How Positive and Negative Childhood Experiences Interact With Resiliency Theory and the General Theory of Crime in Juvenile Probationers

• Author: Kyle C. Mueller,Marcus T. Carey
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/15412040221131278
• Published date: 01 April 2023
• Date: 01 April 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

2023, Vol. 21(2) 130–148

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/15412040221131278

journals.sagepub.com/home/yvj

How Positive and Negative

Childhood Experiences Interact

With Resiliency Theory and the

General Theory of Crime in

Juvenile Probationers

Kyle C. Mueller

1

and Marcus T. Carey

2



Abstract

Self-control and resiliency in juveniles are each thought to be relevant to the onset of delinquency

and recidivism, and both are related to family environments and other childhood experiences. The

general theory of crime is well established within the literature as an explanation for offending at

all ages, and resiliency perspectives stress the importance of things like independence and morality

to avoiding/desisting from deviance among juveniles. Here, Adverse Childhood Experiences

(ACEs) and Positive Childhood Experiences (PCEs) are examined among 3604 juvenile proba-

tioners in the contexts of the general theory of crime and the compensatory, protective factor,

and challenge models of resiliency theory. Results show that high ACE scores were associated

with diminished self-control, and high PCE scores were correlated with better self-control. Policy

implications are discussed.

Keywords

self-control, resiliency theory, adverse childhood experiences, positive childhood experiences,

juvenile probation

Introduction and Literature Review

The general theory of crime is an inf‌luential formulation of self-control theory which suggests that

because crime is easy and gratifying, individuals with low levels of self-control are drawn to it

(Pratt & Cullen, 2000), and it has been found to predict criminal behavior (Piquero et al., 2016;

Vazsonyi et al., 2017). Specif‌ically, a person with low self-control is thought to be thrill-seeking

and impulsive, and to have a high tolerance for risk, while someone with high self-control is better

able to plan, is more empathetic, and is not as drawn to instant gratif‌ication. However, the factors

1

Harris County Juvenile Probation Department, Houston, TX, USA

2

Texas A&M International University, Laredo, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Kyle C. Mueller, Harris County Juvenile Probation Department, 1200 Congress, Houston, TX 77002-1956, USA.

Email: kylecurtismueller@gmail.com

that predict a youth’s self-control are complicated. According to Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990),

the key factor that predicts an individual having low self-control is insuff‌icient parental control

being exerted during childhood. However, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) may also play a

major role in predicting a youth’s self-control, in part because they can include peer associations,

neighborhood conditions, and the educational environment in addition to the effectiveness/extent

of parental control (Meldrum et al., 2020;Pratt et al., 2004).

Research has found that ACEs can correlate to lower self-control among youth (Meldrum et al.,

2020). This is consistent with the predictions of the general theory of crime, as many ACEs such as

domestic violence and parents being incarcerated are consistent with parental inability to exert

control over their children. Further, studies have found that increased ACE exposure can lead to

increased impulsivity (Lovallo, 2013;Perez et al., 2018;Shin et al., 2018). Recently, Meldrum

et al. (2020) also found ACEs to be negatively correlated to a youth’s self-control within a sample

of youth supervised on probation in Florida. Finally, Jones and colleagues found that among a

sample of 3444 youth, cumulative ACE exposure led to decreased self-control over time (Jones

et al., 2021).

It has long been understood that turbulent family circumstances can contribute to adolescent

deviance and propensity to offend (Steketee et al., 2021). However, adverse conditions in the

home do not guarantee that juveniles will resort to deviance or delinquent behaviors, and a

prominent perspective that seeks to explain why depends on the quality of resiliency (Fergusson &

Lynskey, 1996). Resiliency perspectives entail the development of adaptive processes by which

people achieve positive results in the face of adverse circumstances (Song et al., 2019), and there is

a diverse and growing body of research exploring the nuances and applications of resiliency (some

of which can be found in the references herein). The development of resiliency is theorized to

occur when environmental, individual, and social factors exist which disrupt the pathway leading

from risk to adverse outcomes (Zimmerman et al., 2013), and the current research is especially

concerned with environmental and social factors as embodied by PCEs and ACEs.

According to these perspectives, resiliency consists of several interrelated traits, including

morality, creativity, independence, relationships, initiative, and insights (Taylor et al., 2003).

Insight here means that juveniles don’t hold themselves responsible for the problems in their

families. Independence refers to the ability to remain calm in the face of family turmoil, including

the opportunity to retreat to a physically safe distance. Having fulf‌illing relationships either within

the family or outside of it also matters (Taylor et al., 2003). Initiative is the interest in and ability to

solve personal problems, and morality and creativity are used in their usual senses.

Other scholars have def‌ined resiliency differently, such as by focusing on the ability to

overcome challenges to maintain functionality, and resiliency in their approach is based mostly on

adaptability (Masten, 2018;Pasternack & Martinez, 1996). For example, Fergusson & Lynskey

(1996) def‌ined resiliency as a quality belonging to those who face substantial in-home adversity

but who do not engage in much deviance. They further claimed that high resiliency correlates with

higher IQ, fewer delinquent peer associations, and less inclinations toward thrill-seeking behavior.

In short, resiliency and self-control share correlates such that a resilient individual and one with

high self-control possess similar qualities, and while the ideas remain distinct, they are clearly

related to each other. It is also fair to say that low self-control correlates to deviant behavior

(Piquero et al., 2010), and that resiliency allows people to resist risk factors for problem behaviors

(Smith-Osborne, 2007).

Things which bolster resilience, known as resilience factors, exist outside an individual and are

known to help people overcome risks for various adverse outcomes. These are separate from

resilience assets, which are qualities within a person that serve the same purpose. Examples of

resilience factors include supportive home and scholastic environments (Reisner et al., 2014),

which many of the PCE item measures used here also ref‌lect. Resiliency approaches have

Mueller and Carey 131