Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Selection and Influence: A Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Peer and Personal Offending

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Whether people are affected by the criminal behavior of peers (the “influence” perspective) or simply prefer to associate with others who are similar in their offending (the “selection” perspective) is a long-standing criminological debate. The relatively recent development of stochastic actor-oriented models (SAOMs—also called SIENA models) for longitudinal social network data has allowed for the examination of selection and influence effects in more comprehensive ways than was previously possible. This article reports the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that use SAOMs to test for peer selection and influence effects.

Methods

A systematic review and 3-level random effects meta-analysis of studies that have used SAOMs to test selection and influence dynamics for offending behavior.

Results

There is support for both influence (mean log odds ratio = 1.23, p < 0.01, 21 effects, pooled n = 21,193) and selection dynamics (mean log odds ratio = 0.31, p < 0.01, 28 effects, pooled n = 21,269). Type of behavior, country, and the year of the first wave of data collection are found to moderate the influence effect; no significant moderation effects are found for peer selection on offending.

Conclusions

People are both influenced by the offending of their peers and select into friendships based on similarity in offending.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Articles where the behavioral measure was a composite of substance use and delinquency were excluded to ensure that the focus on delinquency was clear. For example, Franken et al. (2016) was excluded as they combined involvement in delinquency, alcohol use, and tobacco use in their measure of externalizing behavior. We did, however, test supplementary models that included weapon carrying (Dijkstra et al. 2010, 2012), a behavior that does not meet the “clearly illegal” criterion, and found that doing so did not alter the results in any meaningful way.

  2. Four potentially relevant non-English language articles were found since they had English abstracts. We were able to find the English language master's thesis that one was drawn from (De Cuyper et al. 2009), the author of two others sent us a copy of an article that was soon to be released online that used the same data (Shin 2017), and the author of the final potentially relevant non-English article confirmed that SIENA models were not used.

  3. We conducted supplementary analyses in which the nature of the scale (multi-item average, variety scale, dichotomized, etc.) was tested as a moderator. The mean effect sizes were not found to depend on the form of the scaling.

  4. The exception here is Haynie et al. (2014). They reported separate results for violent and non-violent crime, but since the correlation between these outcomes is known (not reported in the article, but we used the same data to generate this correlation—r = 0.562), a suitable synthetic estimate can be produced that is not based on an assumed correlation but on the observed data. We combined these results into a single effect by averaging the individual effects and calculating the variance using the equation recommended by Borenstein et al. (2009, p. 227):

    \( V_{{\bar{Y}}} = \frac{1}{4}\left( {V_{{Y_{1} }} + V_{{Y_{2} }} + 2r\sqrt {V_{{Y_{1} }} } \sqrt {V_{{Y_{2} }} } } \right) \)

    \( V_{{Y_{1} }} \) = variance of effect 1.

    \( V_{{Y_{2} }} \) = variance of effect 2.

    \( r \) = correlation between outcome 1 and outcome 2.

    We also tested supplementary models in which the violent and non-violent crime estimates were included as separate effects. The difference in results was negligible (available on request).

  5. An outlier (De La Rue 2015) was excluded from this figure as it altered the horizontal axis scaling such that it obscured the other effects that had narrower confidence intervals. The forest plot including this effect can be accessed in the online supplementary material.

  6. For example, Osgood et al. (2015) used a 4-category delinquency scale; the reported influence effect was 1.108 (SE = 0.084). This was rescaled as follows:

    Log odds ratio = 1.108/(4 − 1) = 0.369

    SE = 0.084/(4 − 1) = 0.028.

  7. Equation 7.1: Converting log odds ratio to d.

    \( d = Log\,odds\,ratio\, \times \frac{\sqrt 3 }{\pi } \).

  8. Equation 6.5: Converting z to r.

    \( r = \frac{{e^{2z} - 1}}{{e^{2z} + 1}} \)

    Equation 7.5: Converting r to d.

    \( d = \frac{2r}{{\sqrt {1 - r^{2} } }} \).

  9. Imputation methods exist for network ties (Wang et al. 2016), but they are not yet widely implemented.

References

  • Achen, C. H. (2000). Why lagged dependent variables can suppress the explanatory power of other independent variables. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the political methodology section of the American Political Science Association, Los Angeles, CA

  • Akers RL (2009) Social learning and social structure: a general theory of crime and deviance. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick

    Google Scholar 

  • Akers RL, Jensen GF (2006) The empirical status of social learning theory of crime and deviance: the past, present, and future. In: Cullen FT, Wright JP, Blevins KR (eds) Taking stock: the status of criminological theory. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, pp 37–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Baerveldt C, Volker B, Van Rossem R (2008) Revisiting selection and influence: an inquiry into the friendship networks of high school students and their association with delinquency. Can J Criminol Crim 50(5):559–587

    Google Scholar 

  • Boman JH, Ward JT (2014) Beyond projection: specifying the types of peer delinquency misperception at the item and scale levels. Deviant Behav 35(7):555–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boman JH, Stogner JM, Miller BL, Griffin OH, Krohn MD (2012) On the operational validity of perceptual peer delinquency: exploring projection and elements contained in perceptions. J Res Crime Delinq 49(4):601–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins J, Rothstein HR (2009) Introduction to meta-analysis. Wiley, Chichester

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burk WJ, Steglich CEG, Snijders TAB (2007) Beyond dyadic interdependence: actor-oriented models for co-evolving social networks and individual behaviors. Int J Behav Dev 31(4):397–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burk WJ, Kerr M, Stattin H (2008) The co-evolution of early adolescent friendship networks, school involvement, and delinquent behaviors. Rev Fr Sociol 49(3):499–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl V, Van Zalk M (2014) Peer networks and the development of illegal political behavior among adolescents. J Res Adolesc 24(2):399–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cuyper R (2008) Good friends, bad behavior? The co-evolution of friendship relations and delinquency involvement among Dutch adolescents. Master’s thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen

  • De Cuyper R, Weerman F, Ruiter S (2009) De co-evolutie van vriendschapsrelaties en delinquent gedrag onder Nederlandse jongeren. Mens en Maatschappij 84(3):300–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De La Rue L (2015) The influence of family and friends on girls’ delinquency: a social network analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

  • Dijkstra JK, Lindenberg S, Veenstra R, Steglich C, Isaacs J, Card NA, Hodges EVE (2010) Influence and selection processes in weapon carrying during adolescence: the roles of status, aggression, and vulnerability. Criminology 48(1):187–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra JK, Berger C, Lindenberg S (2011) Do physical and relational aggression explain adolescents’ friendship selection? The competing roles of network characteristics, gender, and social status. Aggressive Behav 37(5):417–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra JK, Gest SD, Lindenberg S, Veenstra R, Cillessen AHN (2012) Testing three explanations of the emergence of weapon carrying in peer context: the roles of aggression, victimization, and the social network. J Adolesc Health 50(4):371–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franken A, Moffitt TE, Steglich CEG, Dijkstra JK, Harakeh Z, Vollebergh WAM (2016) The role of self-control and early adolescents’ friendships in the development of externalizing behavior: the SNARE study. J Youth Adolesc 45(9):1800–1811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glueck S, Glueck E (1950) Unraveling Juvenile delinquency. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson M, Hirschi T (1987) The methodological adequacy of longitudinal research on crime. Criminology 25(3):581–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson M, Hirschi T (1990) A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynie DL (2001) Delinquent peers revisited: does network structure matter? Am J Sociol 106(4):1013–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynie DL, Osgood DW (2005) Reconsidering peers and delinquency: how do peers matter? Soc Forces 84(2):1109–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynie DL, Doogan NJ, Soller B (2014) Gender, friendship networks, and delinquency: a dynamic network approach. Criminology 52(4):688–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges LV, Tipton E, Johnson MC (2010) Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Res Synth Methods 1(1):39–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins JPT, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: the Cochrane collaboration. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschi T (1969) Causes of delinquency. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidis JPA (2016) The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q 94(3):485–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jose R, Hipp JR, Butts CT, Wang C, Lakon CM (2016) Network structure, influence, selection, and adolescent delinquent behavior: unpacking a dynamic process. Crim Justice Behav 43(2):264–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr M, Van Zalk M, Stattin H (2012) Psychopathic traits moderate peer influence on adolescent delinquency. J Child Psychol Psyc 53(8):826–835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knecht A (2008) Friendship selection and friends’ influence: dynamics of networks and actor attributes in early adolescence. Ph.D. dissertation, Utrecht University, Netherlands

  • Knecht A, Snijders TAB, Baerveldt C, Steglich CEG, Raub W (2010) Friendship and delinquency: selection and influence processes in early adolescence. Soc Dev 19(3):494–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreager DA, Schaefer DR, Bouchard M, Haynie DL, Wakefield S, Young J, Zajac G (2016) Toward a criminology of inmate networks. Justice Q 33(6):1000–1028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee ST (2011) An actor-oriented approach to friendship networks: re-analysis and further model specifications of the published model by Baerveldt, Volker & Van Rossem (2008). Master’s thesis, University of Oxford

  • Light JM, Dishion TJ (2007) Early adolescent antisocial behavior and peer rejection: a dynamic test of a developmental process. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev 118:77–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logis HA, Rodkin PC, Gest SD, Ahn H-J (2013) Popularity as an organizing factor of preadolescent friendship networks: beyond prosocial and aggressive behavior. J Res Adolesc 23(3):413–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGloin JM, Thomas KJ (2016) Considering the elements that inform perceived peer deviance. J Res Crime Delinq 53(5):597–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molano A, Jones SM, Brown JL, Aber JL (2013) Selection and socialization of aggressive and prosocial behavior: the moderating role of social-cognitive processes. J Res Adolesc 23(3):424–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osgood DW, Feinberg ME, Ragan DT (2015) Social networks and the diffusion of adolescent problem behavior: reliable estimates of selection and influence from sixth through ninth grades. Prev Sci 16(6):832–843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt TC, Cullen FT, Sellers CS, Winfree LT Jr, Madensen TD, Daigle LE, Fearn NE, Gau JM (2010) The empirical status of social learning theory: a meta-analysis. Justice Q 27(6):765–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt TC, Turanovic JJ, Fox KA, Wright KA (2014) Self-control and victimization: a meta-analysis. Criminology 52(1):87–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rebellon CJ, Modecki KL (2013) Accounting for projection bias in models of delinquent peer influence: the utility and limits of latent variable approaches. J Quant Criminol 30(2):163–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ripley RM, Snijders TAB, Boda Z, Voros A, Preciado P (2018) Manual for RSiena (version April 17, 2018), University of Oxford, Department of Statistics. Nuffield College, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Rulison KL, Gest SD, Loken E (2013) Dynamic social networks and physical aggression: the moderating role of gender and social status among peers. J Res Adolesc 23(3):437–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin H (2017) Friendship dynamics of adolescent aggression, prosocial behavior, and social status: the moderating role of gender. J Youth Adolesc 46(11):2305–2320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sijtsema JJ, Ojanen T, Veenstra R, Lindenberg S, Hawley PH, Little TD (2010) Forms and functions of aggression in adolescent friendship selection and influence: a longitudinal social network analysis. Soc Dev 19(3):515–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snijders TAB (2001) The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. Sociol Methodol 31(1):361–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snijders TAB, Baerveldt C (2003) A multi-level network study of the effects of delinquent behavior on friendship evolution. J Math Sociol 27(2–3):123–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snijders TAB, Van de Bunt GG, Steglich CEG (2010) Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Soc Netw 32(1):44–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steglich C, Snijders TAB, West P (2006) Applying SIENA: an illustrative analysis of the coevolution of adolescents’ friendship networks, taste in music, and alcohol consumption. Methodology 2(1):48–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steglich C, Snijders TAB, Pearson M (2010) Dynamic networks and behavior: separating selection from influence. Sociol Methodol 40(1):329–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland EH (1947) Principles of criminology, vol 4. J. B. Lippincott, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Svensson Y, Burk WJ, Stattin H, Kerr M (2012) Peer selection and influence of delinquent behavior of immigrant and nonimmigrant youths: does context matter? Int J Behav Dev 36(3):178–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turanovic JJ, Young JTN (2016) Violent offending and victimization in adolescence: social network mechanisms and homophily. Criminology 54(3):487–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zalk MHW, Van Zalk N (2015) Violent peer influence: the roles of self-esteem and psychopathic traits. Dev Psychopathol 27(4pt1):1077–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viechtbauer W (2010) Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw 36(3):1–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang C, Butts CT, Hipp JR, Jose R, Lakon CM (2016) Multiple imputation for missing edge data: a predictive evaluation method with application to Add Health. Soc Netw 45:89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warr M (2002) Companions in crime. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weerman FM (2011) Delinquent peers in context: a longitudinal network analysis of selection and influence effects. Criminology 49(1):253–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weerman FM, Hoeve M (2012) Peers and delinquency among girls and boys: are sex differences in delinquency explained by peer factors? Eur J Criminol 9(3):228–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weerman FM, Wilcox P, Sullivan CJ (2018) The short-term dynamics of peers and delinquent behavior: an analysis of bi-weekly changes within a high school student network. J Quant Criminol 34(2):431–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Nate Doogan for his valuable comments on an earlier version of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology and Legal Studies, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada

    Owen Gallupe & John McLevey

  2. Department of Knowledge Integration, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada

    John McLevey

  3. Library, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada

    Sarah Brown

Authors
  1. Owen Gallupe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John McLevey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sarah Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Owen Gallupe.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (PDF 51 kb)

Appendices

Appendix 1: Database Search Terms

All searches conducted by Sarah Brown, Liaison Librarian, University of Waterloo.

Scopus Search

  • Performed June 3, 2015; updated on April 22, 2017

  • Database: Scopus

  • Retrieved 754 results and 958 results respectively

((TITLE-ABS-KEY(peer* OR friend* OR gang* OR social OR “collective behavior*” OR “collective behavior*”) AND PUBYEAR > 2000) AND ((TITLE-ABS-KEY(delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR assault OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver*” OR “human traffick*” OR kidnapping OR “sex* offen*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY(theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug traffick*” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*))) AND ((TITLE-ABS-KEY(influenc* AND select*) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY(stochastic AND actor) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY(siena) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY(“simulation investigation”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY(stochastic AND model*)))) AND (LIMIT-TO(LANGUAGE, “English”))

Cited Reference Search Snijders, T. A. B. (2001). The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. Sociological Methodology, 31(1), 361–395.

  • Run on June 23, 2015; updated on May 2, 2017.

  • Retrieved 331 results and 443 results respectively.

PsycInfo Search

  • Performed June 3, 2015; updated on April 22, 2017.

  • Database: PsycNET.

  • Retrieved 442 results and 562 results respectively.

(Any Field:(delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR assault OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver*” OR “human traffick*” OR kidnapping OR “sex* offen*” OR theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug traffick*” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*) AND Year:[2001 TO 2018]) AND (Any Field:(influenc* AND select*) OR Any Field:(stochastic AND actor) OR Any Field:(siena) OR Any Field:(“simulation investigation”) OR Any Field:(stochastic AND model*)) AND (Subject:(peer* OR gang OR gangs OR friend* OR social* OR “collective behavior*” OR “collective behavior*”) OR Abstract:(peer* OR friend* OR gang OR gangs OR “collective behavior*” OR “collective behavior*”) OR Abstract:(“social network*” OR “social support*” OR “social influence*”))

Wilson Social Sciences Full Text

  • Performed June 3, 2015; not updated in 2017 (library subscription expired).

  • Database: EBSCO.

  • Retrieved 116 results

(TX delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver” OR “drunk drivers” OR “human trafficking” OR “human trafficker” OR “human traffickers” OR kidnapping OR “sex offenses” OR “sex offender” OR “sex offenders” OR “sexual offenses” OR “sex offences” OR “sexual offences” OR assault OR theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug trafficker” OR “drug trafficking” OR “drug traffickers” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*)  AND ((DE “Friendship” OR DE “Peer relations” OR DE “Friendship -- Sociological aspects” OR DE “Social networks” OR DE “Social support” OR DE “Social interaction” OR DE “Social pressure” OR DE “Peer pressure” OR DE “Social influence” OR DE “Gangs”)) OR SU (social* or peer* or friend* OR gang*) OR TI (social* or peer* or friend* OR gang*) OR AB (social* or peer* or friend* OR gang*)  AND (influenc* AND select*) OR (stochastic AND actor) OR siena OR “simulation investigation” OR (stochastic AND model*)

Web of Science

  • Performed June 3, 2015; updated April 24, 2017.

  • Database: Web of Science.

  • Retrieved 821 results and 1338 results respectively.

#5

#3 AND #2 AND #1

 Refined by: LANGUAGES: (ENGLISH)

 DocType = All document types; Language = All languages

#4

#3 AND #2 AND #1

 DocType = All document types; Language = All languages

#3

TOPIC: (delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver” OR “drunk drivers” OR “human trafficking” OR “human trafficker” OR “human traffickers” OR kidnapping OR “sex offenses” OR “sex offender” OR “sex offenders” OR “sexual offenses” OR “sex offences” OR “sexual offences” OR assault OR theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug trafficker” OR “drug trafficking” OR “drug traffickers” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*)

 DocType = All document types; Language = All languages

#2

TOPIC: (social* OR peer* OR friend* OR gang*)

 DocType = All document types; Language = All languages

#1

TOPIC: (influenc* AND select*) OR TOPIC: (stochastic AND actor) OR TOPIC: (siena) OR TOPIC: (stochastic AND model) OR TOPIC: (“simulation investigation”)

 DocType = All document types; Language = All languages

Cited Reference Search Snijders, T. A. B. (2001). The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. Sociological Methodology, 31(1), 361–395.

  • Performed June 23, 2015; updated May 2, 2017.

  • Retrieved 172 results and 241 results respectively.

Sociological Abstracts

  • Performed April 24, 2017.

  • Database: ProQuest.

  • Retrieved 902 results.

(delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver” OR “drunk drivers” OR “human trafficking” OR “human trafficker” OR “human traffickers” OR kidnapping OR “sex offenses” OR “sex offender” OR “sex offenders” OR “sexual offenses” OR “sex offences” OR “sexual offences” OR assault OR theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug trafficker” OR “drug trafficking” OR “drug traffickers” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*) AND ((influenc* AND select*) OR (stochastic AND model*) OR (stochastic AND actor) OR SIENA OR “simulation investigation”) AND (ab(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*) OR ti(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*) OR su(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*)) AND pd(20010101-20171231)

(Note: Limited to English language only).

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global

  • Performed April 24, 2017.

  • Database: ProQuest.

  • Retrieved 691 results.

all(delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver” OR “drunk drivers” OR “human trafficking” OR “human trafficker” OR “human traffickers” OR kidnapping OR “sex offenses” OR “sex offender” OR “sex offenders” OR “sexual offenses” OR “sex offences” OR “sexual offences” OR assault OR theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug trafficker” OR “drug trafficking” OR “drug traffickers” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*) AND (all(influenc* AND select*) OR all(stochastic AND model*) OR all(stochastic AND actor) OR all(SIENA) OR all(“simulation investigation”)) AND all(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*)

(Note: All terms searched “Anywhere—Except Full-text”. Limiters included: date range 2001—2017 and English only)

National Crime Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Abstracts

  • Performed April 24, 2017.

  • Database: ProQuest.

  • Retrieved 294 results.

(delinquen* OR firearm* OR weapon* OR aggressi* OR devian* OR criminal* OR crime OR vandal* OR perpetrator* OR arson OR “driving under the influence” OR “drunk driving” OR “drunk driver” OR “drunk drivers” OR “human trafficking” OR “human trafficker” OR “human traffickers” OR kidnapping OR “sex offenses” OR “sex offender” OR “sex offenders” OR “sexual offenses” OR “sex offences” OR “sexual offences” OR assault OR theft OR burglar* OR fraud OR “illegal drug distribution” OR “drug trafficker” OR “drug trafficking” OR “drug traffickers” OR violen* OR stalking OR stalker* OR terroris*) AND ((influenc* AND select*) OR (stochastic AND model*) OR (stochastic AND actor) OR SIENA OR “simulation investigation”) AND (ab(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*) OR ti(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*) OR su(peer* OR friend* OR social* OR gang*))

(Note: Limiters: date range 2001—2017 and English only)

Full Text Searches

JSTOR (3 Searches)

(((peer* OR friend*) AND (delinquen* OR crim* OR aggressi*)) AND (“stochastic model” ~ 5)) AND la:(eng OR en)

  • Performed June 5, 2015; updated April 25, 2017.

  • Date Range: 01/01/2001—current date; 01/01/2001—31/12/2017.

  • Results = 242 and 246 respectively.

(((peer* OR friend*) AND (delinquen* OR crim* OR aggressi*)) AND (“stochastic actor” ~ 5)) AND la:(eng OR en)

  • Performed June 5, 2015; updated April 25, 2017.

  • Date Range: 01/01/2001—current date; 01/01/2001—31/12/2017.

  • Results = 18 [same results on update].

(((peer* OR friend*) AND (delinquen* OR crim* OR aggressi*)) AND (“selection influence” ~ 10)) AND la:(eng OR en).

  • Performed June 5, 2015; updated April 26, 2017.

  • Date Range: 01/01/2001—current date; 2015–2017.

  • Results = 1071 (First 300 included); 65.

Google Scholar (2 Searches)

(peer OR friend OR friendship) (crime OR delinquent OR delinquency OR aggression OR aggressive) (SIENA)

  • Performed June 5, 2015; updated April 26, 2017.

  • Date Range: 2001—current date; 2015—current date.

  • Results = 7760; 2020 (first 200 included for both).

(peer OR friendship OR friend) (crime OR delinquent OR delinquency OR aggression OR aggressive) (stochastic actor)

  • Performed June 7, 2015; updated April 26, 2017.

  • Date Range: 01/01/2001—current date; 2015—current date.

  • Results = 1280; 2540 (first 200 included for both).

Appendix 2: Study Flow Diagram

figure a

Adapted from Higgins and Green (2011, Figure 11.2.a)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gallupe, O., McLevey, J. & Brown, S. Selection and Influence: A Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Peer and Personal Offending. J Quant Criminol 35, 313–335 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-018-9384-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-018-9384-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation