This article investigates the role of single parenthood ratios in predicting violent-crime rates (murders, rapes, assaults) of 39 countries and pitted the predictions of parental investment theory (calling for delayed effects) against those of mating aggression (calling for immediate effects). Regression analyses that controlled for masculinity of the population (sex ratio of 15-to 64-year-olds) and national wealth (log gross national product, GNP, per capita) found that current single parenthood ratios were strongly and consistently predictive of violent crimes, whereas single parenthood ratios 18 years ago were not. The results indicate that violent crime is best interpreted as a side effect of mating competition rather than as a function of reduced parental investment.
Abrahamson, M. (1998). Out-of-wedlock births: The United States in comparative perspective. Westport, CT: Praeger.
2.
Archer, D.,& Gartner, R. (1984). Violence and crime in cross-national perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
3.
Barber, N. (2000a). The sex ratio as a predictor of cross-national variation in violent crime. Cross-Cultural Research, 34, 264-282.
4.
Barber, N. (2000b). Why parents matter: Parental investment and child outcomes. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.
5.
Barber, N. (2002). The science of romance. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.
6.
Barber, N. (2003). The sex ratio and female marriage opportunity as historical predictors of violent crime in England, Scotland, and the U.S. Cross-Cultural Research, 37, 373-392.
7.
Belsky, J., Steinberg, L., & Draper, P. (1991). Childhood experience, interpersonal development, and reproductive strategy: An evolutionary theory of socialization. Child Development, 62, 647-670.
8.
Bennett, R. R., & Lynch, J. P. (1990). Does a difference make a difference? Comparing cross-national crime indicators. Criminology, 28, 153-182.
9.
Central Intelligence Agency. (1992). World factbook. Washington, DC: Author.
10.
Crane, J. (1991). The epidemic theory of ghettos and neighborhood effects on dropping out and teenage childbearing. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1226-1259.
11.
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
12.
Day, D. M.(1998). Risk for court contact and predictors of an early age for a first court contact among a sample of high risk youths: A survival analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 40, 421-446.
13.
Eisenman, R. (1995). Is there bias in U.S. law enforcement?Journal of Social Political and Economic Studies, 20, 229-240.
14.
Eisner, M. (2002). Crime, problem drinking, and drug use: Patterns of problem behavior in cross-national perspective. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 580, 201-225.
15.
Ellis, L. (1987). Criminal behavior and r/K selection: An extension of genebased evolutionary theory. Deviant Behavior, 8, 149-176.
16.
Ember, C. R.,& Ember, M. (1993). Issues in cross-cultural studies of interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims, 8, 217-233.
17.
Ember, C. R., & Ember, M. (2002). Father absence and male aggression: A re-examination of the comparative evidence. Ethos, 29, 296-314.
18.
Empey, L. T.,& Stafford, M. C. (1991). American delinquency: Its meaning and construction (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
19.
Farrington, D. P. (1992). Criminal career research in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Criminology, 32, 521-536.
20.
Fox, J. (1991). Regression diagnostics. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
21.
Gabor, T.,& Roberts, J. V. (1990). Rushton on race and crime: The evidence remains unconvincing. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 335-343.
22.
Gartner, R. (1991). Family structure, welfare spending, and child homicide in developed countries. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 231-240.
23.
Guttentag, M.,& Secord, P. F. (1983). Too many women: The sex ratio question. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
24.
Hart, B.,& Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks.
25.
Interpol. (1990). International crime statistics. Paris: Author.
26.
Kierkus, C. A., & Baer, D. (2002). A social control explanation of the relationship between family structure and delinquent behaviour. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 44, 425-458.
27.
Kurian, G. T. (1997). The illustrated book of world rankings. Armonk, NY: Sharpe Reference.
28.
Levinson, D. (1989). Family violence in cross-cultural perspective. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29.
Lykken, D. (1995). The antisocial personalities. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Neapolitan, J. L. (1999). A comparative analysis of nations with low and high levels of violent crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 259-274.
31.
Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. American Psychologist, 44, 329-335.
32.
Popenoe, D. (1988). Disturbing the nest: Family change and decline in modern societies. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
33.
Reiss, D., Heatherington, E. M., Plomin, R., Rowe, G. W., Simmens, S. J., Henderson, S. H., et al. (1995). Genetic questions for environmental studies: Differential parenting and psychopathology in adolescence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 52, 925-936.
34.
Smock, P. J. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology, 1-20.
35.
Trent, K.,& South, S. J. (1989). Structural determinants of thedivorce rate: A cross-societal analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 391-404.
36.
United Nations. (1981). Demographic yearbook of the United Nations. New York: Author.
37.
United Nations. (1999). Global report on crime and justice. New York: Author.
