Journal of Youth and Adolescence

, Volume 43, Issue 10, pp 1781–1799 | Cite as

Ecological Context, Concentrated Disadvantage, and Youth Reoffending: Identifying the Social Mechanisms in a Sample of Serious Adolescent Offenders

  • Kevin A. Wright
  • Byungbae Kim
  • Laurie Chassin
  • Sandra H. Losoya
  • Alex R. Piquero
Empirical Research

Abstract

Serious youthful offenders are presented with a number of significant challenges when trying to make a successful transition from adolescence to adulthood. One of the biggest obstacles for these youth to overcome concerns their ability to desist from further antisocial behavior, and although an emerging body of research has documented important risk and protective factors associated with desistance, the importance of the neighborhoods within which these youth reside has been understudied. Guided by the larger neighborhood effects on crime literature, the current study examines the direct and indirect effects of concentrated disadvantage on youth reoffending among a sample of highly mobile, serious youthful offenders. We use data from Pathways to Desistance, a longitudinal study of serious youthful offenders (N = 1,354; 13.6 % female; 41.4 % African American, 33.5 % Hispanic, 20.2 % White), matched up with 2000 Census data on neighborhood conditions for youth’s main residence location during waves 7 and 8 of the study. These waves represent the time period in which youth are navigating the transition to adulthood (aged 18–22; average age = 20). We estimate structural equation models to determine direct effects of concentrated disadvantage on youth reoffending and also to examine the possible indirect effects working through individual-level mechanisms as specified by theoretical perspectives including social control (e.g., unsupervised peer activities), strain (e.g., exposure to violence), and learning (e.g., exposure to antisocial peers). Additionally, we estimate models that take into account the impact that a change in neighborhood conditions may have on the behavior of youth who move to new residences during the study period. Our results show that concentrated disadvantage is indirectly associated with youth reoffending primarily through its association with exposure to deviant peers. Taking into account youth mobility during the study period produced an additional indirect pathway by which concentrated disadvantage is associated with goal blockage (i.e., the gap between belief in conventional goals and perceived potential to reach those goals), which was then associated with exposure to deviant peers and indirectly, reoffending behavior. We conclude that the neighborhood effects literature offers a promising framework for continued research on understanding the successful transition to adulthood by serious youthful offenders.

Keywords

Neighborhood effects Youth reoffending Social context Concentrated disadvantage Social mechanisms Residential mobility 

References

  1. Abrams, L. S., & Snyder, S. M. (2010). Youth offender reentry: Models for intervention and directions for future inquiry. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 1787–1795.Google Scholar
  2. Agnew, R. (1999). A general strain theory of community differences in crime rates. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 123–155.Google Scholar
  3. Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  5. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Baumer, E. P. (2007). Untangling research puzzles in Merton’s multilevel anomie theory. Theoretical Criminology, 11, 63–93.Google Scholar
  8. Bellair, P. E., & Kowalski, B. R. (2011). Low-skill employment opportunity and African American-White difference in recidivism. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48, 176–208.Google Scholar
  9. Berg, M. T., Stewart, E. A., Brunson, R. K., & Simons, R. L. (2012). Neighborhood cultural heterogeneity and adolescent violence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28, 411–435.Google Scholar
  10. Bernburg, J. G., & Thorlindsson, T. (2001). Routine activities in social context: A closer look at the role of opportunity in deviant behavior. Justice Quarterly, 18, 543–567.Google Scholar
  11. Bernburg, J. G., & Thorlindsson, T. (2007). Community structure and adolescent delinquency in Iceland: A contextual analysis. Criminology, 45, 415–444.Google Scholar
  12. Brame, R., & Piquero, A. R. (2003). Selective attrition and the age-crime relationship. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 107–127.Google Scholar
  13. Brody, G. H., Conger, R., Gibbons, F. X., Ge, X., Murry, V. M., Gerrard, M., et al. (2001). The influence of neighborhood disadvantage, collective socialization, and parenting on African American children’s affiliation with deviant peers. Child Development, 72, 1231–1246.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Bursik, R. J., & Grasmick, H. G. (1993). Neighborhoods and crime: The dimensions of effective community control. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  16. Bushway, S., Johnson, B. D., & Slocum, L. A. (2007). Is the magic still there? The use of the Heckman two-step correction for selection bias in criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 23, 151–178.Google Scholar
  17. Caravelis, C., Chiricos, T., & Bales, W. (2011). Static and dynamic indicators of minority threat in sentencing outcomes: A multi-level analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 27, 405–425.Google Scholar
  18. Cattarello, A. M. (2000). Community-level influences on individuals’ social bonds, peer associations, and delinquency: A multilevel analysis. Justice Quarterly, 17, 33–60.Google Scholar
  19. Chauhan, P., & Reppucci, N. D. (2009). The impact of neighborhood disadvantage and exposure to violence on self-report of antisocial behavior among girls in the juvenile justice system. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 401–416.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Chung, H. L., Mulvey, E. P., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Understanding the school outcomes of juvenile offender: An exploration of neighborhood influences and motivational resources. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 1025–1038.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Chung, H. L., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Relations between neighborhood factors, parenting behaviors, peer deviance, and delinquency among serious juvenile offenders. Development Psychology, 42, 319–331.Google Scholar
  22. Cleveland, H. H. (2003). Disadvantaged neighborhoods and adolescent aggression: Behavioral genetic evidence of contextual effects. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13, 211–238.Google Scholar
  23. Cloward, R. A., & Ohlin, L. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity: A theory of delinquent gangs. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  24. Cullen, F. T., Wright, J. P., & Blevins, K. R. (Eds.). (2006). Taking stock: The status of criminological theory, advances in criminological theory, (Vol. 15). New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
  25. Deutsch, A. R., Crockett, L. J., Wolff, J. M., & Russell, S. T. (2012). Parent and peer pathways to adolescent delinquency: Variations by ethnicity and neighborhood context. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 1078–1094.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., et al. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families. American Psychologist, 48, 90–101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Elliott, D. S. (1990). National youth survey. Institute of Behavioral Science. University of Colorado.Google Scholar
  28. Elliott, D. S., Wilson, W. J., Huizinga, D., Sampson, R. J., Elliott, A., & Rankin, B. (1996). The effects of neighborhood disadvantage on adolescent development. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33, 389–426.Google Scholar
  29. Fagan, A. A., Wright, E. M., & Pinchevsky, G. M. (2014). The protective effects of neighborhood collective efficacy on adolescent substance use and violence following exposure to violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1498–1512.Google Scholar
  30. Freedman, D. A. (2006). On the so-called “Huber sandwich estimator” and “robust standard errors”. The American Statistician, 60, 299–302.Google Scholar
  31. Gibbs, J. P., & Martin, W. T. (1962). Urbanization, technology, and the division of labor: International patterns. American Sociological Review, 27, 667–677.Google Scholar
  32. Gibson, C. L., Morris, S. Z., & Beaver, K. M. (2009). Secondary exposure to violence during childhood and adolescence: Does neighborhood context matter? Justice Quarterly, 26, 30–57.Google Scholar
  33. Green, D. P., Ha, S. E., & Bullock, J. G. (2010). Enough already about “Black Box” experiments: Studying mediation is more difficult than most scholars suppose. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 628, 200–208.Google Scholar
  34. Grunwald, H. E., Lockwood, B., Harris, P. W., & Mennis, J. (2010). Influences of neighborhood context, individual history and parenting behavior on recidivism among juvenile offenders. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1067–1079.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Hall, G. S. (1904). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relation to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion, and education, Vol. I & II. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  36. Harding, D. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Herbert, C. W. (2013). Home is hard to find: Neighborhoods, institutions, and the residential trajectories of returning prisoners. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 647, 214–236.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Harris, P. W., Mennis, J., Obradovic, Z., Izenman, A. J., & Grunwald, H. E. (2011). The coaction of neighborhood and individual effects on recidivism. Cityscape, 13, 33–55.Google Scholar
  38. Hay, C., & Forrest, W. (2008). Self-control theory and the concept of opportunity: The case for a more systematic union. Criminology, 46, 1039–1072.Google Scholar
  39. Haynie, D. L., Silver, E., & Teasdale, B. (2006). Neighborhood characteristics, peer networks, and adolescent violence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 147–169.Google Scholar
  40. Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 47, 153–161.Google Scholar
  41. Hoffman, J. P. (2002). A contextual analysis of differential association, social control, and strain theories of delinquency. Social Forces, 81, 753–785.Google Scholar
  42. Huber, P. J. (1967). The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. In L. Lecam & J. Neyman (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability (pp. 221–233). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  43. Huebner, B. M., DeJong, C., & Cobbina, J. (2010). Women coming home: Long-term patterns of recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 27, 225–254.Google Scholar
  44. Huebner, B. M., Varano, S. P., & Bynum, T. S. (2007). Gangs, guns, and drugs: Recidivism among serious young offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 6, 187–221.Google Scholar
  45. Huizinga, D., Esbensen, F.-A., & Weiher, A. W. (1991). Are there multiple paths to delinquency? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 83–118.Google Scholar
  46. Jencks, C., & Mayer, S. E. (1990). The social consequences of growing up in a poor neighborhood. In L. Lynn & M. McGeary (Eds.), Inner-city poverty in the United States (pp. 111–186). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  47. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1996). Structural equation modeling. Workshop presented for the NORC social science research professional development training sessions, Chicago.Google Scholar
  48. Karriker-Jaffe, K. J., Foshee, V. A., Ennett, S. T., & Suchindran, C. (2013). Associations of neighborhood and family factors with trajectories of physical and social aggression during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 861–877.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Katz, L. F., Kling, J. R., & Liebman, J. B. (2001). Moving to opportunity in Boston: Early results of a randomized mobility experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 607–654.Google Scholar
  50. Kaufman, J. M. (2005). Explaining the race/ethnicity-violence relationship: Neighborhood context and social psychological processes. Justice Quarterly, 22, 224–251.Google Scholar
  51. King, G., & Roberts, M. (2014). How robust standard errors expose methodological problems they do not fix, and what to do about it. Working paper available at http://j.mp/InK5jU.
  52. King, R. D., & Wheelock, D. (2007). Group threat and social control: Race, perceptions of minorities and the desire to punish. Social Forces, 85, 1255–1280.Google Scholar
  53. Kirk, D. S. (2009). A natural experiment on residential change and recidivism: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. American Sociological Review, 74, 484–505.Google Scholar
  54. Kirk, D. S. (2012). Residential changes as a turning point in the life course of crime: Desistance or temporary cessation? Criminology, 50, 329–358.Google Scholar
  55. Kling, J. R., Ludwig, J., & Katz, L. F. (2005). Neighborhood effects on crime for female and male youth: Evidence from a randomized housing voucher experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 87–130.Google Scholar
  56. Kohen, D. E., Leventhal, T., Dahinten, V. S., & McIntosh, C. N. (2008). Neighborhood disadvantage: Pathways of effects for young children. Child Development, 79, 156–169.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. La Vigne, N. G., & Parthasarathy, B. (2005). Returning home Illinois policy brief: Prisoner reentry and residential mobility. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  58. Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2001). Understanding desistance from crime. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 28, pp. 1–69). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  59. Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). The neighborhoods they live in: The effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent outcomes. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 309–337.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Moving to opportunity: An experimental study of neighborhood effects on mental health. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1576–1582.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders, 4, 124–147.Google Scholar
  62. Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (2012). From juvenile delinquency to adult crime: Criminal careers, justice policy, and prevention. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., & Petechuk, D. (2013). Bulletin 1: From juvenile delinquency to young adult offending (study group on the transitions between juvenile delinquency and adult crime). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  64. Ludwig, J., Duncan, G. J., & Hirschfield, P. (2001). Urban poverty and juvenile crime: Evidence from a randomized housing-mobility experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 655–679.Google Scholar
  65. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. Maimon, D., & Browning, C. R. (2010). Unstructured socializing, collective efficacy, and violent behavior among urban youth. Criminology, 48, 443–474.Google Scholar
  67. Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993). American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Matjasko, J. L., Needham, B. L., Grunden, L. N., & Farb, A. F. (2010). Violent victimization and perpetration during adolescence: Developmental stage dependent ecological models. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1053–1066.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Maton, K. I. (1989). Community settings as buffers of life stress? Highly supportive churches, mutual help groups, and senior centers. American Journal of Community Psychology, 17, 203–232.Google Scholar
  70. Mazerolle, P., & Maahs, J. (2000). General strain and delinquency: An alternative examination of conditioning influences. Justice Quarterly, 17, 753–778.Google Scholar
  71. Mears, D. P., & Travis, J. (2004). Youth development and reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 3–20.Google Scholar
  72. Menard, S., & Elliott, D. S. (1996). Prediction of adult success using stepwise logistic regression analysis. Report submitted to the John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.Google Scholar
  73. Mennis, J., Harris, P. W., Obradovic, Z., Izenman, J., & Grunwald, H. E. (2011). The effect of neighborhood characteristics and spatial spillover on urban juvenile delinquency and recidivism. The Professional Geographer, 63, 174–192.Google Scholar
  74. Monahan, K. C., & Piquero, A. R. (2009). Investigating the longitudinal relation between offending frequency and offending variety. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 653–673.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., Fagan, J., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R., Chassin, L., et al. (2004). Theory and research on desistance from antisocial activity among serious adolescent offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 213–236.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., Piquero, A. R., Besana, M., Fagan, J., Schubert, C., et al. (2010). Trajectories of desistance and continuity in antisocial behavior following court adjudication among serious adolescent offenders. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 453–475.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). MPlus version 6. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  78. Onifade, E., Petersen, J., Bynum, T. S., & Davidson, W. S, I. I. I. (2008). Predicting recidivism in probationers with the Youth Level of Service Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 474–483.Google Scholar
  79. Osgood, D. W., Wilson, J. K., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Johnston, L. D. (1996). Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. American Sociological Review, 61, 635–655.Google Scholar
  80. Peterson, R. D., & Krivo, L. J. (2005). Macrostructural analyses of race, ethnicity, and violent crime: Recent lessons and new directions for research. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 331–356.Google Scholar
  81. Piquero, A. R., Blumstein, A., Brame, R., Haapanen, R., Mulvey, E., & Nagin, D. (2001). Assessing the impact of exposure time and incapacitation on longitudinal trajectories of criminal offending. Journal of Adolescent Research, 16, 54–74.Google Scholar
  82. Piquero, A. R., Farrington, D. P., & Blumstein, A. (2003). The criminal career paradigm. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 32, pp. 359–506). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  83. Piquero, A. R., Hawkins, J. D., & Kazemian, L. (2012). Criminal career patterns. In R. Loeber & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), From juvenile delinquency to adult crime: Criminal careers, justice policy, and prevention (pp. 14–46). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2005). Assessing macro-level predictors of crime: A meta-analysis. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 32, pp. 373–450). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  85. Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209–233.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Rankin, B. H., & Quane, J. M. (2002). Social contexts and urban adolescent outcomes: The interrelated effects of neighborhoods, families, and peers on African-American youth. Social Problems, 49, 79–100.Google Scholar
  87. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods, Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  88. Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 359–371.Google Scholar
  89. Sampson, R. J. (1997). The embeddedness of child and adolescent development: A community-level perspective on urban violence. In J. McCord (Ed.), Childhood and violence in the inner city (pp. 31–77). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Sampson, R. J. (2006). Collective efficacy theory: Lessons learned and directions for future inquiry. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wright, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory: Advances in criminological theory (pp. 149–167). New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
  91. Sampson, R. J. (2012). Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  92. Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 774–802.Google Scholar
  93. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Gannon-Rowley, T. (2002). Assessing “neighborhood effects”: Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 443–478.Google Scholar
  94. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Raudenbush, S. (2005). Social anatomy of racial and ethnic disparities in violence. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 224–232.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  95. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Schubert, C. A., Mulvey, E. P., & Glasheen, C. (2011). Influence of mental health and substance use problems and criminogenic risk on outcomes in serious juvenile offenders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 50, 925–937.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Sciandra, M., Sanbonmatsu, L., Duncan, G. J., Gennetian, L. A., Katz, L. F., Kessler, R. C., et al. (2013). Long-term effects of the Moving to Opportunity residential mobility experiment on crime and delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9, 451–489.Google Scholar
  98. Sharkey, P. T. (2006). Navigating dangerous streets: The sources and consequences of street efficacy. American Sociological Review, 71, 826–846.Google Scholar
  99. Sharkey, P., & Sampson, R. J. (2010). Destination effects: Residential mobility and trajectories of adolescent violence in a stratified metropolis. Criminology, 48, 639–681.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  100. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  101. Shinn, M., & Toohey, S. M. (2003). Community contexts of human welfare. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 427–459.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Simons, R. L., Johnson, C., Beaman, J., Conger, R. D., & Whitbeck, L. B. (1996). Parents and peer group as mediators of the effect of community structure on adolescent problem behavior. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 145–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Steinberg, L., & Morris, A. S. (2001). Adolescent development. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 83–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Steiner, B., Makarios, M. D., & Travis, III, L. F. (in press). Examining the effects of residential situations and residential mobility on offender recidivism. Crime & Delinquency. doi:10.1177/0011128711399409.
  105. Stewart, E. A., & Simons, R. L. (2006). Structure and culture in African American adolescent violence: A partial test of the “code of the street” thesis. Justice Quarterly, 23, 1–33.Google Scholar
  106. Stewart, E. A., Simons, R. L., & Conger, R. D. (2002). Assessing neighborhood and social psychological influences on childhood violence in an African-American sample. Criminology, 40, 801–829.Google Scholar
  107. Sullivan, M. L. (2004). Youth perspectives on the experience of reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 56–71.Google Scholar
  108. Tillyer, M. S., & Vose, B. (2011). Social ecology, individual risk, and recidivism: A multilevel examination of main and moderating influences. Journal of Criminal Justice, 49, 452–459.Google Scholar
  109. Travis, J. (2005). But they all come back: Facing the challenges of prisoner reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  110. Trentacosta, C. J., Hyde, L. W., Shaw, D. S., & Cheong, J. (2009). Adolescent dispositions for antisocial behavior in context: The roles of neighborhood dangerousness and parental knowledge. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118, 564–575.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  111. Triplett, R. A., Gainey, R. R., & Sun, I. Y. (2003). Institutional strength, social control and neighborhood crime rates. Theoretical Criminology, 7, 439–467.Google Scholar
  112. Visher, C. A., & Courtney, S. M. E. (2007). One year out: Experiences of prisoners returning to Cleveland. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  113. Wang, X. (2012). Undocumented immigrants as perceived criminal threat: A test of the minority threat perspective. Criminology, 50, 743–776.Google Scholar
  114. Wang, X., Hay, C., Todak, N. E., & Bales, W. D. (2014). Criminal propensity, social context, and recidivism: A multilevel analysis of interactive relationships. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41, 300–317.Google Scholar
  115. Wang, X., & Mears, D. P. (2010). Examining the direct and interactive effects of changes in racial and ethnic threat on sentencing decisions. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47, 522–557.Google Scholar
  116. Webster, C., MacDonald, R., & Simpson, M. (2006). Predicting criminality? Risk factors, neighbourhood influence and desistance. Youth Justice, 6, 7–22.Google Scholar
  117. Wehrman, M. M. (2010). Race, concentrated disadvantage, and recidivism: A test of interaction effects. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 538–544.Google Scholar
  118. White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817–838.Google Scholar
  119. Wickrama, K. A. S., & Noh, S. (2010). The long arm of community: The influence of childhood community contexts across the early life course. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 894–910.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. Wikström, P.-O. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). Social mechanisms of community influences on crime and pathways in criminality. In B. B. Lahey, T. E. Moffitt, & A. Caspi (Eds.), Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency (pp. 118–148). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  121. Wikström, P.-O. H., & Sampson, R. J. (Eds.). (2006). The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms, and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  122. Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  123. Wright, K. A., & Rodriguez, N. (2014). A closer look at the paradox: Examining immigration and youth reoffending in Arizona. Justice Quarterly, 31, 882–904.Google Scholar
  124. Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G, Jr, & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 197–206.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin A. Wright
    • 1
  • Byungbae Kim
    • 1
  • Laurie Chassin
    • 2
  • Sandra H. Losoya
    • 2
  • Alex R. Piquero
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Criminology and Criminal JusticeArizona State UniversityPhoenixUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  3. 3.Program in CriminologyUniversity of Texas at DallasRichardsonUSA

Personalised recommendations