How is parenting related to adolescent delinquency? A between- and within-person analysis of the mediating role of self-control, delinquent attitudes, peer delinquency, and time spent in criminogenic settings
| Author | Heleen J. Janssen,Gerben J.N. Bruinsma,Veroni I. Eichelsheim,Maja Deković |
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370815608881 |
| Published date | 01 March 2016 |
| Date | 01 March 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2015
Article
European Journal of Criminology
2016, Vol. 13(2) 169 –194
How is parenting related to
© The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
adolescent delinquency? A
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1477370815608881
euc.sagepub.com
between- and within-person
analysis of the mediating role
of self-control, delinquent
attitudes, peer delinquency,
and time spent in
criminogenic settings
Heleen J. Janssen
Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), The Netherlands
Veroni I. Eichelsheim
Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), The Netherlands
Maja Deković
Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Gerben J.N. Bruinsma
Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), The Netherlands
Abstract
We examined how parenting is directly and indirectly associated with adolescent delinquency.
We derived four possible mechanisms from major criminological theories and examined their
relative contribution to explaining the relationship between parenting and delinquency: self-
control theory (that is, self-control), differential association theory (that is, delinquent attitudes
and peer delinquency), and routine activity theory (that is, time spent in criminogenic settings).
In addition, we examined how changes in different aspects of parenting during adolescence were
Corresponding author:
Heleen J. Janssen, Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), PO Box
71304, 1008 BH Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Email: hjanssen@nscr.nl
170
European Journal of Criminology 13(2)
directly and indirectly related to changes in delinquency. Results of multilevel structural equation
modeling on two waves of panel data on 603 adolescents indicated that parenting was indirectly
related to delinquency through self-control, delinquent attitudes, peer delinquency, and time
spent in criminogenic settings. However, only when examined together these variables, derived
from major criminological theories, almost fully mediate the effects of parenting. Furthermore,
changes in parenting during adolescence were indirectly related to changes in delinquency through
changes in delinquent attitudes and in peer delinquency.
Keywords
Delinquency, delinquent attitudes, parenting, peer delinquency, self-control, time spent in
criminogenic settings
Introduction
A large body of research has demonstrated that parenting is related to adolescent delin-
quency (for a meta analytical overview, see Hoeve et al., 2009). In the literature, however,
the attention has been given to the mechanisms that might explain this relationship. Parents
might be indirectly protective for involvement in delinquent behavior. In the present study
we examined the extent to which the most important mechanisms, stemming from three
major criminological theoretical approaches (self-control theory, differential association
theory, and routine activity theory), uniquely contribute to explaining the associations
between parenting and adolescent offending.
According to self-control theory (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990), self-control is the
key cause of crime involvement. People with lower levels of self-control are more impul-
sive, tend to engage in risk-taking activities, and prefer easy or immediate gratifications
of desires compared with people with higher levels of self-control (Gottfredson and
Hirschi, 1990; Grasmick et al., 1993). The theory states that low levels of self-control
imply the inability to refrain from delinquent behavior when temptations or provocations
to engage in criminal behavior are present.
Whereas Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) stressed the importance of self-control in
explaining engagement in delinquent behavior, differential association theory (Sutherland,
1947) proposed that delinquent attitudes and peer delinquency are the most important fac-
tors related to delinquent behavior. Delinquent attitudes refer to an individual’s views
about whether delinquent acts are acceptable or unacceptable. The more an individual
holds attitudes that approve of delinquent behavior, the more likely he or she is to engage
in delinquent behavior.
Although differential association is not limited to interaction with peers, peer associa-
tions are a major part of the differential association process, especially during adoles-
cence. Differential association refers to an individual’s exposure to attitudes that are
more or less favorable towards delinquent behavior and implies that these attitudes are
learned in interaction with others (Sutherland, 1947). Delinquent peers are expected to
be an important source of adopting delinquent attitudes, and therefore related to an indi-
vidual’s delinquent behavior.
An alternative explanation for engagement in delinquency is offered by routine activ-
ity theory (Cohen and Felson, 1979). According to the routine activity perspective,
Janssen et al.
171
opportunities that arise in routine everyday life are central in explaining criminal behav-
ior. Certain settings provide opportunities for delinquent behavior, and the degree of
involvement in delinquent behavior depends on the amount of time a person spends in
these criminogenic settings. The social and environmental characteristics of settings pro-
vide temptations, opportunities, and controls that make delinquent behavior more or less
attractive (Felson and Boba, 2010; Wikström et al., 2012). Osgood et al. (1996) applied
the routine activity perspective to explaining individual offending by time spent unsuper-
vised with peers in unstructured activities. The presence of peers is believed to make
criminal behavior more rewarding, and the absence of adult supervision indicates low
social control over the potential offender. Furthermore, unstructured socializing is sug-
gested to leave time available for delinquent behavior because it provides few constraints
on how time is spent (Osgood et al., 1996).
In addition to these social characteristics of settings, environmental characteristics are
also expected to provide opportunities for crime. The presence of signs of disorder (for
example, litter, graffiti, decaying houses) may communicate lack of control over an area,
which might reduce the perceived risk of being caught when committing a crime (Felson
and Boba, 2010; Sampson and Raudenbush, 2004). Keizer et al. (2008) offer another
explanation why settings with higher levels of disorder are criminogenic. In settings
where norms and rules are violated, the concern for appropriate behavior weakens, which
results in more violations of norms and rules.
Whereas the theoretical perspectives focus on different factors as the most important
direct cause of delinquency, self-control theory and differential association theory
acknowledge parenting as important indirect cause. The role of parenting is, however,
not directly addressed by the routine activity perspective. According to Gottfredson and
Hirschi (1990), the development of self-control is a result of parental socialization during
early childhood. More specifically, parental monitoring, discipline, and support are nec-
essary to foster self-control in young children. It has been demonstrated that the relation-
ship between parenting and delinquency is partially mediated by the level of self-control
(Burt et al., 2006; Hay, 2001; Perrone et al., 2004; Unnever et al., 2006; Vazsonyi and
Belliston, 2007).
Similarly, the differential association perspective also contends that parental monitor-
ing and providing consequences for misbehavior are important indirect causes of delin-
quency. Individuals who receive less parental monitoring and control are more likely to
acquire delinquent attitudes and to engage with delinquent peers, and are therefore more
likely to engage in delinquent behavior. Previous research indeed indicated that adoles-
cents who received more effective parenting are less likely to have delinquent attitudes
and delinquent peers (Knoester et al., 2006; Pardini et al., 2005; Ragan et al., 2014; Warr,
2005). By supervising and monitoring the child, parents may intentionally or uninten-
tionally encourage the child to associate less with delinquent peers. Adolescents with a
high-quality relationship with their parents may be more likely to seek out friends who
their parents will like to avoid parental disapproval or disappointment (Knoester et al.,
2006; Warr, 2005). In addition, previous work suggests that parenting has a possible
spillover effect, meaning that parents affect not only the behavior of their children but
possibly also the behavior of their children’s peers (Shakya et al., 2012).
Although the role of parents is not directly elaborated in the routine activity perspec-
tive, parents are expected to restrict their children from spending time in criminogenic
172
European Journal of Criminology 13(2)
settings in order to keep them out of trouble (Felson and Boba, 2010). Osgood and
Anderson (2004) have shown that parental monitoring is negatively related to unstruc-
tured socializing with peers. A recent study has shown that adolescents who have a rela-
tionship of high quality with their parents and who perceive more parental monitoring
and limit-setting spend less time in criminogenic settings (Janssen et al., 2014).
The first aim of the present study is to...
To continue reading
Request your trial