The usually negative relationship between school bonds and juvenile delinquency implies that adolescents with strong ties to school are less likely to engage in delinquency. Still, it is not always clear whether the impact of school bonds on delinquency is direct or mediated by other, more proximate causes. This article examines the dynamic interrelations between social bonds and the acceptance of legal norms over the course of adolescence. Results reveal that school bonds directly affect the acceptance of legal norms, but not delinquency. However, norms are directly and reciprocally related to delinquency. Therefore, school bonds can be considered an indirect preventive factor for delinquent behavior. Moreover, the closely related school bond and norm dimensions share a common developmental pattern during adolescence.
AgnewR. (1991). A longitudinal test of social control theory and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 28, 126-156.
2.
AkersR. L. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
3.
AkersR. L.SellersC. S. (2009). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation and application. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
4.
BiesanzJ. C.Deeb-SossaN.PapadakisA. A.BollenK. A.CurranP. J. (2004). The role of coding time in estimating and interpreting growth curve models. Psychological Methods, 9, 30-52.
5.
BoersK.ReineckeJ.SeddigD.MariottiL. (2010). Explaining the development of adolescent violent delinquency. European Journal of Criminology, 7, 499-520.
6.
BoersK.SeddigD.ReineckeJ. (2009). Sozialstrukturelle Bedingungen und Delinquenz im Verlauf des Jugendalters: Analysen mit einem kombinierten Markov- und Wachstumsmodell [Socio-structural conditions and delinquency during adolescence: Analyses with combined Markov- and Growth-Curve Model]. Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform, 92, 267-288.
7.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley.
8.
BollenK. A.CurranP. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. New York, NY: John Wiley.
9.
BurgessR. L.AkersR. L. (1966). A differential association-reinforcement theory of criminal behavior. Social Problems, 14, 128-147.
10.
CernkovichS. A.GiordanoP. C. (1992). School bonding, race, and delinquency. Criminology, 30, 261-291.
11.
ColemanJ.ColemanE. Z. (1984). Adolescent attitudes to authority. Journal of Adolescence, 7, 131-141.
12.
CostelloB. J.VowellP. R. (1999). Testing control theory and differential association: A reanalysis of the Richmond Youth Project data. Criminology, 37, 815-842.
13.
DuncanT. E.DuncanS. C.StryckerL. A. (2006). An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
ElliottD. S. (1985). The assumption that theories can be combined with increased explanatory power: Theoretical integrations. In MeierR. F. (Ed.), Theoretical methods in criminology (pp. 123-149). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
15.
ElliottD. S. (1994). Serious violent offenders: Onset, developmental course, and termination. Criminology, 32, 1-21.
16.
ElliottD. S.AgetonS.CanterR. J. (1979). An integrated theoretical perspective on delinquent behavior. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 16, 2-27.
17.
ElliottD. S.HuizingaD.AgetonS. S. (1985). Explaining delinquency and drug use. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
18.
EndersC. K. (2001). The impact of nonnormality on full information maximum-likelihood estimation for structural equation models with missing data. Psychological Methods, 6, 352-370.
19.
FloraD. B. (2008). Specifying piecewise latent trajectory models for longitudinal data. Structural Equation Modeling, 15, 513-533.
20.
Freidenfelt LiljebergJ.EklundJ. M.Väfors FritzM.af KlintebergB. (2011). Poor school bonding and delinquency over time: Bidirectional effects and sex differences. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 1-9.
21.
GinsbergI. J.GreenleyJ. R. (1978). Competing theories of marijuana use: A longitudinal study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 22-34.
22.
GottfredsonM. R.HirschiT. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
23.
HirschiT. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
24.
JenkinsP. H. (1997). School delinquency and the school social bond. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 34, 337-367.
25.
Junger-TasJ. (1992). An empirical test of social control theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 8, 9-28.
26.
KrohnM. D.MasseyJ. L. (1980). Social control and delinquent behavior: An examination of the elements of the social bond. The Sociological Quarterly, 21, 529-544.
27.
LaubJ. H.SampsonR. J. (1993). Turning points in the life course: Why change matters to the study of crime. Criminology, 31, 301-325.
28.
LeiteW. L. (2007). A comparison of latent growth models for constructs measured by multiple items. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 581-610.
29.
LiskaA. E.ReedM. D. (1985). Ties to conventional institutions and delinquency: Estimating reciprocal effects. American Sociological Review, 50, 547-560.
30.
MaddoxS. J.PrinzR. J. (2003). School bonding in children and adolescents: Conceptualization, assessment, and associated variables. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 6, 31-49.
31.
MatsuedaR. L. (1982). Testing control theory and differential association: A causal modeling approach. American Sociological Review, 47, 489-504.
32.
MatsuedaR. L.HeimerK. (1987). A test of differential association and social control theories. American Sociological Review, 52, 826-840.
33.
MuthénB. O. (2002). Beyond SEM: General latent variable modeling. Behaviormetrika, 29, 81-117.
34.
OlssonU. H.FossT.TroyeS. V.HowellR. D. (2000). The performance of ML, GLS, and WLS estimation in structural equation modeling under conditions of misspecification and nonnormality. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 557-595.
35.
PreacherK. J.WichmanA. L.MacCallumR. C.BriggsN. E. (2008). Latent growth curve modeling. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
36.
RecklessW. C. (1961). A new theory of delinquency and crime. Federal Probation, 25, 42-46.
37.
ReineckeJ. (2013). Growth curve models and panel dropouts: Applications with criminological panel data. Netherlands Journal of Psychology, 67, 122-131.
38.
ReineckeJ.SeddigD. (2011). Growth mixture models in longitudinal research. Advances in Statistical Analysis, 95, 415-434.
39.
ReineckeJ.WeinsC. (2013). The development of delinquency during adolescence: A methodological analysis of missing data techniques. Quality & Quantity, 47, 3319-3334.
40.
RhemtullaM.Brosseau-LiardP. É.SavaleiV. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354-373.
41.
RosenbaumJ. L.LasleyJ. R. (1990). School, community context, and delinquency: Rethinking the gender gap. Justice Quarterly, 7, 493-513.
42.
SeddigD. (2014). Peer group association, the acceptance of norms and violent behaviour: A longitudinal analysis of reciprocal effects. European Journal of Criminology, 11, 319-339.
43.
SprottJ. B.JenkinsJ. M.DoobA. N. (2005). The importance of school: Protecting at-risk youth from early offending. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, 59-77.
44.
SutherlandE. H. (1947). Principles of criminology (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott.
45.
ThornberryT. P. (1987). Toward an interactional theory of delinquency. Criminology, 25, 863-891.
46.
ThornberryT. P. (1996). Empirical support for interactional theory: A review of the literature. In HawkinsD. J. (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current theories (pp. 198-235). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
47.
ThornberryT. P.LizotteA. J.KrohnM. D.FarnworthM.JangS. J. (1991). Testing interactional theory: An examination of reciprocal causal relationships among family, school, and delinquency. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 3-35.
48.
van MontfortK.MooijaartA.MeijerinkF. (2009). Estimating structural equation models with non-normal variables by using transformations. Statistica Neerlandica, 63, 213-226.
49.
WidamanK. F.FerrerE.CongerR. D. (2010). Factorial invariance within longitudinal structural equation models: Measuring the same construct across time. Child Development Perspectives, 4, 10-18.
