W2 Short Answer Worksheet [due Mon]
1 Michael Shader, Ph.D., is a Social Science Program Specialist in the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s (OJJDP’s) Research and Program Development Division.
1
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
by Michael Shader1
The juvenile justice field has spent much time and
energy attempting to understand the causes of
delinquency. Different theoretical models describe
the relationship between variables and outcomes.
Researchers have concluded that there is no single
path to delinquency and note that the presence of
several risk factors often increases a youth’s chance
of offending. Studies also point to the interaction of
risk factors, the multiplicative effect when several
risk factors are present, and how certain protective
factors may work to offset risk factors.
In recent years, the juvenile justice field has
adopted an approach from the public health arena
in an attempt to understand the causes of
delinquency and work toward its prevention
(Farrington, 2000; Moore, 1995). For example, the
medical community’s efforts to prevent cancer and
heart disease have successfully targeted risk factors
(Farrington, 2000). To evaluate a patient’s risk of
suffering a heart attack, a doctor commonly asks
for the patient’s medical history, family history,
diet, weight, and exercise level because each of
these variables has an effect on the patient’s cardiac
health. After this risk assessment, the doctor may
suggest ways for the patient to reduce his or her risk
factors. Similarly, if a youth possesses certain risk
factors, research indicates that these factors will
increase his or her chance of becoming a
delinquent. A risk assessment may aid in
determining the type of intervention that will best
suit the youth’s needs and decrease his or her risk of
offending. Farrington (2000) calls this recent
movement toward the public health model the “risk
factor paradigm,” the basic idea of which is to
“identify the key risk factors for offending and tool
prevention methods designed to counteract them”
(Farrington, 2000:1).
Although much of the research on risk factors that
youth face has focused on predicting serious and
violent offenses, risk factors are relevant to all
levels of delinquency. This article defines risk
factors, explains why they are important, and briefly
discusses some of the major risk factors linked to
delinquency and violence.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
2
What Is a Risk Factor?
Risk factors have been broadly defined as “those
characteristics, variables, or hazards that, if present
for a given individual, make it more likely that this
individual, rather than someone selected from the
general population, will develop a disorder”
(Mrazek and Haggerty, 1994:127). Kazdin and
colleagues (1997) note that a risk factor predicts an
increased probability of later offending. A recent
report from the U.S. Surgeon General more
specifically defines a risk factor as “anything that
increases the probability that a person will suffer
harm” (Office of the Surgeon General, 2001
(chapter 4)).
Psychologists Coie and colleagues (1993) noted the
following regarding risk factors:2
• Dysfunction has a complicated relationship
with risk factors; rarely is one risk factor
associated with a particular disorder.
• The impact of risk factors may vary with the
developmental state of the individual.
• Exposure to multiple risk factors has a
cumulative effect.
• Many disorders share fundamental risk factors.
Four Steps of the Risk Factor Approach
Mercy and O’Carroll (1998) summarize the four steps of the public health approach to decisionmaking as follows:
• Public health surveillance (i.e., developing and refining data systems for ongoing analysis and disseminating data).
• Risk group identification (i.e., identifying individuals at greatest risk of disease or injury and the places, times, and other circumstances associated with increased risk).
• Risk factor exploration (i.e., analytically exploring the potentially causative risk factors).
• Program implementation and evaluation (i.e., designing, implementing, and evaluating preventive measures based on an understanding of the population at risk and the community’s identified risk factors).
The criminal justice field adopted these steps for its risk factor approach. Criminologists compile statistics on the prevalence of crimes through the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports and the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey. They then apply the techniques of risk group identification to crime as they attempt to determine those at greatest risk of offending. Criminal justice researchers explore risk factors by applying theoretical models and statistical techniques to determine which risk factors are linked to crime. The criminal justice sector then works to develop, design, and implement programs that attempt to prevent offending. These programs are then evaluated to determine whether they are successful and cost effective.
Although researchers use risk factors to detect the
likelihood of later offending, many youth with
multiple risk factors never commit delinquent or
violent acts. A risk factor may increase the
probability of offending, but does not make
offending a certainty. 2 Similar conclusions could be drawn in the juvenile justice field regarding delinquent behavior.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
3
What Is a Protective Factor?
Research on risk factors for delinquency has prompted discussion and investigation into influences that may provide a buffer between the presence of risk factors and the onset of delinquency. These buffers are known as protective factors. Pollard, Hawkins, and Arthur (1999:146) note that “protective factors are those factors that mediate or moderate the effect of exposure to risk factors, resulting in reduced incidence of problem behavior.” Rutter (1987) believes that protective factors offset the onset of delinquency via four main processes: reducing risk, reducing negative chain reactions, establishing self-esteem and self-efficacy, and opening up opportunities.
Researchers disagree about what constitutes a protective factor. Protective factors “have been viewed both as the absence of risk and something conceptually distinct from it” (Office of the Surgeon General, 2001 (chapter 4)). The former view looks at risk and protective factors as opposite ends of a continuum. For example, excellent performance in school might be considered a protective factor because it is the opposite of poor performance in school—a known risk factor. The second view of protective factors sees them as “characteristics or conditions that interact with risk factors to reduce their influence on violent behavior” (Office of the Surgeon General, 2001 (chapter 4)). For example, poverty is often seen as a risk factor, but the presence of supportive, involved parents may mediate the negative influence of poverty to lessen a youth’s chance of becoming delinquent.
Why Study Risk Factors?
Several juvenile justice researchers have linked risk
factors to delinquency (Hawkins et al., 1998;
Lipsey and Derzon, 1998), and many have also
noted a multiplicative effect if several risk factors
are present. Herrenkohl and colleagues (2000)
report that a 10-year-old exposed to six or more
risk factors is 10 times as likely to commit a violent
act by age 18 as a 10-year-old exposed to only one
risk factor.
Similarly, the age range or developmental period
during which a youth is exposed to a specific risk
factor is important to individuals working to tailor
prevention programs to specific factors. Youth
Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General (2001
(chapter 4)) elaborates:
Violence prevention and intervention efforts hinge on identifying risk and protective factors and determining when in the course of development they emerge. To be effective, such efforts must be appropriate to a youth’s stage of development. A program that is effective in childhood may be ineffective in adolescence and vice versa. Moreover, the risk and protective factors targeted by violence prevention may be different from those targeted by intervention programs which are designed to prevent the recurrence of violence.
The study of risk factors, therefore, is critical to the
enhancement of prevention programs that frequently
have limited staffing and funding. Identifying which
risk factors may cause delinquency for particular
sets of youth at specific stages of their development
may help programs target their efforts in a more
efficient and cost-effective manner. The table on
page 4, which was adapted from a report by the
Office of the Surgeon General, categorizes risk
factors by age of onset of delinquency and identifies
corresponding protective factors.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
4
Risk and Protective Factors, by Domain
Risk Factor
Domain Early Onset (ages 6–11) Late Onset (ages 12–14) Protective Factor*
Individual General offenses Substance use Being male Aggression** Hyperactivity Problem (antisocial) behavior Exposure to television
violence Medical, physical problems Low IQ Antisocial attitudes, beliefs Dishonesty**
General offenses Restlessness Difficulty concentrating** Risk taking Aggression** Being male Physical violence Antisocial attitudes, beliefs Crimes against persons Problem (antisocial) behavior Low IQ Substance use
Intolerant attitude toward deviance
High IQ Being female Positive social
orientation Perceived sanctions for
transgressions
Family Low socioeconomic status/poverty
Antisocial parents Poor parent-child relationship Harsh, lax, or inconsistent
discipline Broken home Separation from parents Other conditions Abusive parents Neglect
Poor parent-child relationship Harsh or lax discipline Poor monitoring, supervision Low parental involvement Antisocial parents Broken home Low socioeconomic
status/poverty Abusive parents Family conflict**
Warm, supportive relationships with parents or other adults
Parents’ positive evaluation of peers
Parental monitoring
School Poor attitude, performance Poor attitude, performance Academic failure
Commitment to school Recognition for
involvement in conventional activities
Peer group Weak social ties Antisocial peers
Weak social ties Antisocial, delinquent peers Gang membership
Friends who engage in conventional behavior
Community Neighborhood crime, drugs Neighborhood disorganization
* Age of onset not known. ** Males only.
Source: Adapted from Office of the Surgeon General, 2001.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
5
Description of Risk Factors
Various researchers categorize risk factors in
different ways. For the purposes of this article, risk
factors fall under three broad categories:
individual, social, and community. Each of these
categories includes several subcategories (e.g.,
family- and peer-related risk factors are grouped
under the social category). Because an exhaustive
review of all known risk factors linked to
delinquency is beyond the scope of this article,3 the
following summarizes the major risk factors
associated with juvenile delinquency and violence.
Individual-Level Factors
Prenatal and perinatal factors. Several studies
have linked prenatal and perinatal complications
with later delinquent or criminal behavior (Kandel
et al., 1989; Kandel and Mednick, 1991; Raine,
Brennan, and Mednick, 1994). Prenatal and
perinatal complications can lead to a range of
health problems that negatively influence
development (McCord, Widom, and Crowell,
2001). In a prospective study of youth at high risk
for delinquency, Kandel and Mednick (1991) found
that 80 percent of violent offenders rated high in
delivery complications compared with 47 percent
of nonoffenders.
However, some of the evidence regarding the
association between pregnancy and delivery
complications and delinquency has been conflicting
(Hawkins et al., 1998). For example, neither
Denno’s (1990) study of Philadelphia youth nor
Farrington’s (1997) Cambridge study found a
connection between pregnancy and delivery
complications and violence. Mednick and Kandel
(1988) linked pregnancy and delivery complications
to violent behavior, but not to nonviolent criminal
behavior. In addition, some studies have shown that
children whose mothers smoked cigarettes
frequently during pregnancy were more likely to
display conduct disorders and other problem
behaviors (Fergusson, Horwood, and Lynskey,
1993; Wakschlag et al., 1997). Although the results
are inconsistent, the available data illustrate the
need to study further the relationship between
prenatal care, delivery complications, and the
resulting health problems and juvenile delinquency
(Hawkins et al., 1998).
Psychological, behavioral, and mental
characteristics. Several individual-specific
characteristics are linked to delinquency. Tremblay
and LeMarquand (2001:141) remarked that “the
best social behavior characteristic to predict
delinquent behavior before age 13 appears to be
aggression.” In addition, Hawkins and colleagues
(1998:113) reviewed several studies and reported “a
3 For a complete review of risk factors, see chapter 3 in Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice (McCord, Widom, and Crowell, 2001).
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
6
positive relationship between hyperactivity,
concentration or attention problems, impulsivity
and risk taking and later violent behavior.” Low
verbal IQ and delayed language development have
both been linked to delinquency; these links remain
even after controlling for race and class (Moffitt,
Lynam, and Silva, 1994; Seguin et al., 1995).
Similarly, problems at school can lead to
delinquency. Herrenkohl and colleagues
(2001:223) noted that “children with low academic
performance, low commitment to school, and low
educational aspirations during the elementary and
middle school grades are at higher risk for child
delinquency than are other children.”
Social Factors
Family structure. Family characteristics such as
poor parenting skills, family size, home discord,
child maltreatment, and antisocial parents are risk
factors linked to juvenile delinquency (Derzon and
Lipsey, 2000; Wasserman and Seracini, 2001).
McCord’s (1979) study of 250 boys found that
among boys at age 10, the strongest predictors of
later convictions for violent offenses (up to age 45)
were poor parental supervision, parental conflict,
and parental aggression, including harsh, punitive
discipline. Some research has linked being raised in
a single-parent family with increased delinquency
(McCord, Widom, and Crowell, 2001); however,
when researchers control for socioeconomic
conditions, these differences are minimized
(Austin, 1978; Crockett, Eggebeen, and Hawkins,
1993). Some research has shown that children from
families with four or more children have an
increased chance of offending (Wasserman and
Seracini, 2001; West and Farrington, 1973).
Peer influences. Several studies have found a
consistent relationship between involvement in a
delinquent peer group and delinquent behavior.
Lipsey and Derzon (1998) noted that for youth ages
12–14, a key predictor variable for delinquency is
the presence of antisocial peers. According to
McCord and colleagues (2001:80), “Factors such as
peer delinquent behavior, peer approval of
delinquent behavior, attachment or allegiance to
peers, time spent with peers, and peer pressure for
deviance have all been associated with adolescent
antisocial behavior.” Conversely, Elliot (1994)
reported that spending time with peers who
disapprove of delinquent behavior may curb later
violence. The influence of peers and their
acceptance of delinquent behavior is significant,
and this relationship is magnified when youth have
little interaction with their parents (Steinberg,
1987).
Community Factors
Farrington (2000:5) noted that “only in the 1990’s
have the longitudinal researchers begun to pay
sufficient attention to neighborhood and community
factors, and there is still a great need for them to
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
7
investigate immediate situational influences on
offending.” As described below, the environment
in which youth are reared can influence the
likelihood of delinquency.
School policies. The National Research Council
and the Institute of Medicine reviewed the impact
of school policies concerning grade retention,4
suspension and expulsion, and school tracking of
juvenile delinquency. These organizations reported
that such policies, which disproportionately affect
minorities, have negative consequences for at-risk
youth (McCord, Widom, and Crowell, 2001). For
example, suspension and expulsion do not appear
to reduce undesirable behavior, and both are linked
to increased delinquent behavior. In addition,
Heal’s (1978) cross-sectional study of primary and
secondary schools in England found that large
schools with formal and severe punishment
structures in place had more incidents of students
misbehaving.
Neighborhood. Existing research points to a
powerful connection between residing in an
adverse environment and participating in criminal
acts (McCord, Widom, and Crowell, 2001).
Sociological theories of deviance hypothesize that
“disorganized neighborhoods have weak social
control networks; that weak social control,
resulting from isolation among residents and high
residential turnover, allows criminal activity to go
unmonitored” (Herrenkohl et al., 2001:221).
Although researchers debate the interaction between
environmental and personal factors, most agree that
“living in a neighborhood where there are high
levels of poverty and crime increases the risk of
involvement in serious crime for all children
growing up there” (McCord, Widom, and Crowell,
2001:89).
Conclusion
The risk factor paradigm is a promising approach to
understanding the problem of juvenile delinquency.
The Program of Research on the Causes and
Correlates of Delinquency, partially funded by
OJJDP, is one example of a longitudinal study of
youth that is helping to detect the importance of
various risk factors for delinquency. Future research
should continue to study the interrelationships
between risk factors and delinquency and attempt to
clarify how risk factors interact to create a
cumulative effect. Similarly, researchers should
continue studying the interaction between risk and
protective factors and exploring why some youth
exposed to multiple risk factors do not commit
delinquent acts.
The development of the risk factor model, however,
has its problems. Farrington (2000:16) remarks that
“the main problems lie in the definition and
identification of risk and protective factors, in4 Grade retention occurs when teachers hold students back a grade level at the end of the school year.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
8
establishing what are causes, in choosing
interventions based on identified risk and
protective factors, in evaluating multiple
component and area-based interventions, and in
assessing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness
of components of interventions.”
One question confronting those who would develop
delinquency prevention programs based on risk
factor research is whether a given risk factor can
easily be changed. For example, research has
shown that low socioeconomic status is associated
with increased levels of delinquency. Although
socioeconomic conditions may be hard to change,
programs may seek to increase certain protective
factors to offset the risk. Other risk factors are
more amenable to change. Poor parenting, for
example, can be addressed by programs that teach
parenting skills and provide family support
services.
The prevention of delinquency is a complex
problem with no simple solutions. Risk factor
analysis offers a way to determine which youth are
most likely to become delinquent. The approach
also allows practitioners to tailor prevention
programs to the unique needs of individual youth
and communities.
References
Austin, R.L. 1978. Race, father absence and female
delinquency. Criminology 15(4):487–504.
Coie, J.D., Watt, N.F., West, S.G., Hawkins, D.,
Asarnow, J.R., Markman, H.J., Ramey, S.L., Shure,
M.B., and Long, B. 1993. The science of
prevention: A conceptual framework and some
directions for a national research program.
American Psychologist 48(10):1013–1022.
Crockett, L.J., Eggebeen, D.J., and Hawkins, A.J.
1993. Father’s presence and young children’s
behavioral and cognitive adjustment. Journal of
Family Issues 14(3):355–377.
Denno, D.W. 1990. Biology and Violence: From
Birth to Adulthood. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Derzon, J.H., and Lipsey, M.W. 2000. The
correspondence of family features with problem,
aggressive, criminal and violent behavior.
Unpublished manuscript. Nashville, TN: Institute
for Public Policy Studies, Vanderbilt University.
Elliott, D.S. 1994. Serious violent offenders: Onset,
developmental course, and termination—The
American Society of Criminology 1993 presidential
address. Criminology 32(1):1–21.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
9
Farrington, D.P. 1997. Early prediction of violent
and non-violent youthful offending. European
Journal on Criminal Policy and Research
5(2):51–66.
Farrington, D.P. 2000. Explaining and preventing
crime: The globalization of knowledge—The
American Society of Criminology 1999
presidential address. Criminology 38(1):1–24.
Fergusson, D.M., Horwood, L.J., and Lynskey,
M.T. 1993. Maternal smoking before and after
pregnancy: Effects on behavioral outcomes in
middle childhood. Pediatrics 92(6):815–822.
Hawkins, J.D., Herrenkohl, T.L., Farrington, D.P.,
Brewer, D., Catalano, R.F., and Harachi, T.W.
1998. A review of predictors of youth violence. In
Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk
Factors and Successful Interventions, edited by R.
Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, pp. 106–146.
Heal, K. 1978. Misbehavior among school
children: The roles of the school in strategies for
prevention. Policy and Politics 6:321–332.
Herrenkohl, T.L., Hawkins, J.D., Chung, I., Hill,
K.G., and Battin-Pearson, S. 2001. School and
community risk factors and interventions. In Child
Delinquents: Development, Intervention, and
Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber and D.P.
Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
pp. 211–246.
Herrenkohl, T.L., Maguin, E., Hill, K.G., Hawkins,
J.D., Abbott, R.D., and Catalano, R.F. 2000.
Developmental risk factors for youth violence.
Journal of Adolescent Health 26(7):176–186.
Kandel, E., Brennan, P.A., Mednick, S.A., and
Michelson, N.M. 1989. Minor psychical anomalies
and recidivistic adult violent criminal behavior.
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia 79:103–107.
Kandel, E., and Mednick, S.A. 1991. Perinatal
complications predict violent offending.
Criminology 29(3):519–529.
Kazdin, A.E., Kraemer, H.C., Kessler, R.C., Kupfer,
D.J., and Offord, D.R. 1997. Contributions of risk
factor research to developmental psychopathology.
Clinical Psychology Review 17:375–406.
Lipsey, M.W., and Derzon, J.H. 1998. Predictors of
violent or serious delinquency in adolescence and
early adulthood: A synthesis of longitudinal
research. In Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders:
Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, edited by
R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, pp. 86–105.
McCord, J. 1979. Some child-rearing antecedents of
criminal behavior in adult men. Journal of
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
10
Personality and Social Psychology
37(9):1477–1486.
McCord, J., Widom, C.S., and Crowell, N.A., eds.
2001. Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice. Panel on
Juvenile Crime: Prevention, Treatment, and
Control. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press.
Mednick, S.A., and Kandel, E.S. 1988. Congenital
determinants of violence. Bulletin of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
16(2):101–109.
Mercy, J.A., and O’Carroll, P.W. 1998. New
directions in violence prevention: The
public health arena. Violence and Victims
3(4):285–301.
Moffitt, T.E., Lynam, D., and Silva, P.A. 1994.
Neuropsychological tests predict persistent male
delinquency. Criminology 32(2):101–124.
Moore, M.H. 1995. Public health and criminal
justice approaches to prevention. In Building a
Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime
Prevention, edited by M. Tonry and D. Farrington.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Mrazek, P.J., and Haggerty, R.J., eds. 1994.
Reducing Risks for Mental Disorders: Frontiers for
Preventative Intervention Research. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Office of the Surgeon General. 2001. Youth
Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of
Public Health and Science, Office of the Surgeon
General. Retrieved from
www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence.
Pollard, J.A., Hawkins, D., and Arthur, M.W. 1999.
Risk and protective factors: Are both necessary to
understand diverse behavioral outcomes in
adolescence? Social Work Research 23(3):145–158.
Raine, A., Brennan, P., and Mednick, S.A. 1994.
Birth complications combined with early maternal
rejection at age 1 year predispose to violent crime at
age 18 years. Archives of General Psychiatry
53:544–549.
Rutter, M. 1987. Psychosocial resilience and
protective mechanisms. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry 57(3):316–331.
Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview
11
Seguin, J.R., Pihl, R.O., Harden, P.W., Tremblay,
R.E., and Boulrice, B. 1995. Cognitive and
neuropsychological characteristics of psychically
aggressive boys. Journal of Abnormal Psychology
104(4):614–624.
Steinberg, L. 1987. Single parents, stepparents, and
the susceptibility of adolescents to antisocial peer
pressure. Child Development 58(1):269–275.
Tremblay, R.E., and LeMarquand, D. 2001.
Individual risk and protective factors. In Child
Delinquents: Development, Intervention, and
Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber and D.P.
Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, pp. 137–164.
Wakschlag, L.S., Lahey, B.B., Loeber, R., Green,
S.M., Gordon, R.A., and Leventhal, B.L. 1997.
Maternal smoking during pregnancy and the risk of
conduct disorder in boys. Archives of General
Psychiatry 54(7):670–676.
Wasserman, G.A., and Seracini, A.G. 2001. Family
risk factors and interventions. In Child
Delinquents: Development, Intervention, and
Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber and D.P.
Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, pp. 165–189.
West, D.J., and Farrington, D.P. 1973. Who
Becomes Delinquent? London, England:
Heinemann.