According to research done by Warr, delinquency escalates rapidly as individuals enter their teen years and then declines almost as rapidly as they enter their late teens and early twenties. A possible explanation for this in my opinion is that youngsters in their early teens tend to be more adventurous and experimental. They are also easily influenced to try out new habits-good or bad- since often times, they are not experienced enough to know or care about the consequences of their actions. However, as they grow older and of course learn by experience, they inadvertently develop a more matured and balanced approach to the everyday choices they make.
On another note, the fact that a peer group that you belong to engages in unlawful activities helps to validate its relevance and the feeling that it probably is the cool thing to do. Also, because humans are creatures of habit, once they start a habit, say alcoholism, it doesnt take long before they become addicted. From another perspective, a criminal activity, say illegal drug use, can form part of general criteria for joining some particular peer groups. This can in no small way influence youths to indulge in these activities just to win the groups approval or endorsement.
A bone of contention among researchers is which comes first between delinquency and delinquent peer association Research by Gottfredson and Hirschi, support the notion that delinquency actually comes before delinquent peer association. Similar researches performed by Thornberry, Elliot and Menard however, offer opposing views.
It is important to examine the role that age actually plays in delinquent acts. Hypothesis by Elliot and Menard, show that both delinquency and delinquent peer association increase with age. A more insightful theory is the interactional theory by Thornberry that suggests that the influence of delinquent peer associations should increase during mid-adolescence and then decline gradually based on the reasoning that the hold that peer groups have on an individual is more pronounced during early stages of adolescence and less so as they grow older and commit to traditional activities like school, family, church, work etc. Still on the effects that age and delinquent peer association have on delinquency, the constant supervisory roles that teachersguardians play in schools can douse the negative influences that delinquent peer associations can have on a young individual. However, as they advance in age and schooling, and move on to institutions of higher learning, the teachers or guardians tend to treat individuals as adults capable of making their own decisions. In other words, the supervisory roles that teachers play in the life of students reduce drastically as they advance in age and schooling. This also represents the theories expressed by Jang.
The interactional theory developed by Thornberry has been put to test but not without some loopholes. For instance, though the theory suggests that delinquent peer associations vary with age, it doesnt specifically address the measure or category of offending. Also, a general inference tends to be made based on just one category of offending (e.g. drug offending).
To address these loopholes, warrs research focuses on specific type of offenses for which agepeer interactive relationship might be present. It established that group violations are most prevalent in drug offenses than for other types of offenses. In addition, Warrs research identified a sticky friend pattern prevalent in alcohol and marijuana use. By sticky friend, Warr refers to the difficulty in shaking off friends of a certain delinquency (in this case, drug offenses), once acquired. The argument here is that, because of the sticky friend pattern peculiar to drug related offenses, youths tend to hang on to this particular vice as they grow older because of the communal support and thrill enjoyed within peer groups. In contrast, other non-drug related offenses tend to reduce with increase in age mainly because of the lack of the overwhelming influence of delinquent peer groups.
Based on reliable data (cross sectionallongitudinal) from research performed by the National Youth Survey (NYS), it was discovered that interactive relationship actually existed between age and delinquent peer associations. Furthermore, the offense with the most agepeer interactions happened to be the unlawful use of marijuana, the exception to this general rule was the offense of hitting someone. Of particular interest is the similar agepeer influence that burglary has with drug related offenses. This view was pointed out in the research done by Warr which discovered that burglary, like drug related offenses also have a high group violation rate even though burglary is not associated with a sticky friend pattern.
If you take a cursory look at the findings and results of research carried out by the different researchers in this paper, it may seem that, the findings of one researcher is immediately overthrown or cast aside by the findings of the other(s). However, and based on my own opinion, various inferences can be drawn aided with results of research and findings done by the researchers and the data by the National Youth Survey (NYS).
On the issue of which comes first between delinquency and delinquent peer associations, Gottfredson and Hirschi, support the notion that delinquency actually comes before delinquent peer association. However, others like Thornberry et al., present evidence of interactivity and the opposing view that delinquent peer association comes before delinquency. Still, research by, provide that bi-directional relationship can only surface after individuals engage in delinquency and delinquent peer association. In my opinion, all three findings are correct depending on the particular situation of the individuals involved. For instance, a young individual who while growing up discovers that his parents indulge in alcoholism is more likely to become an alcoholic before any outside peer influence. On the other hand, a young individual that grows up under parents with strong moral background may still involve in illegal drug use if he gets influenced by or joins a peer group that engages in drug related offenses. Also, an individual may not see the need to join a particular delinquent peer group if he is not at all inclined towards such behavior and vice versa. These insights prove my initial stand that all three findings are correct and far from confusing.
I conclude by saying that though a lot of very helpful research has been carried out to connect the dots among age, delinquent peer groups and delinquency, several questions beg for answers. For instance, why does burglary, a non drug related offense have high group violation rate similar to drug offenses even though burglary is not associated with a sticky friend pattern Obviously, a more detailed research is required to address this issue and several others.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment