The Logic of Definition in Criminology: Purposes and Methods for Defining “Gangs”

Abstract

This article is aimed at clarifying some of the problems in gang definition by examination of the logic of definition. Definitions are considered in terms of various purposes as well as lexical and stipulative definitional types. Methods of stipulative definition that have been tangled together in gang research and theory are identified as analytic definition and synthetic definition, with the latter including correlational, causal, and definition by description. The article examines how various researchers and theorists have fallen into various errors of logic in use of these methods and how gang research and theory might make more consistent progress through clarification of the definitional issues.

Gangs, Migration, and Crime: The Changing Landscape in Europe and the USA

“…The definition of gangs has been a difficult task, with many attempts to bring clarity to the issue (Decker and Kempf-Leonard1991;Esbensen et al 2001;Ball and Curry 1995;Klein and Maxson 2006). The term "gang" is fraught with considerable definitional diversity in American research, a shortcoming that makes research difficult to compare between cities or nations.…”

Correlates and consequences of pre-incarceration gang involvement among incarcerated youthful felons

“…In order to better explore the heterogeneity in gang membership and criminal behavior, gang involvement was subdivided into three groups: no gang membership, involvement in an unorganized gang, and involvement in an organized/criminal gang. The coding scheme is consistent with the work of Ball and Curry (1995) who suggest that gang membership should be indentified in terms of the weakening of normative ties, not solely the presence of violence As such we separate offenders based on self-reported classification of gang involvement prior to the period of incarceration. The types include "0" for no gang involvement before prison, "1" for "unorganized" gang involvement whereby men reported involvement in gangs prior to imprisonment that did not attempt to control or direct criminal behavior, and finally "2" for those involved in "organized/criminal" gangs that had rules or codes for carrying guns and the gang was organized to commit crime.…”

“…This research also provides evidence that not all gang involvement is the same. As Ball and Curry (1995) note, normative features of particular gangs help explain differential levels of violence and other forms of crime across gangs. Future research should consider the relationship between administrative control decisions such as segregation strategies and how these may influence misconduct outcomes (Huebner, 2003;Useem & Reisig, 1999).…”

Évolution des connaissances sur les gangs de rue. Nouveau regard sur les jeunes qui s’y joignent

“…Mais nous savons aussi que ce problème social ne connaît pas un accroissement linéaire et qu'il suit plutôt un mouvement de type cyclique (Curry et Decker, 2003) 2 , qui est en bonne partie relié à des enjeux de visibilité et de notoriété médiatique (Rollwagen et Béland, 2012). Nous sommes aussi limités par l'absence d'une définition normalisée des trois concepts de gang, de membre de gang et d'incident de gang (Ball et Curry, 1995 ;Covey, Ménard et Franzese, 1992 ;Howell, 1994 ;Parks, 1995 ;Spergel, 1995 ;Spergel et Curry, 1993). Sans compter que les informations dont nous disposons proviennent bien souvent de données policières, dont l'objectif n'est pas d'établir le portrait de la situation, mais bien de faire des enquêtes criminelles.…”