The Past Is Prologue: Criminal Specialization Continuity in the Delinquent Career

• Published date: 01 October 2019
• Author: Matt DeLisi,Andy Hochstetler,Jacob H. Erickson,Mark H. Heirigs,Ramate Bunga
• Date: 01 October 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204018809839
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

The Past Is Prologue: Criminal

Specialization Continuity in the

Delinquent Career

Matt DeLisi

1

, Ramate Bunga

1

, Mark H. Heirigs

1

,

Jacob H. Erickson

1

, and Andy Hochstetler

1

Abstract

The versatility/specialization debate in criminology has important theoretical, research, and juvenile/

criminal justice ramifications. Although offenders are mostly versatile, there is important evidence of

specialization, but much of this evidence is derived from highly technical statistical approaches.

Drawing on data from a cohort of serious delinquents committed to the California Youth Authority,

logistic regression models revealed robust evidence for criminal specialization net the effects of

behavioral and demographic controls. Prior homicide was associated with a 1,467% increased

likelihood of being currently adjudicated for a homicide offense. Similar prior–current involvement

in robbery (294% increased likelihood), aggravated assault (200%), burglary (148%), and drug sales

(736%) was found. Logistic regression with odds ratios provides intuitive, valuable estimates of

specialization in offending whereby prior involvement in a specific form of delinquency dramatically

increases the likelihood of current involvement in the same form of crime.

Keywords

specialization, versatility, generality of offending, delinquency, criminal career, offense behavior

Whether criminal offenders are versatile or specialized in their offending patterns is a question of

significant theoretical and applied importance. At the theoretical level, the versatility/specialization

debate informs conceptualizations of criminal offenders and the potential processes that drive

criminal conduct. For theorists who attribute crime to a relatively coherent disposition or set of

traits, such as self-control/self-regulation (Baumeister & Heatherton, 1996; Finkel & Hall, 2018;

Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990), temperament (Buss & Plomin, 1975; DeLisi & Vaughn , 2014;

Schwartz, Snidman, & Kagan, 1996), neuropsychologica l functioning (Moffitt, 1993, 2018), or

psychopathy (DeLisi, 2016; Hare, 1996; Lynam, 1996), criminal versatility is expected because

differing opportunity structures will interact with the individual’s underlying antisocial tendencies

and drive various manifestations of conduct problems and crime. In this way, general propensity

theorists would predict that serious offenders have lengthy juvenile and criminal records comprised

1

Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Matt DeLisi, Iowa State University, 203A East Hall, 510 Farm House Lane, Ames, IA 50011, USA.

Email: delisi@iastate.edu

Youth Violence and JuvenileJustice

2019, Vol. 17(4) 335-353

ªThe Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1541204018809839

journals.sagepub.com/home/yvj

of different offenses. For theorists who instead focus on contextual factors, interactional dynamics,

and social processes, such as the social psychological mechanisms of general strain theory (Agnew,

1992), coercive family processes (Patterson, 1986), social information processing theory (Crick &

Dodge, 1994), or social learning (Burgess & Akers, 1966), there is greater potential for specialized

offending that reflects the influence of current situational contexts, the dynamism of peer associa-

tions, or other state-dependent effects.

Versatility/specialization also has important juvenile justice implications. In the event that youth

engage in general or specific forms of delinquency, correctional interventions can specifically target

criminogenic needs that relate to that conduct. For instance, Lai, Zeng, and Chu (2016) studied

nearly 4,000 serious offenders and examined whether those who committed only violent delinquent

offenses were different from youth who committed violent and other types of delinquency. They

found that more general delinquents, those who committed violence and other types, had earlier

starting delinquent careers, evinced more risk factors, and had more criminogenic needs than more

specialized violent youth. Indeed, policies who focus on specific types of offenders, such as sexual

offenders, are in part predicated on the notion they are disproportionately likely to specialize in

sexual aggression (Jennings & Perez, 2018; Lin & Simon, 2016; Miethe, Olson, & Mitchell, 2006;

Simon, 2000).

1

In the event that delinquents are versatile and thus evince a general antisocial disposition popu-

lated by broad-based risk factors, comprehensive risk assessment and case management tools, such

as the level of service/Case Management Inventory (Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2000), and

comprehensive correctiona l interventions, such as mult isystemic therapy and functi onal family

therapy (Baglivio, Jackowski, Greenwald, & Wolff, 2014) can be used. In practice, correctional

sanctions employ a host of conditions (e.g., monitored sobriety, no contact with victims, home visits,

mental health counseling, employment monitoring) that are designed to modify the behavior of the

offender toward conventional, prosocial conduct. In this regard, it is the general, antisocial disposi-

tion and behaviors that are addres sed. Thus, the versatility/sp ecialization debate has importa nt

implications for academic criminology and applied juvenile/criminal justice alike.

Versatility and (Not or) Specialization in Offending

Like many criminological debates, the versatility/specialization dialogue has historically been cast

in zero-sum terms in which offenders were characterized as either versatile or specialized. This is

unfortunate because offending trajectories and inspection of individual criminal records usually

showed evidence for both trends in offending. For example, an offender with 40 career arrests for

10 different offense types is indicative of versatility, but if 20 of those arrests are for the same crime,

that is indicative of specialization. Nevertheless, scholars occasionally took rather strident, polarized

views in favor of specialization or versatility. For instance, Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990, p. 91)

famously quipped, “In spite of years of tireless research motivated by a belief in specialization, no

credible evidence of specialization has been reported. In fact, the evidence of offender versatility is

overwhelming.” Indeed, the preponderance of offender’s official criminal history contains a broad

diversity of charges spanning violent, property, drug, traffic, and regulatory domains, and numerous

studies support criminal versatility. The empirical support derives from a variety of data sources

including the Pittsburgh Youth Study (van Wijk et al., 2005), the Texas Youth Commission data

(Trulson, Haerle, Caudill, & DeLisi, 2016), the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development

(Piquero, Farrington, Jennings, Diamond, & Craig, 2012), the Federal Bureau of Investigation

computerized criminal history file (Blumstein & Cohen, 1979), the California Youth Authority

(Armstrong & Britt, 2004), the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study (Lynam,

Piquero, & Moffitt, 2004), and the Philadelphia Collaborative Perinatal Project (Piquero, 2000).

336 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 17(4)