward their partners. These results corroborate previous surveys of community samples in the United States (Elliott et al, 1985;O'Leary et al, 1989;Straus & Gelles, 1986). The gender similarities are counterintuitive.…”

“…In contrast, surveys of birth cohorts such as ours, which sample the full range of involvement in partner violence, support generalizable conclusions about the epidemiology and correlates of partner violence. Our findings and other studies (Elliott et al, 1985;Straus & Gelles, 1986;Straus et al, 1980) have shown women to behave at least as violently as men. However, the interpretation of violent behavior perpetrated by men and women must be informed by knowledge about the consequences of violence, the context in which it occurred, the motives of perpetrators, and their personal characteristics.…”

“…For comparison purposes, we give the perpetration and victimization rates only for young adults (see Figure 1 ): under age 25 in the NFVS (n = 397) as reported by Fagan and Browne (1994), and under age 24 in the NYS (n = 477; Elliott et al, 1985). Because the NFVS and the NYS excluded dating couples, the Dunedin rates are presented first for cohabiting study members only (including married and nonmarried, n = 250), and then for cohabiting and dating individuals combined (n = 861 ).…”

“…The CTS have been used in numerous clinical studies as well as in U.S. national surveys of the prevalence of marital violence (Elliott et al, 1985;Straus & Gelles, 1986;Straus et al, 1980). We report CTS scores because they allow us to compare the Dunedin findings to those from nationally representative surveys of Americans.…”

“…These included a history of conduct disorder before age 15, irresponsible negligence toward family and work, illegal behaviors, fighting, financial mismanagement, lying, conning, and recklessness. Stranger violence was measured during individual interviews with a modified version of the standardized instrument developed by Elliott et al for the NYS (Elliott et al, 1985). The measure of stranger violence indicates how many of five different offenses the respondent committed at least once during the past 12 months: simple assault, aggravated assault, rape, robbery, and gang fighting.…”