Testing control theory and differential association: A causal modeling approach.

A number of strong theoretical statements have been based on analyses of delinquency data from the Richmond Youth Project. Hirschi (1969) and Jensen (1972), in particular, found that Hirschi's control theory was empirically supported over Sutherland's theory of differential association. This paper reanalyzes these data and reassesses this negative evidence pertaining to differential association theory. It is shown that the ratio of learned behavior patterns favorable and unfavorable to violation of legal codes, the critical variable in Sutherland's theory, can be operationalized by explicitly modeling its measurement error structure. In turn, this allows the testing of specific hypotheses derived from the theory. The analysis based on this strategy finds differential association theory supported over control theory. Specifically, the unobservable construct representing the ratio of learned behavior patterns successfully mediates the effects on delinquency of the model's other variables.

[1]  W. W. Minor,et al.  Techniques of Neutralization: a Reconceptualization and Empirical Examination , 1981 .

[2]  J. Braithwaite.  The Myth of Social Class and Criminality Reconsidered , 1981 .

[3]  John A. Humphrey,et al.  Juvenile delinquency : little brother grows up , 1980 .

[4]  Larry W. Isaac.  Political Protest Orientations among Black and White Adults. , 1980 .

[5]  Delbert S. Elliott,et al.  Reconciling race and class differences in self-reported and official estimates of delinquency. , 1980 .

[6]  L. Lanza-Kaduce,et al.  Social learning and deviant behavior: a specific test of a general theory. , 1979, American sociological review.

[7]  K. Miller,et al.  Women and Work: The Psychological Effects of Occupational Conditions , 1979, American Journal of Sociology.

[8]  C. S. Reichardt,et al.  Latent variable models of status attainment , 1979 .

[9]  Carmi Schooler,et al.  The Reciprocal Effects of the Substantive Complexity of Work and Intellectual Flexibility: A Longitudinal Assessment , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[10]  Robert M. Hauser,et al.  Response Errors of Black and Nonblack Males in Models of the Intergenerational Transmission of Socioeconomic Status , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[11]  J. Hepburn.  Testing Alternative Models of Delinquency Causation , 1976 .

[12]  O. D. Duncan,et al.  Introduction to Structural Equation Models. , 1977 .

[13]  Dag Sörbom,et al.  DETECTION OF CORRELATED ERRORS IN LONGITUDINAL DATA , 1975 .

[14]  Karl G. Jöreskog,et al.  Analyzing psychological data by structural analysis of covariance matrices , 1974 .

[15]  M. Hindelang.  Causes of Delinquency: A Partial Replication and Extension , 1973 .

[16]  G. Jensen,et al.  Parents, Peers, and Delinquent Action: A Test of the Differential Association Perspective , 1972, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  H. Costner.  Theory, Deduction, and Rules of Correspondence , 1969, American Journal of Sociology.

[18]  K. Jöreskog.  A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis , 1969 .

[19]  R. Stanfield.  The Interaction of Family Variables and Gang Variables in the Aetiology of Delinquency , 1966 .

[20]  Melvin L. De Fleur,et al.  A Reformulation of Sutherland's Differential Association Theory and a Strategy for Empirical Verification , 1966 .

[21]  I. Piliavin,et al.  Delinquency, Situational Inducements, and Commitment to Conformity , 1965 .

[22]  H. L. Voss.  Differential Association and Reported Delinquent Behavior: A Replication , 1964 .

[23]  A. Reiss,,et al.  An Empirical Test of Differential Association Theory* , 1964 .

[24]  Donald R. Cressey,et al.  Epidemiology and Individual Conduct: A Case from Criminology , 1960 .

[25]  Gresham M. Sykes,et al.  Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. , 1957 .

[26]  J. J. F. Short.  Differential Association and Delinquency , 1957 .

[27]  D. Cressey.  Application and Verification of the Differential Association Theory , 1952 .