The Triple Crown of Antisocial Behavior

• Date: 01 October 2016
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204015599042
• Published date: 01 October 2016
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
2016, Vol. 14(4) 350-366
The Triple Crown
ª The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permission:
of Antisocial Behavior:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1541204015599042
yvj.sagepub.com
Effortful Control, Negative
Emotionality, and
Community Disadvantage
Kevin T. Wolff1, Michael T. Baglivio2, Alex R. Piquero3,
Michael G. Vaughn4, and Matt DeLisi5
Abstract
This study examines the effect of negative emotionality, effortful control, and community
disadvantage on juvenile recidivism. Using DeLisi and Vaughn’s temperament theory as a foundation,
we assess whether youth who have temperament issues and those who live in disadvantaged
communities are more likely to recidivate. Findings indicate that net of a wide array of known risk
factors, youth with poor temperaments, and those living in disadvantaged communities are more
likely to reoffend. Additionally, those youth who face a triple threat of temperament issues and
disadvantage reoffend faster post-completion. The theoretical and policy implications of these
findings are discussed.
Keywords
temperament theory, community context, juvenile justice, recidivism
Introduction
Contemporary temperament research is most prominent in the field of developmental psychology.
Criminologists, however, have only periodically incorporated temperament concepts in the explana-
tion of antisocial and deviant behavior. Most notably, negative emotionality (NE) has been impli-
cated in Agnew’s (1992) general strain theory (1992), Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) use of
1 John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, NY, USA
2 G4S Youth Services, LLC, Tampa, FL, USA
3 University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
4 Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA
5 Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Kevin T. Wolff, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 524 West 59th St., New York, NY 10019, USA.
Email: kwolff@jjay.cuny.edu

---

Wolff et al.
351
low self-control in the general theory of crime, Moffitt’s (1993) elaboration of the role of angry–
irritableness in her dual taxonomy, and Wilson and Herrnstein’s (1985) explanation of the effects
of low effortful control (EC) on offending. Recently, DeLisi and Vaughn (2014) have articulated a
temperament-based theory of antisocial behavior, which employs explicit temperament concepts
as the exclusive explanation of both law-breaking behavior and negative interactions with the jus-
tice system. EC and NE are the two constructs fundamental to their temperament-based theory.
Furthermore, the theorists argue temperament theory to be indispensable in the advancement of
understanding the effects of context on offending, stating ‘‘when low levels of behavioral self-
regulation and high levels of NE are paired with disadvantaged contexts their expression is more
likely to be stronger’’ (2014, p. 17).
The current study examines the hypothesis of an interplay between temperament theory con-
structs and community conditions on juvenile recidivism. We first provide a brief overview of
EC and NE, followed by a review of the research on contextual effects on juvenile crime and reci-
divism, and the limited work examining temperament and context in tandem for understanding pat-
terns of offending. Next we describe the data, measures, and methods, followed by the analyses and
closing with a discussion regarding policy, prevention, and intervention.
Temperament Theory Constructs
EC
EC is essentially the ability to constrain a response that is perhaps more favorable (dominant) at the
moment and instead perform a subdominant behavior (Kagan & Snidman, 2009; Rothbart, 1989;
Sulik et al., 2010). At any given moment, there are behaviors we would prefer to engage in, yet
we inhibit those emotions and behavioral impulses and instead pay attention, and act, in a more
socially appropriate manner. This ability to regulate emotion and delay immediate gratification
(exhibit EC) is required in every facet of life, from sitting quietly at one’s desk and raising a hand
to be called on to speak in school, to arriving to work on time and interacting with coworkers and
one’s superiors appropriately in later life (see also DeLisi & Vaughn, 2014; MacDonald, 2008).
Juveniles with EC deficits act impulsively, seemingly unable to control their negative behavior.
These youth lack techniques and skills to delay gratification, modulate reactivity, or ‘‘think before
acting,’’ especially in emotionally charged situations (Rothbart, Evans, & Ahadi, 2000). Youth with
these deficits are at increased likelihood of experiencing peer rejection of impulsive or aggressive
speaking or acting out, teachers disciplining inappropriate school conduct, punitive parental
responses to wandering off or inattention, and ultimately encounters with the juvenile justice system
(DeLisi & Vaughn, 2014).
Individuals with lower levels of EC (often referred to as self-control in adolescents and adults)
have a higher likelihood of experiencing a host of negative outcomes across many life domains,
including physical health, substance dependence, personal finances, and criminal offending (see
Moffitt et al., 2011). With respect to offending, EC deficits have been shown to be predictive of
delinquency and reoffending (Evans-Chase, 2014; Evans-Chase & Zhou, 2014; Gordon, Diehl, &
Anderson, 2012; Pratt & Cullen, 2000; Roose, Bijttebier, Van der Oord, Claes, & Lilienfeld,
2013; Stevenson & Goodman, 2001), a finding which holds across race and gender (Heatherton
& Baumeister, 1996; Rothbart, 2011; Sulik et al., 2010) and across the life course (DeLisi &
Vaughn, 2014, 2015; Morizot, 2015).
NE
Research suggests that individuals differ in how they perceive and experience interactions with
others and their environment. NE involves a predominately negative outlook and perception of

---

352
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)
individuals and one’s social environment (Clark, 2005). Individuals with high NE have increased
likelihood of perceiving the intentions and actions of others as hostile or directed against them.
NE is composed of both ‘‘hot’’ (frustration, fear, anger, hostility, and irritability) and ‘‘cold’’ (dis-
comfort, sadness, and soothability) variants (Rothbart, 2007; see also DeLisi & Vaughn, 2014). NE
has consistently been found to be related to the externalization of behavior, internalizing problems,
and adjustment difficulties, with those having higher NE evincing more problems (Clark, Watson, &
Mineka, 1994; Eisenberg et al., 2001, 2005; Lengua, West, & Sandler, 1998). One vignette-based
study assessing reactions to a person being singled out for punishment showed that individuals with
low self-control were more likely to perceive the sanction as unfair and that both unfair sanctions
and low self-control led to higher perceptions of being angry for being singled out for punishment
(see Piquero, Gomez-Smith, & Langton, 2004).
Individuals with both low EC and high NE are hypothesized to evidence even greater antisocial
behavior and negative interactions with and within the juvenile and criminal justice systems (DeLisi
& Vaughn, 2014). There is ample evidence of the interrelatedness of EC and NE (Clark, 2005;
Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Eggum, 2010; Kochanska & Knaack, 2003). The comorbidity of low EC and
high NE heightens the likelihood the individual will display emotions and behaviors that will be
poorly received by others as they are unable to inhibit visceral responses to emotions and negative
perceptions. This coupling of poor self-regulation and the expression of negative emotions sets the
stage for negative social exchanges and interactions. Those with greater propensity to perceive oth-
ers and their environment as hostile and who are less able to control emotions and actions and to
adhere to societal norms will be more likely rejected by friends, family, and authority, increasing
the likelihood of encountering both informal and formal social control mechanisms.
Contextual Effects and Juvenile Crime
While the past two decades has seen a growth in studies examining the effects of community context
on criminal behavior (Elliott et al., 1996; Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997; Sampson, Moren-
off, & Gannon-Rowley, 2002; Wikstrom & Loeber, 2000), research and theory on the recidivism of
previously adjudicated juveniles has, to a large extent, neglected the potential for contextual factors
to contribute to postrelease outcomes (Abrams & Snyder, 2010). We know of three studies that have
examined the potential for community-level factors, such as disadvantage or immigrant concentra-
tion, to impact further involvement in criminal behavior among juveniles. Wright and Rodriguez
(2014) found no relationship between returning to communities marked by concentrated immigra-
tion and recidivism among 12,000 youth in a single county in the state of Arizona. In contrast, Wolff,
Baglivio, Intravia, and Piquero (2015) found youth residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods to be at
an increased risk of juvenile recidivism, but those living in neighborhoods marked by a high con-
centration of immigrants were roughly 6% less likely to reoffend. They conclude that, consistent
with the broader literature on recidivism, community context, including levels of disadvantage, is
an important predictor of juvenile recidivism (Wolff et al., 2015; see also Kubrin & Stewart,
2006; Wright, Kim, Chassin, Losoya, & Piquero, 2014). A third study that examined juvenile reof-
fending using Pathways to Desistance data found concentrated disadvantage indirectly associated
...