Advertisement

Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 53–84 | Cite as

Something Old, Something New: Revisiting Competing Hypotheses of the Victimization-Offending Relationship Among Adolescents

  • Graham C. OuseyEmail author
  • Pamela Wilcox
  • Bonnie S. Fisher
Original Paper

Abstract

This study revisits a familiar question regarding the relationship between victimization and offending. Using longitudinal data on middle- and high-school students, the study examines competing arguments regarding the relationship between victimization and offending embedded within the “dynamic causal” and “population heterogeneity” perspectives. The analysis begins with models that estimate the longitudinal relationship between victimization and offending without accounting for the influence of time-stable individual heterogeneity. Next, the victimization-offending relationship is reconsidered after the effects of time-stable sources of heterogeneity, and time-varying covariates are controlled. While the initial results without controls for population heterogeneity are in line with much prior research and indicate a positive link between victimization and offending, results from models that control for time-stable individual differences suggest something new: a negative, reciprocal relationship between victimization and offending. These latter results are most consistent with the notion that the oft-reported victimization-offending link is driven by a combination of dynamic causal and population heterogeneity factors. Implications of these findings for theory and future research focusing on the victimization-offending nexus are discussed.

Keywords

Victimization Offending Reciprocal effects Latent variable models Dynamic causal effects Population heterogeneity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was sponsored, in part, by grant DA-11317 (Richard R. Clayton, PI) from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The authors would like to thank Richard R. Clayton, Scott A. Hunt, Kimberly Reeder, Michelle Campbell Augustine, Shayne Jones, Staci Roberts, and Jon Paul Bryan for their contributions to the Rural Substance abuse and Violence Project, which provides the data analyzed here.

References

  1. Agnew R (2001) Building on the foundation of general strain theory: specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. J Res Crime Delinq 38:319–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agnew R (2002) Experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strain: an exploratory study on physical victimization and delinquency. Justice Q 19:603–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agnew R, Brezina T, Wright JP, Cullen FT (2002) Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: extending general strain theory. Criminology 40:43–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allison PD (2000) Inferring causal order from panel data. Paper prepared for presentation at the ninth international conference on panel data, 22 June, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  5. Allison PD (2002) Missing data. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  6. Allison PD (2005) Fixed effects regression methods for longitudinal data using SAS. SAS Institute, Inc, CaryGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson E (1999) Code of the streets: decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. W.W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Arbuckle JL (1996) Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In: Marcoulides GA, Schumacker RE (eds) Advanced structural equation modeling. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Mahwah, pp 243–277Google Scholar
  9. Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58:277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bankston WB, Thompson CY, Jenkins QAL, Forsyth CJ (1990) The influence of fear of crime, gender and southern culture on carrying firearms for protection: a causal model. Sociol Q 31:287–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baron SW (2004) General strain, street youth and crime: a test of Agnew’s revised theory. Criminology 42:457–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Baron SW, Hartnagel TF (1998) Street youth and criminal violence. J Res Crime Delinq 35:166–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Baron SW, Forde DR, Kennedy LW (2001) Rough justice: street youth and violence. J Interpers Violence 16:662–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Black D (1983) Crime as social control. Am Soc Rev 48:34–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brame R, Bushway SD, Paternoster R (1999) On the use of panel research designs and random effects models to investigate state and dynamic theories of criminal offending. Criminology 37:599–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Broidy LM, Daday JK, Crandall CS, Sklar DP, Jost PF (2006) Exploring the demographic, structural, and behavioral overlap among homicide offenders and victims. Homicide Stud 10:155–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burrow JD, Apel R (2008) Youth behavior, school structure, and student risk of victimization. Justice Q 25:349–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Campbell Augustine M, Wilcox P, Ousey GC, Clayton RR (2002) Opportunity theory and adolescent school-based victimization. Violence Vict 17:233–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cao L, Cullen FT, Link BG (1997) The social determinants of gun ownership: self-protection in an urban environment. Criminology 35:629–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chesney-Lind M (1997) The female offender: girls, women and crime. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  21. Cook PJ (1986) The demand and supply of criminal opportunities. Crime Justice Annu Rev Res 7:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cullen FT, Unnever JD, Hartman JL, Turner MG, Agnew R (2008) Gender, bullying victimization, and juvenile delinquency: a test of general strain theory. Vict Offenders 3:346–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Daigle LE, Cullen FT, Wright JP (2007) Gender difference in the predictors of juvenile delinquency: assessing the generality/specificity debate. Youth Violence Juv Justice 5:254–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Daigle LE, Beaver KM, Hartman JL (2008) A life-course approach to the study of victimization and offending behaviors. Vict Offenders 3:365–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Decker SH, Curry GD (2000) Addressing key features of gang membership: measuring the involvement of young members. J Crim Justice 28:473–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Eitle D, Turner RJ (2002) Exposure to community violence and young adult crime: the effects of witnessing violence, traumatic victimization, and other stressful life events. J Res Crime Delinq 39:124–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ellickson PL, Hawes J (1989) An assessment of active versus passive methods for obtaining parental consent. Eval Rev 13:45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Enders CK, Bandalos DL (2001) The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Struct Equ Modeling 8:430–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Esbensen F-A, Deschenes EP, Vogel RE, West J, Arboit K, Harris L (1996) Active parental consent in school-based research: an examination of ethical and methodological considerations. Evaluation Review 20:737–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fagan J, Piper ES, Cheng Y-T (1987) Contributions of victimization to delinquency in inner cities. J Crim Law Criminol 78:586–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Felson RB, Tedeschi JT (eds) (1993) Aggression and violence: social interactionist perspectives. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  32. Ferraro KF (1995) Fear of crime: interpreting victimization risk. SUNY Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  33. Finkel SE (1995) Causal analysis with panel data. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  34. Fisher BS, Sloan JL, Cullen FT, Chunmeng L (1998) Crime in the ivory tower: the level and sources of student victimization. Criminology 26:671–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Forde DR, Kennedy LW (1997) Risky lifestyles, routine activities, and the general theory of crime. Justice Q 14:265–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gottfredson MR, Hirschi T (1990) A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  37. Hay C, Evans MM (2006) Violent victimization and involvement in delinquency: examining predictions from general strain theory. J Crim Justice 34:261–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hindelang MJ, Gottfredson MR, Garofalo J (1978) Victims of personal crime: an empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Ballinger, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Hsiao C (2003) Analysis of panel data, 2nd edn. University of Cambridge Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jacques S, Wright R (2008) The victimization-termination link. Criminology 46:1009–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jensen GF, Brownfield D (1986) Gender, lifestyles, and victimization: beyond routine activity. Violence Vict 1:85–99Google Scholar
  42. Kearney KA, Hopkins RH, Mauss AL, Weisheit RA (1983) Sample bias resulting from a requirement for written parental consent. Public Opin Q 47:96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kubrin CE, Weitzer R (2003) Retaliatory homicide: concentrated disadvantage and neighborhood culture. Soc Probl 50:157–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lasley JR (1989) Drinking routines/lifestyles and predatory victimization: a causal analysis. Justice Q 6:529–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lauritsen JL, Davis Quinet KF (1995) Repeat victimization among adolescents and young adults. J Quant Criminol 11:143–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lauritsen JL, Laub JH (2007) Understanding the link between victimization and offending: new reflections on an old idea. Crime Prev Stud 22:55–75Google Scholar
  47. Lauritsen JL, Sampson RJ, Laub JH (1991) The link between offending and victimization among adolescents. Criminology 29:265–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lauritsen JL, Laub JH, Sampson RJ (1992) Conventional and delinquent activities: implications for the prevention of violent victimization among adolescents. Violence Vict 7:91–108Google Scholar
  49. Luckenbill DF (1977) Criminal homicide as situated transaction. Soc Probl 25:176–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Menard S, Huizinga D (2001) Repeat victimization in a high-risk neighborhood sample of adolescents. Youth Soc 32:447–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Miller J (1998) Up it up: gender and the accomplishment of street robbery. Criminology 36:37–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Moriarty LJ, Parsons-Pollard N (2008) Role reversals in the life-course: a systematic review. Vict Offenders 3:331–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mundlak Y (1978) On the pooling of time series and cross sectional data. Econometrica 56:69–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mustaine EE, Tewksbury R (1998a) Specifying the role of alcohol in predatory victimization. Deviant Behav 19:173–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mustaine EE, Tewksbury R (1998b) Predicting risks of larceny theft victimization: a routine activity analysis using refined lifestyle measures. Criminology 36:829–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Muthén B (1994) Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociol Methods Res 22:376–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ousey GC, Wilcox P (2007) The interaction of antisocial propensity and life-course varying predictors of delinquent behavior: differences by method of estimation and implications for theory. Criminology 45:313–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ousey GC, Wilcox P, Brummel S (2008) Déjà vu all over again: investigating temporal continuity of adolescent victimization. J Quant Criminol 24:307–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Peterson D, Taylor TJ, Esbensen F-A (2004) Gang membership and violent victimization. Justice Q 21:793–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Piquero AR, MacDonald J, Dobrin A, Daigle LF, Cullen FT (2005) Self control, violent offending, and homicide victimization: assessing the general theory of crime. J Quant Criminol 21:55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sampson RJ, Lauritsen JL (1990) Deviant lifestyles, proximity to crime and the offender-victim link in personal violence. J Res Crime Delinq 27:110–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Satorra A (2000) Scaled and adjusted restricted tests in multi-sample analysis of moment structures. In: Heijmans RDH, Pollock DSG, Satorra A (eds) Innovations in multivariate statistical analysis. A Festschrift for Heinz Neudecker. Kluwer, London, pp 233–247Google Scholar
  63. Schreck CJ (1999) Criminal victimization and low self-control: an extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Q 16:633–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schreck CJ, Mitchell Miller J, Gibson CL (2003) Trouble in the school yard: a study of the risk factors of victimization at school. Crime Delinq 49:460–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schreck CJ, Stewart EA, Fisher BS (2006) Self-control, victimization, and their influence on risky lifestyles: a longitudinal analysis using panel data. J Quant Criminol 22:319–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Siegel JA, Williams LM (2003) The relationship between child sexual abuse and female delinquency and crime: a prospective study. J Res Crime Delinq 40:71–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Singer SI (1986) Victims of serious violence and their criminal behavior: subcultural theory and beyond. Violence Vict 1:61–70Google Scholar
  68. Skogan WG, Maxfield MG (1981) Coping with crime: individual and neighborhood reactions. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  69. Spano R, Freilich JD, Bolland J (2008) Gang membership, gun carrying, and employment: applying routine activities theory to explain violent victimization among inner-city, minority youth living in extreme poverty. Justice Q 25:381–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sparks RF (1982) Research on victims of crime. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  71. Stewart EA, Schreck CJ, Simons RL (2006) I ain’t gonna let no one disrespect me: does the code of the street reduce or increase violent victimization among African American adolescents? J Res Crime Delinq 43:427–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Teague R, Mazerolle P, Legosz M, Sanderson J (2008) Linking childhood abuse and adult offending: examining mediating factors and gendered relationships. Justice Q 25:313–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Von Hentig H (1948) The criminal and his victim: studies in the sociobiology of crime. Schocken Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  74. Widom CS (1989) Does violence beget violence? A critical examination of the literature. Psychol Bull 106:3–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wilcox Rountree P, Land KC (1996) Burglary victimization, perceptions of crime risk, and routine activities: a multilevel analysis across Seattle neighborhoods and census tracts. J Res Crime Delinq 33:146–180Google Scholar
  76. Wilcox P, May DC, Roberts SD (2006) Student weapon possession and the “fear and victimization hypothesis”: unraveling the temporal order. Justice Q 23:502–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Windle M (1994) Substance use, risky behaviors, and victimization among a US national adolescent sample. Addiction 89:175–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wolfgang ME (1958) Patterns in criminal homicide. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  79. Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  80. Wothke W (2000) Longitudinal and multi-group modeling with missing data. In: Little TD, Schnabel KU, Baumert J (eds) Modeling longitudinal and multilevel data: practical issues, applied approaches and specific examples. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  81. Wright RT, Decker SH (1997) Armed robbers in action: stickups and street culture. Northeastern University Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  82. Wright BRE, Caspi A, Moffitt TE, Silva PA (2001) The effects of social ties on crime vary by criminal propensity: a life-course model of interdependence. Criminology 39:321–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zumbo BD, Gadermann AM, Zeisser C (2007) Ordinal versions of coefficients alpha and theta for Likert rating scales. J Appl Stat Methods 6:21–29Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Graham C. Ousey
    • 1
    Email author
  • Pamela Wilcox
    • 2
  • Bonnie S. Fisher
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SociologyCollege of William & MaryWilliamsburgUSA
  2. 2.School of Criminal JusticeUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations