Gender and Serious Youth Victimization: Assessing the Generality of Self-control, Differential Association, and Social Bonding Theories

Abstract

Criminologists have long questioned whether theories that have focused on male delinquency are equally applicable to female delinquency, a phenomenon termed “gender generalizability.” Although a number of studies have used self-reports from offenders, criminologists have yet to extend this issue to crime victims. While controlling for variables derived from victimization theories, we test three criminological perspectives (self-control, differential association, and social bond) on male and female victimization using data obtained from the Evaluation of the Gang Resistance Education and Training Program in the United States. Results show that for male victimization, gang membership and indications of a deviant lifestyle (self-reported delinquency) significantly predicted victimization, while associating with pro-social peers and being in a gang were associated with female victimization. Parental monitoring and belong to an intact family reduced victimization for males. Self-reported delinquency consistently predicted victimization across genders.

Acknowledgement

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2014 meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Notes

1 While the data were collected in the mid-1990s, the data are relevant to theory testing. Cochran et al. (2016) argued that general theories like the ones tested here should be applicable to any time frame. As such, “the validity, explanatory power, and/or predictive efficacy of general theories should not be period specific, that is, limited to data collected at some but not other points in time” (Cochran et al. 2016:968).

2 Due to page limitations, the scales and the individual items that form them are not presented in the text. They are available upon request by contacting the first author.

3 Dichotomizing victimization data are common practice. This is sometimes because scholars are interested in the occurrence of violence rather than the frequency of violence. The current method is consistent with prior studies using these data (i.e., Schreck, Miller, and Gibson 2003; Wilcox, Tillyer, and Fisher 2009).

4 We acknowledge that each theory is being partially tested because all the necessary variables needed to fully test these theories were not available in these data. Nevertheless, the testing of these theories is consistent with previous studies using these data.

5 The primary investigators did not employ all of Grasmick et al.’s (1993) self-control scale, opting to capture only impulsivity and risk-seeking behavior. It should be noted that other scholars have used these same eight items to measure self-control in studies testing Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) general theory of crime (see Childs, Cochran, and Gibson 2009; Higgins et al. 2009; Jennings et al. 2010).

6 Studies using GREAT data have also included variables that measure negative and positive peer associations in predicting victimization (see Taylor et al., 2007, 2008). In a separate analysis (not shown), these variables were not significant in predicting victimization for either sex. These results should not be surprising, because the items used to construct these measures are hypothetical questions about whether respondents would hang out with friends that started getting into trouble. These questions have little face validity for a study testing differential association theory.

7 Unfortunately, the data did not include a measure of the respondent’s involvement in conventional activities. However, some scholars have argued that commitment and involvement are the same concept (Krohn 2000). Take, for example, a youth who is a member of the high school marching band. Practicing daily on his or her musical instrument can be viewed as being both involved and committed to music.

8 Some readers may notice that the delinquency variable is constructed of various behaviors that include serious and minor offenses, whereas the dependent variable is serious victimization. However, this is consistent with other studies using these data (e.g., Taylor et al. 2007, 2008).

9 As with any regression procedure, multicollinearity may be a problem. To determine if multicollinearity is a problem in these data, tolerance and variance inflation factors were calculated. In both the male and female models, all tolerances are above 0.25 and all variance inflation factors are below 4, indicating that multicollinearity is not a problem in the present study (Walker and Maddan 2013). The results are not shown in order to preserve space but are available upon request from the first author.

10 All variables have less than 10% of missing data. Bennett (2001) recommended that anything less than 10% be an acceptable percentage of missing data.

11 An exploratory analysis (not shown) excludes prior delinquency and gang member to determine the effects of the theoretical variables on the dependent variable in the absence of these control variables that are strongly related to the dependent variable, since engaging in delinquency is a strong predictor of victimization and these data were collected from a gang intervention program. In this analysis, self-control is significant for the female model but becomes nonsignificant when delinquency and gang member are included. For the male model, the results of this analysis were similar to those discussed in the article.

12 We thank the anonymous reviewer for illustrating this point.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Egbert Zavala

Egbert Zavala is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at The University of Texas at El Paso, where he has been since receiving his PhD in sociology from Kansas State University. His area of research includes intimate partner violence, testing criminological theories, deviance, and victimology/victimization. His publications appear in Crime & Delinquency, American Journal of Criminal Justice, Deviant Behavior, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, and others.

Ryan E. Spohn

Dr. Ryan Spohn is the Director of the Nebraska Center for Justice Research at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, where he performs statewide and local research and evaluation activities targeted at improving the performance of Nebraska’s criminal justice and corrections activities. His areas of research include the areas of juvenile delinquency, families, victimization, and processes of the criminal justice system. Dr. Spohn has published in numerous sociology and criminal justice journals, including Criminal Justice and Behavior, Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, Criminal Justice Review, Social Forces, and Victims and Offenders.

Leanne F. Alarid

Leanne F. Alarid is Department Chair and Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Texas at El Paso. She has authored over 70 scholarly publications in corrections and gender and crime, to include her most recent textbook, entitled Community-Based Corrections (Cengage Learning).