Elsevier

Journal of Criminal Justice

Volume 35, Issue 1, January–February 2007, Pages 51-67
Journal of Criminal Justice

Reassessing the family-delinquency association: Do family type, family processes, and economic factors make a difference?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2006.11.015Get rights and content

Abstract

The present study drew on four competing theoretical perspectives to examine the relationship between family structure and juvenile delinquency. Using data from the Add Health Study, the authors examined nonserious and serious delinquent behavior across youth from different types of households and also considered how the association between family structure and delinquency might be conditioned by family processes and economic factors. Results from negative binomial regression analyses indicated that, in general, type of household was not a significant predictor of nonserious or serious delinquency. Rather, maternal attachment emerged as the most important determinant of delinquent behavior among youth from all family types. The results are discussed within the context of Hirschi's original interpretation of social control theory and future directions for research are suggested.

Introduction

Various versions of social disorganization theories (e.g., Sampson, 1992, Shaw and McKay, 1932), social control theories (e.g., Hirschi, 1969, Nye, 1958), subcultural theories (e.g., Lewis, 1961, Miller, 1958), and life-course perspectives (e.g., Sampson and Laub, 1993, Thornberry, 1987) cite family as a major factor in the explanation of delinquent behavior. Much of the research literature on the subject indicates that the family generally encourages conformity of youth by monitoring behavior, applying consistent discipline, and developing parent–child attachments (e.g., Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990, Patterson, 1982). Scholars are not in agreement, however, as to whether single parents are as effective as two parents in their ability to do these things (e.g., Demo, 1992, Hetherington and Kelly, 2002, Popenoe, 1996, Rebellon, 2002, Stacey, 1996, Wilkinson, 1974).

There is some evidence that single-mothers place fewer maturity demands on their children, engage in less monitoring, and use less effective disciplinary strategies than families with two parents (e.g., Simons, Simons, & Wallace, 2004). Moreover, some research also lends support to the idea that compared to children from intact families, children living in single-parent families participate in more delinquency (e.g., Dornbusch et al., 1985, Juby and Farrington, 2001, Rodgers and Pryor, 1998, Simons and Chao, 1996), have lower educational achievement, and demonstrate poorer overall adjustment as adults (e.g., Acock and Kiecolt, 1989, Amato, 2000, Amato and Keith, 1991, Loh, 1996, McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994, Rankin and Kern, 1994, Wells and Rankin, 1991). The relationship between family structure and delinquency appears to be particularly significant when official data is used rather than self-report measures and for certain types of conduct problems, such as status offending (e.g., Free, 1991, Hirschi, 1969, Nye, 1958, Rankin and Kern, 1994, Rosen and Neilson, 1982, Van Voorhis et al., 1988, Wells and Rankin, 1991).

Despite a number of studies on the topic, several issues regarding the relationship between family structure and delinquent behavior remain unresolved. One underlying concern is the conceptualization of the single-parent household and the role that family processes and social structure may have on tempering its relationship with delinquency. Prior research, for example, has often characterized the single-parent home in simplistic terms by using the traditional methodological practice of collapsing all single-parent households into a single category (i.e., non-intact or broken homes). Treating all single-parent families as theoretically and empirically equivalent is problematic, however, for several reasons. Most important, it ignores differences that might exist between households that experience divorce, death, or no marriage, especially in terms of family bonds and resources that may condition involvement in delinquency relative to one another and to intact households (Cernkovich and Giordano, 1987, Juby and Farrington, 2001, Sprey, 1967, Wells and Rankin, 1991).1

The present research attempted to address this weakness of the existing literature by using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) to examine in greater detail the extent to which family type, family process variables, and economic factors impact participation in nonserious and serious delinquency. More specific, the study considered whether differences existed in the relationship between family types (i.e., intact, divorce, death, or never married) and delinquency, and if this association was mediated by family processes (i.e., attachment, supervision, and control) and/or economic variables (i.e., membership in the underclass and maternal employment status).

Section snippets

Theoretical background

A number of theoretical frameworks have been used to explain the relationship between family structure and a variety of youth outcomes, including delinquency.2 Following earlier research, the present article refers to four of these paradigms as social control theory, the social control/parental absence model (see Amato and Keith, 1991, Demuth and

Prior research

It is clear that these different theoretical approaches offer distinct positions on the association between family structure and delinquent behavior and the specific social processes that may mediate this relationship. Although research was lacking that focused specifically on family type and each of these family and structural processes, previous studies had offered some support for each theoretical position. Demuth and Brown (2004), for example, found that family structure was much less

Data and sample

Data used for this research came from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health). The study was based on a nationally representative sample of eighty high schools and fifty-two “feeder schools” (i.e., middle or junior high schools) that were stratified by region, urbanicity, school type, ethnic mix, and size. Seventh to twelfth grade students were randomly chosen from the class rosters of the selected schools and were interviewed in their own homes. One parental figure,

Comparing family type by family processes and economic resources

Recall that three of the perspectives discussed, the social control/parental absence, the family crisis, and the economic strain models, indicated that because of either having only one parent present or experiencing a disruption, differences should be evident among family types in parental/child attachment, supervision, or economic resources. According to the social control/parental absence model, for example, non-intact households should reveal lower levels of attachment relative to intact

Discussion

Social control theory, together with parental absence, family crisis, and economic strain models were used as the theoretical background to examine the relationship between family type and delinquency in the present study. The first two frameworks, social control theory and the parental absence model, make the assumption that two parents are better able to provide affection and supervision of their children than single parents (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990, McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994).

Acknowledgements

This research used data from Add Health, a program project designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris, and funded by a grant P01-HD31921 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from seventeen other agencies. Special acknowledgement is due to Ronald Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Persons interested in obtaining data files from Add Health should contact Add Health, Carolina

References (71)

  • A.C. Acock et al.

    Family diversity and well-being

    (1994)
  • A.C. Acock et al.

    Is it family structure or socioeconomic status? Family structure during adolescence and adult adjustment

    Social Forces

    (1989)
  • P. Amato

    Family process in one-parent, stepparent, and intact families: The child's point of view

    Journal of Marriage and the Family

    (1987)
  • P. Amato

    The consequences of divorce for adults and children

    Journal of Marriage and the Family

    (2000)
  • P. Amato et al.

    Parental divorce and the well-being of children: A meta–analysis

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1991)
  • E. Anderson

    Streetwise: Race, class, and change in an urban community

    (1990)
  • R.L. Austin

    Race, father–absence and female delinquency

    Criminology

    (1978)
  • T. Biblarz et al.

    Family structure, educational attainment, and socioeconomic success: Rethinking the “pathology of matriarchy.”

    American Journal of Sociology

    (1999)
  • S. Briar et al.

    Delinquency, situational inducements, and commitments to conformity

    Social Problems

    (1965)
  • S. Cernkovich et al.

    Family relationships and delinquency

    Criminology

    (1987)
  • K. Chantala et al.

    Strategies to perform a design-based analysis using the Add Health data

  • Z. Chen et al.

    The impact of family structure during adolescence on deviance in early adulthood

    Deviant Behavior

    (1997)
  • D. Demo

    Parent–child relations: Assessing recent changes

    Journal of Marriage and the Family

    (1992)
  • S. Demuth et al.

    Family structure, family processes, and adolescent delinquency: The significance of parental absence versus parental gender

    Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

    (2004)
  • S. Dornbusch et al.

    Single parents, extended households, and the control of adolescents

    Child Development

    (1985)
  • K.A. Faust et al.

    Marital dissolution: Divorce, separation, annulment, and widowhood

  • R. Felner et al.

    Family stress and organization following parental divorce or death

    Journal of Divorce

    (1980)
  • R. Felner et al.

    Parental death or divorce and the school adjustment of young children

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1981)
  • M. Free

    Clarifying the relationship between the broken home and juvenile delinquency: A critique of the current literature

    Deviant Behavior

    (1991)
  • S. Glueck et al.

    Unraveling juvenile delinquency

    (1950)
  • M. Gottfredson et al.

    A general theory of crime

    (1990)
  • J. Guidubaldi et al.

    The impact of parental divorce on children: Report of the nationwide NASP study

    School Psychology Review

    (1983)
  • K. Heimer

    Socioeconomic status, subcultural definitions, and violent delinquency

    Social Forces

    (1997)
  • E.M. Hetherington et al.

    Effect of divorce on parents and children

  • E.M. Hetherington et al.

    For better or for worse: Divorce reconsidered

    (2002)
  • T. Hirschi

    Causes of delinquency

    (1969)
  • K.C. Holden et al.

    The economic costs of marital dissolution: Why do women bear a disproportionate cost?

    Annual Review of Sociology

    (1991)
  • H. Juby et al.

    Disentangling the link between disrupted families and delinquency

    British Journal of Criminology

    (2001)
  • O. Lewis

    The children of Sanchez: Autobiography of a Mexican family

    (1961)
  • E. Loh

    Changes in family structure, attained schooling, and adult poverty status

    Social Science Quarterly

    (1996)
  • J.S. Long et al.

    Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata

    (2001)
  • K.Y. Mack et al.

    Race, gender, single-mother households, and delinquency: A further test of power–control theory

    Youth and Society

    (2005)
  • B. Martinson et al.

    Parental histories: Patterns of change in early life

    Journal of Family Issues

    (1992)
  • R. Matsueda et al.

    Race, family structure, and delinquency: A test of differential association and social control theories

    American Sociological Review

    (1987)
  • S. McLanahan

    Family structure and the reproduction of poverty

    American Journal of Sociology

    (1985)
  • Cited by (62)

    • The differential influence of absent and harsh fathers on juvenile delinquency

      2018, Journal of Adolescence
      Citation Excerpt :

      After accounting for indirect and direct parental controls, the researchers found no evidence that parental absence was a significant predictor of adolescent delinquency. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, Mack et al. (2007) tested various theories that explain the association between family structure and delinquency among community adolescents. The results suggest that there is no association between father absence and juvenile delinquency after controlling for maternal attachment.

    • The unique and interactive effects of parent and school bonds on adolescent delinquency

      2017, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The linkages between parent-child relationships and youth outcomes are significant, even when controlling for other parental characteristics and behaviors. Prior work in delinquency prevention indicates that the emotional component of parent-child relationships may be more strongly linked to youth outcomes than parental monitoring, supervision and control (Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1986; Mack, Leiber, Featherstone, & Monserud, 2007) and other consistent correlates of delinquency, like family structure (i.e., parents' marital status) and parent education (Davis-Kean, 2005; Kristensen, Gravseth, & Bjerkedal, 2009; Mack et al., 2007). These findings are also supported by Demuth and Brown (2004) who found that, when all of these factors are studied in concert, strong bonds remain significantly associated with reduced levels of delinquent behavior after controlling for parent monitoring, supervision, education and marital status.

    • Psychological criminology: An integrative approach

      2023, Psychological Criminology: An Integrative Approach
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text