Pathways to Crime and Emerging Adulthood: Differences between Prison Inmates and Normative Young Adults in Israel

• Author: Maayan Zohari,Mally Shechory-Bitton
• DOI: 10.1177/0032885520968244
• Date: 01 December 2020
• Published date: 01 December 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885520968244

The Prison Journal

2020, Vol. 100(6) 726 –746

© 2020 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0032885520968244

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

Article

Pathways to Crime and

Emerging Adulthood:

Differences between

Prison Inmates and

Normative Young

Adults in Israel

Mally Shechory-Bitton1 and Maayan Zohari2

Abstract

The current study evaluates differences between inmates and normative

young male adults based on the Pathways to Crime model. Research findings

support the model’s assumptions, showing that inmate characteristics

are consistent with the Life-Course Persistent (LCP) pathway, while the

characteristics of the non-inmates are mostly consistent with the abstainers’

pathway. This investigation makes a theoretical contribution, demonstrating

the model’s suitability for distinguishing between crime pathways among

emerging adults. Also, emphasis is placed on emerging adulthood as an

intermediate period on the path to adulthood, which can affect the evolution

of crime pathways among at-risk populations.

Keywords

pathways to crime, emerging adulthood, youth, inmates

Introduction

A great deal of research and statistical data indicate that adolescents engage

in criminal activities and high-risk behaviors at higher rates than adults

(e.g., Cohen-Medina & Ben-David, 2016; Ryan et al., 2013). These sources

1Ariel University, Ariel, Israel

2Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel

Corresponding Author:

Mally Shechory-Bitton, Department of Criminology, Ariel University, Ariel 40700, Israel.

Email: mally@bezeqint.net

968244TPJXXX10.1177/0032885520968244The Prison JournalShechory-Bitton and Zohari

research-article2020

Shechory-Bitton and Zohari 727

primarily focus on the delinquency and risk behaviors of teens in adoles-

cence (ages 10–18), a period which constitutes a stage of transition from

childhood to adulthood, and which is characterized by developmental

changes that affect identity formation (Erikson, 1968).

These assumptions are consistent with the age-crime curve (Hirschi &

Gottfredson, 1983), which peaks during adolescence when many adolescents

experience difficulties and are in the process of forming their own identity

(Aviad-Wilchek, 2005; Laub & Sampson, 2003; Shechory & Ben-David,

2010). Nevertheless, this involvement is usually limited to adolescence and

does not develop into a criminal career during adulthood (Mulder et al.,

2011). This period is also a crucial time in the process undergone by young

offenders, dubbed the “criminological crossroads” (Thornberry et al., 2013).

While most law breakers opt for a normative route upon reaching young

adulthood (Farrington et al., 2012; Piquero, 2008), a minority continue their

delinquent activities (Farrington, 2012) and even end up in prison. However,

the journey to adulthood has drastically changed in developed nations over

the last 50 years (Salvatore et al., 2012). Some researchers have noted the

extension of the period between adolescence and adulthood, and identified it

as “emerging adulthood” (Arnett, 2006; Erikson, 1968) or “prolonged ado-

lescence” (Erikson, 1968), relating to young adults (ages 18–25).

Emerging adulthood is both a period of role transition related to school,

relationships, and employment, and a more gradual maturation of individual

beliefs and values (Arnett, 2000). The main developmental task in this period

is to form and explore the identity of the young adult. In this period, young

adults are characterized by egocentrism; a sense of detachment stemming

from existing in the intermediate phase between adolescence and adulthood;

instability; openness to a wide variety of possibilities; and an occupation with

existential questions, spirituality, developing outlooks and views on life and

the world (Arnett, 2000; Schwartz et al., 2013). Individuals at this stage who

do not consider themselves “adults” are less likely to forge solid relationships

and more likely to be risk takers (Nelson & Barry, 2005). The behavior of a

young adult inclined to risk behaviors and involvement in criminal activities

might take a turn for the worse in this period.

In Israel, this age has another special meaning. Unlike their counterparts

in most western countries, Jewish young adults in Israel must enlist for man-

datory military service (Shulman, Blatt & Walsh, 2006). The army period is

considered a meaningful shaping period in the life of young adults. Strict and

demanding, the relatively long service (2 years for females and 3 years for

males) is characterized by taking responsibility, coping with physical and

mental difficulties, and partial separation from the family setting—all of

which let young people experience new liberties for the first time (Mayseless