Assignment 1: Issues with Criminal Justice

International Social Science Review

Volume 93 | Issue 1 Article 2

The Emerging Adulthood Gap: Integrating Emerging Adulthood into Life Course Criminology Christopher Salvatore Montclair State University

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr

Part of the Anthropology Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Social Science Review by an authorized editor of Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository.

Recommended Citation Salvatore, Christopher () "The Emerging Adulthood Gap: Integrating Emerging Adulthood into Life Course Criminology," International Social Science Review: Vol. 93 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. Available at: http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

The Emerging Adulthood Gap: Integrating Emerging Adulthood into Life Course Criminology

Cover Page Footnote An earlier draft of this paper was presented at the 2015 annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society in Boston MA. Christopher Salvatore, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Justice Studies at Montclair State University.

This article is available in International Social Science Review: http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

The Emerging Adulthood Gap:

Integrating Emerging Adulthood into Life Course Criminology

In 1993, clinical psychologist Terrie Moffitt presented a developmental theory that

describes two key offending trajectories, the adolescent limited and life course persistent.1 The

adolescent limited trajectory group consists of individuals who mainly engage in lower-level

crimes, such as underage drinking and shoplifting, and typically desist by approximately age

eighteen. In the second group are individuals in the life-course persistent trajectory, who engage

in antisocial behavior earlier in their life course, participate in both lower-level and more serious

crimes, such as robberies and assault, as well as the lower-level offenses typical of adolescent

limited offenders. These life course persistent offenders do not desist, but instead continue their

involvement in offending through adulthood.

Key to Moffitt’s work is the idea of the maturity gap, defined as the delay between

biological and social maturation, during which adolescents engage in offending due to the

frustration experienced by being biologically, but not socially mature, and thereby unable to fully

participate in adult society.2 According to Moffitt, most young offenders are on an adolescent

limited trajectory, and offend as a result of the maturity gap desisting once they reach social

maturity and are able to participate in the economy. In other words, once youth reach social

maturity and are able to fully participate in “adult” society they generally stop engaging in the

types of delinquency common during adolescence. For example, an individual may shoplift and

fence goods as a way of making money in high school, but once they graduate, they may stop

engaging in that behavior since they now have a credential that allows access to higher paying

jobs.

More recently, research has begun to incorporate emerging adulthood into the discourse

surrounding antisocial behavior. Recent studies explore the potential for criminal onset during

1

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

emerging adulthood, changes in offending behavior during emerging adulthood, the influence of

turning points and social bonds on offending during emerging adulthood, as well as the influence

of emerging adulthood on sexual behaviors and drug use.3 Although these studies lay a solid

foundation in the area of emerging adulthood, bringing it into the social science discourse, they

have yet to fully conceptualize and theoretically link emerging adulthood into the offending

literature. For example, the criminal career paradigm has been firmly linked to developmental

stages in the life course. Scholars have found that offending onset, participation, frequency, and

desistance are fairly well established concepts in relation to developmental life stages.4

However, the same cannot be said about empirical research on emerging adulthood. Studies such

as the ones conducted by Christopher Salvatore, Travis Taniguchi, and Wayne Welsh provide

support for the notion that emerging adulthood could be integrated into Moffitt’s developmental

taxonomy but stop short of integrating the ideas empirically due to a lack of longitudinal

analyses.5 Due to the need for this integration, it is necessary to place emerging adulthood

within the context of the criminological literature and connect it conceptually and empirically to

existing research.

The National Institute of Justice supports the importance of emerging adulthood as an

area of criminological inquiry. It conducted a large-scale project that focused on adolescence and

emerging adulthood. The project, a “Study Group on the Transitions from Juvenile Delinquency

to Adult Crime,” had the goal of reviewing research findings about offending during the

transition from adolescence to adulthood, as well as exploring the policy implications for the

criminal justice system. The “Study Group” utilized several developmental perspectives to

review the scientific evidence focusing on offending behaviors between the ages of fifteen and

twenty-nine. Two key conclusions emerged from the study: there is a large gap in the research

2

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

dealing with this time period and there is a need for more research exploring why some

adolescents transition out of crime during emerging adulthood, whereas others continue to

offend.6

The above studies provide a useful starting point and establish emerging adulthood as a

legitimate area of criminological inquiry, as well as the continued need for integration of

emerging adulthood into theoretical paradigms in criminology. The aim of this study is to

provide such integration by providing a theoretical mechanism, the ‘emerging adulthood gap,’

which integrates emerging adulthood into the life course or developmental area of criminological

theory. This paper will present the ‘what’ of the emerging adulthood gap by introducing the

concept and integrating it into existing theoretical paradigms, the ‘how’ by examining how social

circumstances have altered the life course leading to the evolution of emerging adulthood as a

distinct stage of the life course and to the ‘emerging adulthood gap,’ and the ‘why’ of the

‘emerging adulthood gap’ by discussing the decreased level of informal social controls

experienced by those in emerging adulthood, which may make those in this stage of the life

course prone to offending, substance abuse, and risky behaviors as part of their identity

exploration and the instability characteristic of emerging adulthood, thereby tying emerging

adulthood into criminological theory.

Emerging Adulthood and Offending: An Overview

First discussed by Jeffrey Arnett in 1994, emerging adulthood is a developmental stage

that occurs between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five. Emerging adulthood is often

characterized by instability and as an age of exploration, during which drug, alcohol, and

sexuality experimentation are common.7 Essential is the understanding that emerging adulthood

is not the adolescence or young adulthood of the past.8 The journey from childhood to adulthood

3

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

is different than it was decades ago, with the key difference being that this process lasts far

longer.9 Changes in society, including delays in marriage and parenting, the commodification of

higher education, and identity exploration, all have been identified as components that have led

to the evolution of emerging adulthood as a unique stage of the life course.10 Furthermore, many

in emerging adulthood experience an increase in social freedom as they are no longer subjected

to the informal social controls of adolescence, such as parents and teachers. This increased level

of social freedom provides opportunities for emerging adults to engage in risky and dangerous

behaviors, including unsafe sex, substance use, and crime.

The convergence between emerging adulthood and antisocial behaviors is well

established. Studies consistently find that dangerous and risky behaviors, such as binge drinking,

smoking, unsafe driving, and unsafe sexual practices are all common in populations of emerging

adults.11 Turning more specifically to crime, Alex Piquero, Robert Brame, Paul Mazerolle, and

Rudy Haapanen conducted one of the first studies to examine the influence of emerging

adulthood on criminal activity, finding that arrest rates for both violent and nonviolent crimes

peaked in their early twenties—i.e. during emerging adulthood. Additionally, they found that

increases in social bonds, such as marriage, decreased arrests for nonviolent offenses, but did not

influence arrests for violent crime.12 In another study, Terrie Moffitt, Avshalom Caspi, Honalee

Harrington, and Barry Milne used data from the Dunedin study to examine offenders in their

mid-twenties, noting that many adolescent limited offenders were engaging in property crimes,

substance use, and had other issues, such as financial problems.13 Moffitt and her team note that

emerging adulthood may have played a role in why those identified as adolescent limited

offenders had yet to ‘age out’ as her original conceptualization of the Adolescent Limited

4

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

Offender in her 1993 dual taxonomy.14 Both Piquero’s and Moffitt’s work provide evidence to

suggest that emerging adulthood has impacted youth offending.

Subsequent studies incorporate the developmental processes indicative of emerging

adulthood into explaining offending during this stage of the life course. Robert Marcus utilized

data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) to examine

violent offending during emerging adulthood. Consistent with Arnett’s work, Marcus found

sensation seeking and violent offending declined as the sample aged out of emerging adulthood,

and married.15 More recently, Salvatore and Taniguchi used Add Health data to examine the role

of social bonds and turning points identified in the life course literature—including in John Laub

and Robert Sampon’s 2003 landmark study—as influencing desistance. The results of their study

provides support for the role of social bonds and turning points such as employment, marriage,

parenthood, economic stability, and property ownership as influencing desistance during

emerging adulthood.16 Sung Joon Jang and Jeremy Rhodes also utilized Add Health data to

examine the effects of strain on crime and drug use during emerging adulthood. Examples of

strain that could influence offending and substance use during emerging adulthood include the

ending of a romantic relationship, the loss of a job, or association with anti-social peers. Jang and

Rhodes found that the effects of strain on offending and substance use were exacerbated during

emerging adulthood by social bonds with offending peers and low-self-control.17 The results of

the abovementioned studies support Arnett’s theory, as well as suggesting that there may be a

‘maturity gap’ in emerging adulthood like that identified by scholars during adolescence.

The Life Course Perspective: A Theoretical Framework for the Emerging Adulthood Gap

The life course perspective is the study of individual level changes in offending over

time.18 It is a multidisciplinary paradigm that incorporates ideas from biology, sociology,

5

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

psychology, criminal justice, and criminology. Instead of being a theory in the traditional sense,

it is an alternative way of looking at and understanding human development.19 Rolf Loeber and

Marc LeBlac state that developmental criminology is the study of origins and dynamics of

antisocial behaviors and offending according to age, and second, the examination of causal

factors that are precursors to, or occur with, behavioral development that influence the life

course.20 Farrington argues that developmental and life course criminology is focused on

documenting and explaining offending throughout a person’s life course.21 Other scholars, like

Laub and Sampson, simplify the concept to the idea of making sense of people’s lives.

Glen H. Elder, considered the preeminent figure in life course criminology, defined the

life course in 1985 as the interconnected trajectory an individual has as they age through life.22

A trajectory is defined as a sequence of linked stages within a set of experiences or range of

behavior. For example, an individual’s career trajectory is a series of linked stages, as people

age, they go through stages of their career from entry level through executive positions, ceasing

at retirement at approximately age sixty-five. As individuals move through their career

trajectory, they move up in positions and levels in an organization. Entering into an

administrative position could mark a change in the trajectory known as a transition. Transitions

are built into trajectories, and the stages that are part of the trajectory are connected to each other

by transitions.23 For example, an individual who is casually dating someone may engage in drug

dealing as a way to supplement their income. Once their relationship becomes more formalized

through an engagement, they may no longer sell drugs, opting for a more respectable (legal) part-

time job to supplement their income. However, if the relationship ends, so may the stabilizing

force it provided, and the individual may revert to drug sales to supplement their income.

6

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

Turning our focus to the influence of social and biological maturation on offending, in

addition to Moffitt’s abovementioned developmental taxonomy other theoretical models explain

key features of social and biological maturation (the ‘what’ examined in how the transition to

adulthood leads to decreased offending), its origins (the ‘why’ most people stop or decrease

offending as they reach adult social roles and turning points), and the cause of these changes (the

‘how’).

Laub and Sampson’s model of age-graded social control focuses on the role of turning

points, such as marriage, employment, and military service, in understanding the process of

change in an offender.24 Elder defines turning points as changes in the life course which have the

ability to alter life trajectories.25 Sampson and Laub conceptualize turning points as a process

that occurs over time instead of drastic changes that occur instantly; turning points may be the

causative agent that starts the process of change in an individual.26 For example, getting a job

may not instantly cause an individual to cease offending, but it may start a process through

which an individual gradually moves towards building conventional bonds to their employer and

coworkers, and gradually moves away from relationships with deviant peers. This summary of

the life course theoretical paradigm, while brief, captures the essence of the increasingly

prominent perspective. The life course perspective is a natural fit for emerging adulthood and the

‘emerging adulthood gap.’

Emerging Adulthood in the Context of the Moffitt’s Developmental Taxonomy

Historically, adolescence is the period where identity exploration occurs and therefore

delinquency is common. Moffitt argues that developmental changes in antisocial behaviors are

best explained by her developmental taxonomy. This theory makes the distinction between two

types of offenders: adolescent limited (AL) and life course persistent (LCP) offenders. ALs

7

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

generally have normal childhood backgrounds and start offending during adolescence, usually

engaging in nonviolent crime, and desisting as they transition to adult social roles. In contrast,

LCPs demonstrate antisocial behaviors in earlier in childhood, have less stable childhoods,

commit nonviolent and violent offending during adolescence, and continue to commit violent

crime in adulthood. LCPs account for approximately 6 percent of the male population, but

commit roughly 50 percent of all violent crime.27

A large amount of scholarship has been devoted to testing Moffitt’s developmental

taxonomy, with the bulk of the research examining LCP offenders. Two conditions in early

childhood are hypothesized to be the origin to LCP offending. The first is that LCPS suffer from

neuropsychological deficits such as ADHD. These deficits are believed to be caused by several

factors, including maternal drug and alcohol use during pregnancy, inadequate prenatal nutrition,

birth complications, genetic factors, and pre- and postnatal exposure to toxic agents such as

lead.28 Moffitt identifies that harsh, abusive, and criminogenic home environments during

childhood are key to the development of an LCP offender. In other words, Moffitt suggests that

abusive, neglectful parenting can amplify the effects of neuropsychological deficits, whereas a

more stable, prosocial family environment could reduce or nullify the antisocial effects of

neuropsychological deficits.

Moffitt argues that LCPs may precipitate some of the offending in others, thereby

furthering the development of ALs offending. Reflecting social learning theory, Moffitt suggests

that ALs offenders were mimicking these behaviors to look more adult and penetrate the

‘maturity gap’ between biological and social maturity. She further states that the maturity gap is

rooted in the fact that adolescents are sexually mature, yet they are still prevented from

participating in adult behaviors such as military service, consuming alcohol, and working.29

8

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

Essentially, ALs challenge the maturity gap by imitating the behavior of their LCPs counterparts.

The maturity gap can also be applied to desistance. As adolescents age, they are allowed more

adult privileges and also build social bonds through marriage and employment that act to reduce,

then erase the maturity gap. As such, those ALs who do not encounter any of the “snares”

(defined by Moffitt as factors such as addiction or precocious pregnancy) that would knock ALs

‘off track’ and prevent their natural desistance.30 ALs should desist; the potential influence of

emerging adulthood could, however, act to create a new ‘emerging adulthood’ gap that allows

opportunities for offending. The question becomes does emerging adulthood act as a ‘snare’ for

ALs? If emerging adulthood does act as a ‘snare,’ how should it be integrated into criminological

theory?

It may be possible that emerging adulthood acts to stimulate adult onset offending. Arnett

argues that emerging adulthood is characterized by identity exploration which can be expressed

through substance use and other forms of risky and dangerous behaviors.31 Many prior studies

exploring adult onset antisocial behavior has been limited by two criticisms: 1) it is an artifact of

criminal record and 2) it does not exist because of the low base rate.32 Prior research provides

inconsistent findings regarding if adult onset offending is an artifact of criminal records. Several

studies using self-report data have not found evidence for adult onset trajectories.33 Conversely,

several other studies using self-report data have found support for the existence of adult onset

offending.34 Based on the existing evidence, there has yet to be a consensus reached regarding

the role of emerging adulthood as a factor on adult onset offending, potentially through an

emerging adulthood ‘gap’ similar to Moffitt’s ‘maturity gap.’

A key issue to acknowledge is that the majority of the studies that did not find evidence

for adult onset offending trajectories collected data before the 1990s. The participants in those

9

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

studies did not experience the social changes indicative of emerging adulthood identified by

Arnett as occurring between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five. These changes include

postponement of marriage, the commodification of, and extension of education, as well as

increased parental support that many experience by ‘boomeranging’ back to their parents’

home.35 As previously discussed, the bulk of emerging adults experience increased levels of

freedom without the adult supervision of their high school years. This is of particular note as

emerging adults can be separated into two general groups, those who either attend or do not

attend college.

In 2007, Arnett raised the issue of subgroups in emerging adulthood, specifically those

who are and are not involved in higher education.36 Many in emerging adulthood, seeking to be

competitive in an ever increasingly competitive global job market, continue their education in

college, where they are subjected to a variety of life changes, such as stress, pressure to perform,

and the autonomy of college and university life, whereas others do not attend college and may

struggle to find jobs that allow them to earn a living wage.37

During emerging adulthood individuals are no longer subjected to teacher or parental

controls compared to childhood and the earlier years of adolescence, yet they have not

established permanent romantic relationships or bonds with employers and coworkers that can

act to inhibit antisocial behaviors in adulthood. The increased freedom of emerging adulthood

provides opportunities to engage in identity exploration through sexual and substance abuse

experimentation.38 Therefore, emerging adulthood may place some in a socially constructed

snare or ‘emerging adulthood gap’ during which they engage in antisocial behaviors.

Although previous studies provide evidence for the onset of antisocial behavior in young

adulthood, investigate the role of emerging adults bonds to parents on influencing offending

10

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

trajectories, and present the idea of an extension to Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy, it is not

clear if there is a ‘gap’ in emerging adulthood that operates in a similar manner to the maturity

gap Moffitt identifies as the causative factor for most adolescents antisocial behaviors.39 Here, it

is proposed that there is ‘emerging adulthood gap’ that may explain why some offend during

emerging adulthood whereas others do not participate in antisocial behaviors.

The discussion to this point reviews the life course paradigm, establishing that emerging

adulthood is a valid and important area of criminological inquiry, and lays a foundation for the

goals of this paper: 1) presenting the emerging adulthood gap (defining ‘what’ it is); 2)

describing the social and economic changes that have allowed emerging adulthood—and in turn

the ‘emerging adulthood gap’—to develop (defining ‘how’ it occurs); and 3) to exam through

what mechanisms the ‘emerging adulthood gap’ works (the ‘why’ of it).

The Emerging Adulthood Gap: The “What” of it

As established above, emerging adulthood is a distinct stage of the life course that

criminologists and other social scientists have explored over the last twenty years. An ever

increasing portion of this scholarship is examining risky and dangerous behaviors, such as unsafe

sex and driving, and substance use, as well as criminal offending behaviors. These studies

demonstrate that emerging adulthood is not simply a passing sociological fad, but rather a

legitimate area of criminology inquiry that needs to be formally integrated into criminological

theory. The above discussion establishes that the most natural fit for emerging adulthood is the

life course paradigm, with its focus on transitions, turning points, social bonds, and biological as

well as social maturation, as it closely parallels many of the conceptual and theoretical constructs

that Arnett discusses throughout his work in emerging adulthood.40 The first goal of this study is

to integrate or place emerging adulthood into the life course paradigm. To accomplish this, a pre-

11

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

existing construct that closely parallels the idea of ‘emerging adulthood gap’ was needed. This

exists in Moffitt’s maturity gap.

Emerging adulthood is an active period of criminal offending. Many turning points are

postponed and as such social bonds that reduce offending and participation in risky and

dangerous behaviors are absent or delayed during emerging adulthood. Unlike adolescence in

which there are formal (e.g., teachers) and informal (e.g., parents) social controls to restrict or

limit offending behaviors, these are largely are not present in emerging adulthood. As such we

have a group of largely socially and biologically mature youth, who in the past would have been

married, having children, and working, unencumbered, and as such are stuck in an ‘gap’ during

which most are completing higher education, experimenting with romantic relationships and

their sexuality, and trying different types of work to see what suits them best. In other words,

similar to Moffitt’s ‘maturity gap’ during adolescence, there is a similar ‘gap’ during emerging

adulthood characterized by experimentation with substances, sexuality, and offending, reflecting

the exploratory nature of emerging adulthood, as well as the lack of informal social controls on

emerging adults. Hence, the emerging adulthood gap is defined as follows: a period during

emerging adulthood in which there is an increased sense of exploration, freedom, and choice,

often marked by offending, substance use, sexual experimentation, and risky behaviors, in which

there are a decreased level of informal social controls. Due to the social maturity ‘gap’ caused by

being in emerging adulthood some may be prone to offending, substance abuse, sexual

experimentation, and other risky and dangerous behaviors. The ‘emerging adulthood gap’

provides a theoretical mechanism to explain offending during emerging adulthood. Youth in

emerging adulthood, even though they are biologically and socially mature, still have not fully

transitioned to adult roles, or as Arnett argues, are in a state of being ‘in between.’ This study

12

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

defines this ‘in between’ nature of emerging adulthood as the ‘emerging adulthood gap,’ and

those in it may be more likely to engage in offending, in a similar manner to those in Moffitt’s

‘maturity gap’ of adolescence. Those in the ‘emerging adulthood gap’ will be binge drinking,

speeding, experimenting with drugs and alcohol, engaging in unprotected sex, shoplifting, being

loud and rowdy, but they will stop short of the more serious, violent, and predatory crimes

characteristic of Moffitt’s life course persistent offenders.

The Emerging Adulthood Gap: The “How” of it

Several major changes occurred in the areas of marriage, parenting, and the economy to

bring about emerging adulthood. Identified by Arnett and Laub and Sampson, as well as

numerous others studies, marriage is one of the key transitions to adulthood, requiring

conformity to social norms as part of the economic and romantic partnership. In the 1960s

marriage trends changed, with people delaying marriage or choosing not to marry.41 By delaying

marriage, youth were now free to explore their sexuality and have a greater number of romantic

partners. However, marriage provides informal social controls and social bonds which act to

reduce offending behaviors and other risky behaviors, such as substance use. The delay or lack

of marriage brought greater instability to the lives of young adults. Without the traditional role of

husband or wife, emerging adults may have greater social freedoms and personal choices, but

also more instability, and opportunities to offend and engage in dangerous behaviors. Without

the social bonding created by marriage, young adults may be more apt to engage in identity

exploration as discussed by Arnett, which can include sexual experimentation, substance use,

and offending behaviors.42

Our next major area relates closely to the first—parenthood. As with marriage, the 1960s

saw increasing delays in parenthood.43 Delays in parenting continued to increase through the

13

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

1970s and 1980s, as well as an increased number of people who were not having children.44 The

life course literature identifies parenting as a key turning point away from offending.45 Those

with children need to not only protect themselves from injury, but also their children. Engaging

in risky behaviors, such as offending and substance use, may place both parent and child in

danger. Furthermore, engaging in these behaviors may threaten the parent’s ability to provide for

the child, and if the parent is incarcerated the children may be placed in foster care or be

subjected to unstable conditions. As such, parenting is essential to the aging out commonly seen

in offending;46 without it young adults are free to explore their identities through sexual

experimentation, drug and alcohol use, and offending.

Finally, changes to the economy had a profound impact on youth. Due to the shift from a

manufacturing to a more service-based economy, as well as the increased commodification of

education, more and more young adults need college educations or risk being in a labor market

where they face decreased salary potential.47 As an increased percentage of youth went to

college, living in dorms or apartments away from parents, they were no longer subjected to the

control of parents. College professors generally do not provide the same level of social control

teachers in high school do, thereby leaving many in the eighteen-to-twenty-five-year-old range in

environments where identity exploration and sensation seeking are common, and where there

were few restrictions on their behaviors.48

In sum, emerging adulthood is the result of changing social circumstances in our society

in the areas of marriage, parenting, and the economy. Those ‘caught’ in the emerging adulthood

gap find themselves in this situation because they have not fully transition to adult life due to

these changes. Those caught in the emerging adulthood gap are not married, are less likely to

have children, and have not established the social bonds with employment. Combined with the

14

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

unstable and experimental nature of emerging adulthood, these individuals may participate in

offending, substance use, and other risky behaviors until the fully transition out of the emerging

adulthood gap by reaching adult social roles and transitions.

The Emerging Adulthood Gap: The “Why” of it

So ‘why’ does emerging adulthood act to stimulate these behaviors in youth? Arnett

argues that emerging adulthood provides increased level of freedom and less social controls than

high school.49 Throughout emerging adulthood youth have increased levels of autonomy and less

supervision from parents, both of which have been found to be related to alcohol and drug use.50

Another factor that may influence the behavior of those caught in the emerging adulthood gap’

may be reflective of the ‘college experience.’51 The challenges that accompany college or

university life, such as peer pressure, may increase the risk for substance abuse.52 Throughout the

adjustment period to college life most students do not have direct supervision of parents, and

this, combined with the experimental nature of emerging adulthood and the sensation seeking

commonly found during this era, is a recipe for increased dangerous behaviors. It is important to

note that both emerging adults attending and not attending college may be at higher risk for

offending, substance use, and other risky behaviors, but there may be different factors

influencing their behavior. Those in college may be adjusting to a new lifestyle characterized by

more stress and pressure,53 while those not attending college may face financial pressures,

limited employment, or unemployment.54

There are several reasons ‘why’ being caught in the emerging adulthood gap (not being

married, having children, employed full time, in other works fully transitioning to adult roles)

influences offending behaviors. First, emerging adulthood is characterized by instability,

sensation seeking, and a feeling of being ‘in between.’55 As a result, many in emerging adulthood

15

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

find themselves experimenting with their sexuality, substance use, and in some cases offending

behaviors, most of which would be lower-level offenses reflective of those committed by

Moffitt’s ALs. Next, there are decreased levels of informal and formal social controls during

emerging adulthood. Once youth reach age twenty-one they are free to fully participate in adult

life, parents no longer have control over their behavior, if they attend college, professors do not

hold the authority of influence that teachers in high school do, and as such there are fewer

controls on behavior during emerging adulthood, making it easier for youth to engage in

dangerous or offending behaviors.

Conclusion

This article identified key dimensions of the relationship between offending behaviors

and emerging adulthood, synthesizing them into a single construct the emerging adulthood gap; a

goal which had not been fully realizing in criminological theory until this point. Emerging

adulthood straddles several disciplines including sociology, social psychology, and criminology,

and over the last fifteen years an ever increasing portion of scholarship in criminal justice and

criminology has been devoted to the subject. This article argues that the emerging adulthood gap

offers a useful way to integrate emerging adulthood in the life course paradigm and to provide a

mechanism through which to explain offending, substance abuse, and risky and dangerous

behaviors during emerging adulthood.

It is clear that the emerging adulthood gap can provide an important theoretical

mechanism to help explain why those in emerging adulthood may participate in low level

offenses and risky and dangerous behaviors. Equally, it has shown that emerging adulthood can

be integrated into a preexisting theoretical paradigm which could benefit from the integration of

emerging adulthood.

16

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

There is ample scholarship in the area of emerging adulthood demonstrating that

instability, sensation seeking, and identity exploration characteristic of this new stage of the life

course impacts the behavior of youth. Arnett’s research suggests that emerging adulthood is a

developmental stage that impacts offending behaviors, including substance use. Most studies that

have examined emerging adulthood from a criminological perspective have found it has some

level of influence on offending behaviors. Studies such as that conducted by Salvatore, Welsh,

and Taniguchi’s seek to connect emerging adulthood theoretically to the life course paradigm,

whereas others provide support for the notion that emerging adulthood provides a developmental

period which may foster offending.

Further research is required to confirm the applicability of the emerging adulthood gap, in

particular longitudinal research. There is evidence that many of the social bonds and turning

points found in the life course literature to influence offending are relevant for many in emerging

adulthood, but what has not been found is how offending during emerging adulthood impacts the

trajectories of these individuals over the rest of their life course. As an emerging area, it has been

challenging for studies to accomplish this goal, but as cohorts who have experienced emerging

adulthood age, retrospective studies similar to that of Laub and Sampson’s (which followed up

with the men in the Glueck’s Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency study when they were senior

citizens) will provide valuable insight into the influence of emerging adulthood on offending and

how being caught in the emerging adulthood gap shapes the lives of those who experienced it.

The identification of the emerging adulthood gap helps bring emerging adulthood into

mainstream criminology, bridging a gap between disciplines and allowing criminological theory

to incorporate an area of scholarship which now has over twenty years of empirical examination.

As a multidisciplinary perspective, life course criminology is an ideal home for the ‘emerging

17

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

adulthood gap’ as it reflects and builds upon Moffitt's maturing gap and as emerging adulthood is

a relatively new developmental stage, it fits within the realm of the life course perspective, in

particular its focus on the influence of historical, economic, and social changes. Additionally,

now that the emerging adulthood gap has been identified and placed in the context of the life

course paradigm, future research is needed to study if it is applicable across sociodemographic

factors such as gender and race/ethnicity, as well as if it applies to those in non-Western nations

and cultures. Some studies suggest that there may be a cultured effect related to emerging

adulthood; as such the emerging adulthood gap may have less (or more) influence in other

cultures.56

The emerging adulthood gap has policy implications as well. Those caught in the

‘emerging adulthood gap’ as conceptualized here are likely to engage in lower-level offenses,

substance use, and risky behaviors. Key to our conceptualization of the emerging adulthood gap

is that most of these individuals will age out of these behaviors once they fully transition to adult

roles, similar to how Moffitt’s adolescent limited offenders will age out of low level offending

and delinquency once they transition out of adolescence and into adulthood. As such, those in the

criminal justice and related systems (e.g., public health) may need to target intervention

programs to deal with the unique developmental needs of emerging adults. For those who find

their way into the criminal justice system, it may be that more traditional processing may be

overly aggressive. Diversion programs aimed at emerging adults could be developed to factor in

the ‘emerging adulthood gap’ and provide support for those during this stage of the life course.

Programs such as an emerging adult court could incorporate the scholarship mentioned above to

identify emerging adulthood as a distinct time of experimentation and exploration, as a result

18

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

increase rates of arrests for lower-level offenses and substance abuse should be expected as more

and more experience the emerging adulthood gap.

ENDNOTES

1 Terrie E. Moffitt, “Adolescence Limited and Life Course Persistent Antisocial Behavior: A

Developmental Taxonomy, Psychological Review 100 (1993): 674-701. 2 Ibid. 3 Heather L. Couture, “Criminal onset in emerging adulthood” (PhD, diss., University of

Maryland, 2009). Retrieved using: http://hdl.handle.net/1903/9234; Andrea D. Mata, and

Manfred H. M. Van Dulmen. “Adult-Onset Antisocial Behavior with Adolescent Family

Processes and Emerging Adulthood Functioning.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 27

(2012):177-193.; Badiah Haffejee, Jamie Rae Yoder, and Kimberly Bender, “Changing in

Illegal Behavior During Emerging Adulthood.” Advances in Social Work 14 (2013): 458-76.; 3

Michael Markowitz, and Christopher Salvatore, “Exploring Race Based Differences in Patterns

of Life Course Criminality,” Deviant Behavior 33(2012): 589-605.; Christopher Salvatore, and

Michael Markowitz, “Do Life Course Transitions and Social Bonds Influence Males and

Females Differently? Gender Contrasts and Criminality” Deviant Behavior 35 (2014): 628-53.;

Christopher Salvatore, and Travis Taniguchi, “Do Social Bonds Matter for Emerging Adults?,”

Deviant Behavior 33 (2012): 1-19.; Christopher Salvatore, Travis Taniguchi, and Wayne Welsh,

“Is Emerging Adulthood Influencing Moffitt’s Developmental Taxonomy? Adding the

“Prolonged” Adolescent Offender,” Western Criminology Review 13 (2012): 1-15. ; Jeffrey J.

Arnett, “Risk Behavior and Family Role Transitions During the Twenties,” Journal of Youth and

Adolescence 27(1998): 301-19.; R. F. Marcus, “Cross-Sectional Study of Violence in Emerging

Adulthood,” Aggressive Behavior 35(2009): 188-202.; Alex R. Piquero, Robert Brame, Paul

Mazerolle, and Rudy Haapanen, R. (2002). Crime in Emerging Adulthood,” Criminology 40

(2002): 137-69. ; 3 Helen Raskin White, and Kristina Jackson, “Social and psychological

influences on emerging adult drinking behavior,” Alcohol Research & Health (2004): 182-90. 4 David C. Pyrooz, “From Your First Cigarette to Your Last Dyin’ Day: The Patterning of Gang

Membership in the Life Course,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 30(2013):349-72. 5 Salvatore, Taniguchi, and Welsh, “Is Emerging Adulthood Influencing Moffitt’s

Developmental Taxonomy? Adding the “Prolonged” Adolescent Offender,” 1-15. 6 Rolf Loeber, and David P. Farrington, From Juvenile Delinquency to Adult Crime: Criminal

Careers, Justice Policing, and Prevention. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012). 7 Jeffrey J. Arnett, “The Developmental Context of Substance Use in Emerging Adulthood,” The

Journal of Drug Issues 35(2005): 235-54. 8 Jeffrey J. Arnett, “Emerging Adulthood: A Theory of Development from the Late Teen

through the Twenties, American Psychologists 55 (2000): 469-80. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid.

19

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

11 Arnett, “Risk Behavior and Family Role Transitions During the Twenties,” 301-319.; Raskin

White, and Jackson, “Social and Psychological Influences on Emerging Adult Drinking

Behavior,” (2004): 182-90. 12 Piquero, Brame, Mazerolle, and R Haapanen, Crime in emerging adulthood,” 137-69. 13 Terrie E. Moffitt, Avshalom Caspi, Honalee Harrington, and Barry J. Milne, “Males on the

Life-Course Persistent and Adolescent Limited Anti-Social Pathways: Follow Up at Age 26

Years,” Development and Psychopathology 14 (2002):179-207. 14 Ibid. 15 Marcus, “Cross-Sectional Study of Violence in Emerging Adulthood,” 188-202. 16 Salvatore and Taniguchi, “Do Social Bonds Matter for Emerging Adults?,” 1-19. 17 Sung Joon, and Jeremy R. Rhodes, “General Strain and Non-Strain Theories: A Study of

Crime During Emerging Adulthood,” Journal of Criminal Justice 40 (2012), 176-86. 18 Rolf Loeber, R., and M. LeBlac, “Toward a Developmental Criminology, in Michael Tonry

and Norwal Morris (eds), Crime and justice, volume 12, ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, 1990), 375-437. 19 Glen H. Elder, Perspectives on the Life Course. In Glen H. Edler (ed) Life Course Dynamics:

trajectories and transitions, 1968-1980, (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1985), 23-

49. 20 Loeber and LeBlac, “Toward a Developmental Criminology,” 375-437. 21 David Farrington, “Developmental and Life Course Criminology: Key theoretical and

Empirical Issues-The 2002 Sutherland Award Address,” Criminology 41 (2003): 221-5. 22 Elder Perspectives on the Life Course. 23 Ibid. 24 Laub and Sampson, Shared Beginnings. 25 Elder Perspectives on the Life Course. 26 Robert Sampson, and John Laub, Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through

life. (Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993). 27 Moffitt, “Adolescence Limited and Life Course Persistent Antisocial Behavior: A

Developmental Taxonomy, 674-701. 28 Kim N. Dietricha, M. Douglas Risb, Paul A. Succopa, Omer G. Bergerb, and Robert L.

Bornscheina. “Early Exposure to Lead and Juvenile Delinquency.” Neurotoxicology and

Teratology 23 (2001): 511–18. 29 Moffitt, “Adolescence Limited and Life Course Persistent Antisocial Behavior: A

Developmental Taxonomy, 674-701. 30 Ibid. 31 Arnett, “Are College Students,” 154-68. 32 Terrie E. Moffitt, “A Review of Research on Taxonomy of Life Course Persistent versus

Adolescent Limited Antisocial Behavior,” in Taking Stock: The Status of Criminological

Theory, edited by Frances T. Cullen, F.T., John P. Wright, and K. R. Blevins, New Brunswick:

Transaction Publishers, 2006). 271-81. 33 John H. Laub, Daniel S. Nagin, and Robert J. Sampson, “Trajectories of Change in Criminal

Offending: Good Marriages and the Desistance Process. American Sociological Review

63(1998): 225-238.; Terrie E. Moffitt, Avshalmom Caspi, Michael Rutter, and Paul A. Silva Sex

differences in antisocial behavior: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence in the Dunedin

longitudinal study. (Cambridge: University Press, 2001). 34 Michael Massoglia, “Desistance of displacement? The changing patterns of offending from

20

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

adolescence to young adulthood,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 16 (2006):199-221. 35 Jeffrey J. Arnett, “Are College Students Adults? Their Conceptions of the Transition to

adulthood,” Journal of Adult Development 1 (1994): 154-168.; James Cote, Arrested Adulthood:

The Changing Nature of Maturity and Identity.New York: New York University Press, 2000).;

Jean D. Okimoto, and Phyllis J. Stegall, Boomerang Kids. (New York, New York: Simon &

Schuster, 1987). 36 Jeffrey J. Arnett, “Socialization in Emerging Adulthood; From Family to the Wider World,

from Socialization to Self-Socialization.” In J.E. Grusec and P.D. Hastings (eds) Handbook of

Socialization” Theory and Research, 208-237 (Hastings, New York: The Guilford Press, 2007). 37 Lilac Lev Ari, and Shmuel Shulman, (2012) “Pathways of Sleep, Affect, and Stress

Constellations During the First Year of College: Transition Difficulties of Emerging Adults,”

Journal of Youth Studies 15(2012): 273-92. 38 Arnett, “Risk Behavior and Family Role Transitions During the Twenties,” 301-19.; Joan S.

Tucker, Phyllis L. Ellickson, Maria Orlando, Steven C. Martino, and David J, Klein, “Substance

Use Trajectories from Early Adolescence to Emerging Adulthood: A Comparison of Smoking,

Binge Drinking, and Marijuana use,” Journal of Drug Issues 22(2005):307-322.; Raskin White,

and Jackson, “Social and Psychological Influences on Emerging Adult Drinking Behavior,”

(2004): 182-190.; Helen White, B.J. McMorris, R. Catalano, C. B. Fleming, K. P. Haggerty, and

R. D. Abbott, “Increase in Alcohol and Marijuana use during the Transition Out of High School

and Emerging Adulthood: The Effects of Leaving Home, Going to College, and High School

Protective Factors,” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 67(2006):810-22. 39 Moffitt, “Adolescence Limited and Life Course Persistent Antisocial Behavior: A

Developmental Taxonomy, 674-701. 40 Arnett, “Are College Students Adults? Their Conceptions of the Transition to adulthood,”

154-168.; Arnett, “The Developmental Context of Substance Use in Emerging Adulthood,” 235-

254. 41 Thomas J. Espenshade, “Marriage Trends in America: Estimates, Implications, and

Underlying Causes,” Population and Developmental Review 11 (1985):193-245. 42 Arnett, “Risk Behavior and Family Role Transitions During the Twenties,” 301-319.; Arnett,

“Are College Students Adults? Their Conceptions of the Transition to adulthood,” 154-68.;

Arnett, “The Developmental Context of Substance Use in Emerging Adulthood,” 235-54. 43 J. R. Wilkie, “The Trend Toward Delayed Parenthood,” Journal of Marriage and the Family

43(1981):583-91. 44 W. H. Baldwin, and C. Nord, “Delayed childbearing in the United States: Facts and Fictions,”

Population Bulletin, 39 (1984):1-42. 45 Salvatore, Taniguchi, and Welsh, “Is Emerging Adulthood Influencing Moffitt’s

Developmental Taxonomy? Adding the “Prolonged” Adolescent Offender,” 1-15. 46 John H. Laub, Robert J. Sampson, Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives: Delinquent Boys to

Age 70. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003). 47 Cote, Arrested Adulthood. 48 Arnett, “Risk Behavior and Family Role Transitions During the Twenties,” 301-19.; Arnett,

“The Developmental Context of Substance Use in Emerging Adulthood,” 235-54.; Tucker,

Ellickson, Orlando, Martino, and Klein, “Substance Use Trajectories from Early Adolescence to

Emerging Adulthood: A Comparison of Smoking, Binge Drinking, and Marijuana use, 307-22.;

Raskin White, and Jackson, “Social and Psychological Influences on Emerging Adult Drinking

Behavior,” (2004): 182-90.

21

Salvatore: The Emerging Adulthood Gap

Published by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository,

49 Arnett, “The Developmental Context of Substance Use in Emerging Adulthood,” 235-54. 50 J. G. Bachman, K. N. Wadsworth, P. M. O’Malley, D. L. Johnston, and J. E. Schulenberg,

Smoking, Drinking and Drug Use During Young Adulthood: The Impacts of New Freedoms

and New Responsibilities (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1997).; L. Chassin,

S. C. Pitts, and J. Proust, “Binge Drinking Trajectories from Adolescence to Emerging

Adulthood in a High Risk Sample: Predictors and Substance Abuse Outcomes,” Journal of

Counseling and Clinical Psychology 70(2002), 67-78. 51 Bachman, Wadsworth, O’Malley, Johnston, and Schulenberg, Smoking, Drinking and Drug

Use During Young Adulthood..: Chassin, Pitts, and J. Proust, “Binge Drinking Trajectories from

Adolescence to Emerging Adulthood in a High Risk Sample: Predictors and Substance Abuse

Outcomes,” 67-78. 52 John E. Schulenberg, and Jennifer L. Maggs,“A Developmental Perspective in Alcohol Use

and Heavy Drinking During Adolescence and the Transition to Young Adulthood,” Journal of

Studies on Alcohol, 14 (2002): 54-70. 53 Ari, and Shulman, “Pathways of Sleep, Affect, and Stress Constellations During the First

Year of College: Transition Difficulties of Emerging Adults,” 273-292.; White, McMorris,

Catalano, Fleming, Haggerty, and Abbott, “Increase in Alcohol and Marijuana use during the

Transition Out of High School and Emerging Adulthood: The Effects of Leaving Home, Going

to College, and High School Protective Factors,” 810-22. 54 Haffejee, Yoder, and Bender, “Changing in Illegal Behavior During Emerging Adulthood,”

458-76. 55 Arnett, “The Developmental Context of Substance Use in Emerging Adulthood,” 235-254. 56 Larry J. Nelson, Sarah Badger, Bo Wu, “The Influence of Culture in Emerging Adulthood:

Perspectives of Chinese College Students,” International Journal of Behavioral Development 28

(2004): 26-36.

22

International Social Science Review, Vol. 93, Iss. 1 [], Art. 2

http://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/issr/vol93/iss1/2

Copyright of International Social Science Review is the property of Pi Gamma Mu Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.