From within a social learning framework, the authors test the relative contributions of socialization, group pressure, social selection, and rationalization processes in explaining the relationships between peer-group associations, attitudes, and serious theft. Estimating a nonrecursive model, the authors argue that serious theft is as likely to affect delinquent associations and attitudes as associations and attitudes are to affect serious theft. The authors use panel data over three time periods from the National Youth Survey (NYS) to estimate simultaneously the influences of each social process over time. In addition, the authors estimate a measurement model to correct for the potential biasing effects of correlated measurement error. Estimation of the nonrecursive model reveals that the socialization effects of peers are negligible and insignificant. The group pressure effects are of relatively equal importance in comparison to the social selection effects. However, the group pressure effects are substantially smaller in magnitude compared to those commonly reported in recursive studies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Agnew, R. (1991a). A longitudinal test of social control theory and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28, 126-156.
2.
Agnew, R. (1991b). The interactive effects of peer variables on delinquency. Criminology, 29, 47-72.
3.
Akers, R. L. (1985). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4.
Akers, R. L. (1994). Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation. Los Angeles: Roxbury.
5.
Akers, R. L. , Krohn, M. D., Lanza-Kaduce, L., & Radosevich, M. (1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44, 636-655.
6.
Briar, S. , & Piliavin, I. (1965). Delinquency, situational inducements, and commitment to conformity. Social Problems, 13, 35-45.
7.
Burkett, S. R. , & Warren, B. O. (1987). Religiosity, peer associations, and adolescent marijuana use: A panel study of underlying causal structures. Criminology, 25, 109-131.
8.
Cressey, D. R. (1953). Other people's money: A study in the social psychology of embezzlement. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
9.
Cullen, F. T. (1983). Rethinking crime and deviance theory. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld.
10.
Dielman, T. E. , Butchart, A. T., Shope, J. T., & Miller, M. (1991). Environmental correlates of adolescent substance use and misuse: Implications for prevention programs. International Journal of Addiction, 25, 855-880.
11.
Elliott, D. S. (1976). National youth survey [United States]: Wave I, 1976. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
12.
Elliott, D. S. , Huizinga, D., & Ageton, S. S. (1985). Explaining delinquency and drug use. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13.
Elliott, D. S. , Knowles, B. A., & Canter, R. J. (1981). The epidemiology of delinquent behavior and drug use among American adolescents: Vol. 1. The National Youth Survey Project Report No. 14. Boulder, CO: Behavioral Research Institute.
14.
Elliott, D. S. , & Menard, S. (1996). Delinquent friends and delinquent behavior: Temporal and developmental patterns. In D. Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current theories (pp. 28-67). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Flannery, D. J. , Vazsonyi, A. T., Torquati, J., & Fridrich, A. (1994). Ethnic and gender differences in risk for early adolescent substance use. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23, 195-213.
16.
Glueck, S. , & Glueck, E. (1950). Unraveling juvenile delinquency. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
Gottfredson, M. , & Hirschi, T. (1987). The methodological adequacy of longitudinal research on crime. Criminology, 25, 581-614.
18.
Gottfredson, M. , & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19.
Greenberg, D. F. (1985). Age, crime, and social explanation. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 1-21.
20.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
21.
Huizinga, D. (1978). Description of the National Youth Sample. The dynamics of delinquent behavior: A national survey (Project Report No. 2, HEW Grant Number MH27552). Boulder, CO: Behavioral Research Institute.
22.
Jackson, E. F. , Tittle, C. R., & Burke, M. J. (1986). Offense-specific models of the differential association process. Social Problems, 33, 335-356.
23.
Jensen, G. F. (1972). Parents, peers, and delinquent action: A test of the differential association perspective. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 562-575.
24.
Johnson, R. E. , Marcos, A. C., & Bahr, S. J. (1987). The role of peers in the complex etiology of adolescent drug use. Criminology, 25, 323-340.
25.
Joreskog, K. G. , & Sorbom, D. (1986). LISREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationships by maximum likelihood and least squares methods. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
26.
Joreskog, K. G. , & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL VII: A guide to the program and applications. Chicago: SPSS.
27.
Joreskog, K. G. , & Sorbom, D. (1990). SPSS LISREL VII and PRELIS: User's guide and reference. Chicago: SPSS.
28.
Jussim, L , & Osgood, D. W. (1989). Influence and similarity among friends: An integrative model applied to incarcerated adolescents. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52, 98-112.
29.
Krohn, M. D. , Skinner, W. F., Massey, J. L., & Akers, R. L. (1983). Social learning theory and adolescent cigarette smoking: A longitudinal study. Social Problems, 32, 455-471.
30.
LaGrange, R. L. , & White, H. R. (1985). Age differences in delinquency: A test of theory. Criminology, 23, 19-45.
31.
Liska, A. E. (1973). Causal structures underlying the relationship between delinquent involvement and delinquent peers. Sociology and Social Research, 58, 23-36.
32.
Liska, A. E. (1978). Deviant involvement, associations and attitudes: Specifying the underlying causal structures. Sociology and Social Research, 63, 73-88.
33.
Liska, A. E. (1987). Perspectives on deviance (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
34.
Lofland, J. (1969). Deviance and identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
35.
Marcos, A. C. , Bahr, S. J., & Johnson, R. E. (1986). Test of a bonding/association theory of adolescent drug use. Social Forces, 65, 135-161.
36.
Massey, J. L. , & Krohn, M. D. (1986). A longitudinal examination of an integrated social process model of deviant behavior. Social Forces, 65, 106-134.
37.
Matsueda, R. L. (1982). Testing control theory and differential association: A causal modeling approach. American Sociological Review, 47, 489-504.
38.
Matsueda, R. L. (1989). The dynamics of moral beliefs and minor deviance. Social Forces, 68, 428-457.
39.
Matsueda, R. L. , & Heimer, K. (1987). Race, family structure, and delinquency: A test of differential association and social control theories. American Sociological Review, 52, 826-840.
40.
Menard, S. , & Elliott, D. S. (1990). Longitudinal and cross-sectional data collection and analysis in the study of crime and delinquency. Justice Quarterly, 7, 11-55.
41.
Menard, S. , & Elliott, D. S. (1994). Delinquent bonding, moral beliefs, and illegal behaviors: A three-wave panel model. Justice Quarterly, 11, 173-188.
42.
Minor, W. W. (1984). Neutralization as a hardening process: Considerations in the modeling of change. Social Forces, 62, 995-1019.
43.
Patterson, G. R. , & Dishion, T. J. (1985). Contribution of families and peers to delinquency. Criminology, 23, 63-79.
44.
Reed, M. D. , & Rountree, P. W. (1997). Peer pressure and adolescent substance use. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 13, 143-180.
45.
Reiss, A. J. Jr. , & Rhodes, A. L. (1964). An empirical test of differential association theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1, 5-18.
46.
Short, J. F. Jr. (1957). Differential association and delinquency. Social Problems, 4, 233-239.
47.
Short, J. F. Jr. (1958). Differential association with delinquent friends and delinquent behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 20-25.
48.
Short, J. F. Jr. , & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1965). Group process and gang delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
Spear, S. , & Akers, R. L. (1988). Social learning variables and the risk of habitual smoking among adolescents: The Muscatine study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 4, 336-348.
50.
Stafford, M. C. , & Ekland-Olson, S. (1982). On social learning and deviant behavior: A reappraisal of the findings. American Sociological Review, 47, 167-169.
51.
Strickland, D. E. (1982). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory: A comment and critique. American Sociological Review, 47, 162-167.
52.
Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Principles of criminology (4th ed.). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.
53.
Sutherland, E. H. (1973). Edwin H. Sutherland on analyzing crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
54.
Sutherland, E. H. , & Cressey, D. R. (1970). Criminology. New York: J. B. Lippincott.
55.
Sykes, G. M. , & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22, 664-670.
56.
Thornberry, T. P. , Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Farnworth, M., & Jang, S. J. (1994). Delinquent peers, beliefs, and delinquent behavior: A longitudinal test of interactional theory. Criminology, 32, 47-83.
57.
Tittle, C. R. (1985). The assumption that general theories are not possible. In Robert F. Meier (Ed.), Theoretical methods in criminology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
58.
Tittle, C. R. , Burke, M. J., & Jackson, E. F. (1986). Modeling Sutherland's theory of differential association: Toward an empirical clarification. Social Forces, 65, 405-432.
59.
Warr, M. , & Stafford, M. (1991). The influence of delinquent peers: What they think or what they do?Criminology, 29, 851-866.
60.
West, S. G. , Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
