How do outside factors impact youth delinquency? Understanding youth convictions.

1. How do outside factors impact youth delinquency? Understanding youth convictions. Melissa Beale mb6145a@student.american.edu American University School of International Service

2. Research Question & Hypothesis Research Question: Is youth delinquency a result of poor family circumstances? What other factors contribute to youth convictions? H0: There is no statistically significant relationship between a youth being convicted and poor family circumstances. There is no statistically significant relationship between any of the other independent variables and youth convictions. H1: There is a statistically significant relationship between a youth being convicted and poor family circumstances. Factors such as family income, ethnicity, criminal records of parents, mother’s education and father’s education, significantly increase the probability of youth delinquency and convictions.

3. Literature Review Anne M. Dannerbeck - Differences in Parenting Attributes, Experiences, and Behaviors of Delinquent Youth With and Without a Parental History of Incarceration-Data was collected from the Missouri Office of State Courts Administrator, Juvenile Offender Risk and Needs Assessment and Classification System, database. Interviewed 1,112 juveniles, where 31% had a parent with a history of incarceration. (2005).- They quantitatively tested four hypotheses, all based on youth delinquents with a history of family incarceration. The study supported all hypotheses except the last one which stated that “parental incarceration history is a predictor of delinquent behavior .”-Overall, this study concludes that parents with a history of incarceration may not be what influences youth delinquency, but rather, it seems to be that these youth experienced “parenting attributes and life events” that have led them down a negative path. Dionne Anna Peniston - The Effects of Parental Incarceration on Children: An Examination of Delinquency and Criminality, School Performance, and Alcohol and Drug Use - Using data from the Children at Risk Program which was implemented in 1992-1996, and the electronic data set obtained from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, reveal that there is not a significant relation between youth delinquency and parental incarceration during the past 12 months. However, according to the study, youth tend to show a higher tendency of delinquency once a parent has been incarcerated or on probation more than once in the past 2 years. Therefore, although there seems to be little difference in youth delinquency during the past 12 months of parental incarceration, overall, there does seem to be a higher probability of “delinquency, criminality, poor school performance, and alcohol and drug use among youth with parents under correctional supervision.” (Peniston 2006)-This study used the mean scores of two types of youths: (1) those whose parents or caretakers had been incarcerated, and (11) those whose parents or caretakers had not been incarcerated. The mean scores reflect the relation of parental incarceration on youth delinquency, criminality, poor school performance and drug and alcohol abuse.- Suggests that there is a relation between parental incarceration and youth delinquency.

4. Data Data has been collected from the ICPSR (Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research) website. The Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development [Great Britain], 1961-1981, examined a sample of boys between the ages of 8-9 who were on the registers of six state primary schools what were within a one-mile radius of the established research office, of the working-class urban area in Cambridge. The main purpose of this study was to test several hypotheses about youth delinquency. Outside factors such as “socioeconomic conditions, schooling, friendship, parent-child relationships, extracurricular activities, school records, and criminal records” were examined by the researchers. The information collected in the surveys contain records from peers, family background, job histories, self-reported delinquency, etc. Dependent Variable: sumv5_8 (ordinal) which represents youth convicted or not convicted. Also recoded into sumv5_8recode (ordinal). Independent Variables: X1 is v92 (ordinal) which represents income of family – inadequate, adequate, comfortable. X2 is v131 (nominal) which represents ethnicity of boy – British, not British. X3 is v300 (ordinal) which represents criminal record of parents – none, not convicted as juvenile, 1 conviction, 2 convictions, 3 convictions, >3 convictions. X4 is v199 (ordinal) which represents education of mother – unascertained, beyond school age, neither. X5 is v198 (ordinal) which represents education of father – unascertained, beyond school age, neither.

5. Descriptive Statistics of Dependent Variable • Both the median and the mode of the dependent variable (sum5_8recode) is 0 (not convicted). • All missing data was recoded into 'missing' values, which amounts to 16. • The dependent variable consists of youth that are not convicted, and those that are convicted. According to the first bar chart out of a total of 395 youth, 265 or 67.1% youth were not convicted, and 130 or 32,9% were convicted. • The second bar chart shows the number of times a youth was convicted. Out of the 130 who were convicted, 46.92% had 1 conviction, 29.23% had 2 convictions, 16.92% had 3 convictions, and 6.92% had more than 3 convictions.

6. Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Analysis of Independent Variables Interpretations: • The first bar chart shows how the income of family impacts not convicted and convicted youth. According to the gamma calculations, the income of family (approx. sig.=.001) is significant to the dependent variable. • The second bar chart shows how the criminal record of parents impacts the dependent variable. According to the gamma calculations, the criminal record of parents (approx. sig.=.000) is significant to the dependent variable.

7. Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Analysis of Independent Variables Interpretations: • The top left bar chart shows how the level of education of the mother impacts not convicted and convicted youth. According to gamma calculations, the mother’s education (approx. sig.=.339) is not significant to the dependent variable. • The top right bar chart shows how the level of education of the father impacts not convicted and convicted youth. According to the gamma calculations, the father’s education (approx. sig.=.010) is significant to the dependent variable. • The bottom left bar chart shows how the ethnicity of the boy relates to the dependent variable. According to the lambda calculations, the boy’s ethnicity (approx. sig.=.674) is not significant to the dependent variable.

8. Probit Analysis • Table3 . Estimates, Dependent variable conviction of youth Interpretations: In each model, the first three independent variables, income of family, ethnicity of boy, and criminal record of parents, are all statistically significant. Model 1: One unit increase in income of family (v92) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.104 units (sumv5_8). One unit increase in ethnicity of boy (v131) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.204 units (sumv5_8). Model 2: One unit increase in income of family (v92) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.079 units (sumv5_8). One unit increase in ethnicity of boy (v131) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.198 units (sumv5_8). One unit increase in criminal record of parents (v300) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.085 units (sumv5_8). Model 3: One unit increase in income of family (v92) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.080 units (sumv5_8). One unit increase in ethnicity of boy (v131) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.196 units (sumv5_8). One unit increase in criminal record of parents (v300) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.856 units (sumv5_8). Model 4:One unit increase in income of family (v92) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.082 units (sumv5_8). One unit increase in ethnicity of boy (v131) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.207 units (sum5_8). One unit increase in criminal record of parents (v300) increases the probability of youth convictions by 0.084 units (sumv5_8). Estimates significant at the 5% level are in boldface, p-values in parentheses. Model 1 explains 4.03% of the total variation of the dependent variable (sumv5_8). Model 2 explains 8.63% of the total variation of the dependent variable (sumv5_8). Model 3 explains 8.94% of the total variation of the dependent variable (sumv5_8). Model 4 explains 9.31% of the total variation of the dependent variable (sumv5_8). All are weak models but Model 4 is the strongest.

9. Policy Implications • To a large extent I must fail to reject the null hypothesis. My research hypothesis that there would be a statistically significant relationship between youth convictions and poor family circumstances was not demonstrated. However, although there was no statistically significant relationship between many of my independent variables and youth convictions, there was between some (income of family, ethnicity of boy, criminal record of parents) and so I must both accept and reject the null hypothesis. • What are the policy implications of your findings? • Confirms the arguments of most previous scholars that youth convictions are not a direct result of parental criminal records or poor family circumstances. • Since other factors seem to influence youth delinquency and convictions, programs should be installed by the government, schools and other institutions that will be able to provide the necessary guidance for troubled youth. • Extra curricular activities is one answer to this problem, where youth can positively overcome challenges through skillful and recreational activities, that will help keep them from going down the wrong path. • Adults, parents, and other caregivers, as well as teachers should be educated more on the topic of youth delinquency. • One criticism of the study is that it centers only on young boys. An updated study should be conducted in order to include both genders for a more detailed and realistic analysis.