Parents, Friends, and Serious Delinquency

• Author: Justin W. Patchin,Beth M. Huebner,Jason R. Ingram,Timothy S. Bynum,John D. McCluskey
• Published date: 01 December 2007
• Date: 01 December 2007
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0734016807311436
• Subject Matter: Articles

Criminal Justice Review

Volume 32 Number 4

December 2007 380-400

© 2007 Georgia State University

Research Foundation, Inc.

10.1177/0734016807311436

http://cjr.sagepub.com

hosted at

http://online.sagepub.com

380

Authors’ Note: An earlier version of this article was presented at the Annual Meeting of the

Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Chicago, IL (2005). We would like to thank the anonymous

reviewers for their contribution to a previous version of this article.

Parents, Friends, and

Serious Delinquency

An Examination of Direct and Indirect

Effects Among At-Risk Early Adolescents

Jason R. Ingram

Michigan State University, East Lansing

Justin W. Patchin

University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire

Beth M. Huebner

University of Missouri-St. Louis

John D. McCluskey

University of Texas at San Antonio

Timothy S. Bynum

Michigan State University, East Lansing

Family context has been identified as a central domain in the study of delinquency, particularly

during early childhood. As youth enter adolescence peer associations become a much stronger

influence. Using a sample of preadolescent youth, this research examines the effect of family and

peer relationships on delinquency. Specifically, path analysis is used to test the effects of family

structure, parental supervision, and parental attachment on serious delinquent behavior to deter-

mine if a youth’s family life has a unique effect on serious delinquent behavior, or if familial rela-

tionships are mediated by peer associations. Findings suggest that parental variables are

indirectly related to subsequent, serious delinquency, whereas delinquent peer association exerts

a strong, direct effect. The study offers insight into the roles that a youth’s family life and peer

associations play in explaining delinquent behavior. In addition, the findings highlight the need

for interventions that encourage pro-social relationships among youth.

Keywords: adolescence; juvenile delinquency; parents; peers; poststructuralism

Family and peer relationships are two central domains in the study of delinquency. With

regard to family relationships, researchers have linked residence in single-parent

homes, weak parental ties, and poor parental supervision to higher incidence of delin-

quency (Agnew, 2001; Canter, 1982; Gorman-Smith, Tolan, Loeber, & Henry, 1998;

Hirschi, 1969; Jang & Smith, 1997; Rebellon, 2002; Sokol-Katz, Dunham, & Zimmerman,

1997; Wells & Rankin, 1991). In addition, association with antisocial peers has been linked

to delinquent behavior (Elliott, Huizinga, & Ageton, 1985; Menard & Elliott, 1994;

Ingram et al. / Parents, Friends, and Serious Delinquency 381

Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Farnworth, & Jang, 1994). This linkage has been deemed one

of the strongest predictors of delinquency (Agnew, 1991; Thornberry et al., 1994; Warr, 1993,

2002; Warr & Stafford, 1991). Thus, the extant research within these two domains provides

substantial support for family life and peer associations as important predictors of delinquency.

In the past, the effects of family and peers on delinquency were largely examined inde-

pendently as competing theoretical frameworks (Kandel, 1996). Attempts have been made,

however, to integrate these approaches into what Marcos, Bahr, and Johnson (1986) labeled

“bonding/association theory” that considers the individual and combined effects of these

domains on delinquency. Such integrated models typically focused on the relationship

among attachment to parents, delinquent peers, and either minor delinquency or drug use

in samples of older adolescents (e.g., Agnew, 1993; Aseltine, 1995; Kandel, 1996; Marcos

et al., 1986; Warr, 1993). To date, fewer attempts have been made to extend this approach

to other familial variables relevant to control theory, such as parental supervision (Aseltine,

1995, and Warr, 2005, are exceptions) or to examine these relationships in younger samples

with attention given to more serious delinquent behaviors. The current study attempts to fill

these voids by incorporating family structure, parental supervision, and parental attachment

into a single framework. Furthermore, these relationships are tested using a sample of at-

risk and delinquent preadolescent and adolescent youth (90% are between the age of 10 and

13 years). As prior research has identified a shift from parental to peer influence on behav-

ior at around age 10 or 11 (Warr, 2005), the current work captures a transitional period for

the sample youth where, unlike prior research involving older adolescents, familial and

friend variables may be competing for importance in influencing the behavior of youth at

this age. Also, by focusing on serious delinquency, the current study aids in determining if

the integrated bonding/association approach holds for a type of deviance not widely studied

within this framework.

Previous Theoretical and Empirical Research

Two theoretical perspectives stand above others in their recognition of the importance of

intimate relationships with parents and friends and how these relationships can result in

delinquent behavior. Control theory (Hirschi, 1969) emphasizes the importance of parents,

whereas social learning/differential association theory (Akers, 1973; Sutherland, 1947)

focuses on the influence of delinquent peers. The following sections review the theoretical

foundations and empirical support for control and differential association/social learning

theories and describe how these frameworks inform our understanding of the importance of

family and peer domains.

Control Theory and Family Relationships

Social control theory posits that “delinquent acts result when an individual’s bond to

society is weak or broken” (Hirschi, 1969, p. 16). Social bonds become weak or broken

when a person fails to (a) form positive attachments to significant others (notably parents),

(b) develop a stake in conformity to conventional norms, (c) engage in conventional activi-

ties, or (d) believe in society’s accepted norms (Hirschi, 1969; Rebellon, 2002; Toby, 1957).

Control theory rests on the assumption that effective parenting, for example, can induce