Executive functions, self-control and juvenile delinquency

ABSTRACT

Both self-control and executive dysfunctions have gained theoretical and empirical support in their relation to juvenile delinquency. However, the precise nature of executive dysfunctions is unclear, and recent models suggest a new conceptualization of self-control, in which executive functions play a supporting role. This research attempts to clarify the role of executive dysfunctions in juvenile delinquency and explicitly integrate executive functioning with self-control in predicting juvenile offending. About 34 boys in the juvenile justice system and 36 age- and education-matched control boys participated in this research. Computerized tasks were used to measure executive functions. Self-control and background variables were measured through a survey. No significant differences emerged from group comparisons. A logistic regression model revealed cool executive functioning to be a significant predictor of group. Hot executive functions or self-control were not predictive. Finally, executive functions were not significantly related to self-control scores. These results indicate a potential role of cool executive functioning in the explanation of juvenile delinquency, independent of self-control.

KEYWORDS:

• Executive functions
• self-control
• delinquency
• neuropsychological deficits
• adolescence

Acknowledgement

This contribution was realized within the Youth Research Platform (JOP), an interdisciplinary and interuniversity collaboration of the Ghent University, the University of Leuven and the Free University of Brussels, recognized as Policy Research Centre by the Flemish government. For more information: www.jeugdonderzoeksplatform.be/eng/index.htm

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the second author, prof. S. P. The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.

Notes

1 Equal variances assumption violated as indicated by Levene’s test (F_{1, 59} = 23.452, p < .001), and thus a correction was applied.

2 The cut-off values were as followed: Levers: $2\ast \widehat{h_i}$; Studentized deleted residuals: 3; Cook’s D: $\frac{4}{n-k-1}$; with $h_i$ the lever for the ith participant and k the amount of variables

3 When analyses were performed on the uncleaned data, the main results regarding the differences in executive function performance were comparable to the cleaned data. Descriptive differences were all found in the same direction (cf. Table 3).

4 Equal variances assumption violated as indicated by Levene’s test (F_{1, 56} = 5.613, p < .05), and thus a correction was applied.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ena Coenen

Ena Coenen is a PhD student at the Leuven Institute of Criminology, University of Leuven. She received prior a Master’s Degree in Theoretical and Experimental Psychology at the University of Ghent.

S. Pleysier

Stefaan Pleysier is an associate Professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Leuven (Belgium) and affiliated with the Leuven Institute of Criminology (LINC).

J. Put

Professor Johan Put is Full Professor of Youth Law and Social Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Leuven (Belgium), affiliated with the Leuven Institute of Criminology (LINC) and the Institute of Social Law (ISR).