Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T19:38:13.185Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Formal Processing and Future Delinquency: Deviance Amplification as Selection Artifact

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Douglas A. Smith and
Raymond Paternoster
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Does referring a case to juvenile court or diverting it affect a person's future delinquent/criminal behavior? Labeling theory suggests that it does, arguing that formal processing by the juvenile justice system is part of a deviance amplification process that ultimately results in increased criminal/delinquent activity. But critics point out that a higher rate of future offending among those referred to court, often interpreted as evidence supporting the deviance amplification argument, could be nothing more than a selection artifact. Specifically, those referred to juvenile court may have more attributes that are related to future offending than do those who are diverted from the system. Under this scenario, differences between these groups in later offending could simply reflect preexisting differences in criminal propensity. This article discusses approaches for testing the deviance amplification argument against the alternative hypothesis of a selection artifact.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 24 , Issue 5 , 1990, pp. 1109 - 1131
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 The Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

We thank Dan Nagin for helpful comments during the evolution of this article. We also thank Charles Tittle and Debbie Curran for providing the data used in this article and the Computer Science Center at the University of Maryland for providing computer support for this research.

References

AMEMIYA, Takeshi (1985) Advanced Econometrics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
BAILEY, William C., and Ruth D., PETERSON (1981) “Legal Versus Extralegal Determinants of Juvenile Court Dispositions,” 32 Juvenile and Family Court Journal 41.Google Scholar
BARNOW, B.S., G., CAIN, and A., GOLDBERGER (1980) “Issues in the Analysis of Selectivity Bias,” in Stromsdorfer, E. and Farkas, G. (eds.), 5 Evaluation Studies. San Francisco: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
BECKER, Howard (1963) Outsiders. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
BISHOP, Donna, and Charles, FRAZIER (1988) “The Influence of Race in Juvenile Justice Processing,” 25 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 242.Google Scholar
CAMERON, A. Colin, TRIVEDI, And P.K. (1986) “Econometric Models Based on Count Data: Comparison and Applications of Some Estimators and Tests,” 1 Journal of Applied Econometrics 29.Google Scholar
CICOUREL, Aaron V. (1968) The Social Organization of Juvenile Justice. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
COHEN, Lawrence E. (1975) “Delinquency Dispositions: An Empirical Analysis of Processing Decisions in Three Juvenile Courts.” Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
COHEN, Lawrence E., and James, KLUGEL (1978) “Determinants of Juvenile Court Dispositions: Ascriptive and Achieved Factors in Two Metropolitan Courts,” 43 American Sociological Review 162.Google Scholar
DUNCAN, Gregory (1983) “Sample Selection as a Proxy Variable Problem: On the Use and Misuse of Gaussian Selectivity Corrections,” Research in Labor Economics, Suppl. 2.Google Scholar
DUNCAN, Gregory (1986) “Continuous/Discrete Econometric Models with Unspecified Error Distribution,” 32 Journal of Econometrics 1.Google Scholar
EMERSON, Robert (1969) Judging Delinquents: Context and Process in Juvenile Court. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
EMPEY, Lemar T., and Erickson, Maynard (1972) The Provo Experiment. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.Google Scholar
FARRINGTON, David P. (1983) “Randomized Experiments on Crime and Justice,” in M. Tonry and N. Norris (eds.), 4 Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
FARRINGTON, David P. (1987) “Predicting Individual Crime Rates,” in Gottfredson, D. and Tonry, M. (eds.), 9 Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
GOLD, Martin, and Jay R., WILLIAMS (1969) “A National Survey of the Aftermath of Apprehension,” 3 Prospectus 3.Google Scholar
GREEN, William (1981) “Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error: Comment,” 49 Econometrica 795.Google Scholar
GREEN, William (1990) Econometric Analysis. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
HECKMAN, James J. (1976) “Simultaneous Equation Models with Continuous and Discrete Endogenous Variables and Structural Shifts,” in S. Goldfeld and R. Quandt (eds.), Studies in Non-Linear Estimation. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
HECKMAN, James J. (1978) “Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System,” 46 Econometrica 931.Google Scholar
HECKMAN, James J., and V.J., HOTZ (1989) “Choosing Among Alternative Nonexperimental Methods for Estimating the Impact of Social Programs: The Case of Manpower Training,” 84 Journal of the American Statistical Association 862.Google Scholar
HECKMAN, James J., and R., ROBB (1985) “Alternative Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Interventions,” in J. Heckman and B. Singer (eds.), Longitudinal Analysis of Labor Market Data. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HIRSCHI, Travis (1975) “Labeling Theory and Juvenile Delinquency: An Assessment of the Evidence,” in W. Gove (ed.), The Labelling of Deviance: Evaluating a Perspective. New York: Halstead Press.Google Scholar
HORWITZ, Allan, and Michael, WASSERMAN (1979) “The Effect of Social Control on Delinquent Behavior: A Longitudinal Test,” 12 Sociological Focus 52.Google Scholar
KLEIN, Malcolm (1975) “Alternative Dispositions for Juvenile Offenders.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
KLEIN, Malcolm (1979) “Deinstitutionalization and Diversion of Juvenile Offenders: A Litany of Impediments,” in N. Morris and M. Tonry (eds.), 1 Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
KLEIN, Malcolm (1986) “Labeling Theory and Delinquency Policy,” 13 Criminal Justice and Behavior 47.Google Scholar
LEMERT, Edwin M. (1951) Social Pathology. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
LIPTON, Douglas, Robert, MARTINSON, and Judith, WILKS (1975) The Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment: A Survey of Treatment Evaluation Studies. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
LOEBER, Rolf, and Thomas, DISHION (1983) “Early Predictors of Male Delinquency: A Review,” 94 Psychological Bulletin 68.Google Scholar
Maddala, G. (1983) Limited-dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MEADE, Anthony C. (1974) “The Labeling Approach to Delinquency: State of the Theory as a Function of Method,” 53 Social Forces 83.Google Scholar
MENG, Chun-Lo, and Peter, SCHMIDT (1985) “On the Cost of Partial Observability in the Bivariate Probit Model,” 26 International Economic Review 71.Google Scholar
OLSEN, R.J. (1980) “A Least Squares Correction for Selectivity Bias,” 48 Econometrica 1815.Google Scholar
PATERNOSTER, Raymond, and Leeann, IOVANNI (1989) “The Labeling Perspective and Delinquency: An Elaboration of the Theory and an Assessment of the Evidence,” 6 Justice Quarterly 359.Google Scholar
RAUSCH, Sharla (1983) “Court Processing Versus Diversion of Status Offenders: A Test of Deterrence and Labeling Theories,” 20 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 39.Google Scholar
SCHUR, Edwin M. (1973) Radical Non-intervention: Rethinking the Delinquency Problem. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
SCULL, Andrew T. (1977) Decarceration, Community Treatment and the Deviant: A Radical View. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
SHANNON, Lyle W. (1980) “Assessing the Relationship of Adult Criminal Careers to Juvenile Careers,” in C. Abt (ed.), Problems in American Social Policy Research. Cambridge: Abt.Google Scholar
SHANNON, Lyle W. (1988) Criminal Career Continuity. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
SHERMAN, Lawrence W., and Richard A., BERK (1984) “The Specific Deterrent Effects of Arrest for Domestic Assault,” 49 American Sociological Review 261.Google Scholar
STOLTZENBERG, Ross M., and D. A., RELLES (1990) “Theory Testing in a World of Constrained Research Design: The Significance of Heckman's Censored Sampling Bias Correction for Nonexperimental Research,” 18 Sociological Methods and Research 395.Google Scholar
TANNENBAUM, Frank (1938) Crime and the Community. Boston: Ginn.10.7312/tann90782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
THORNBERRY, Terence P. (1971) “Punishment and Crime: The Effect of Legal Dispositions on Subsequent Criminal Behavior.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
TITTLE, Charles R. (1975) “Deterrents or Labeling,” 53 Social Forces 399.Google Scholar
TITTLE, Charles R., and D. A., CURRAN (1988) “Contingencies for Dispositional Disparities in Juvenile Justice,” 67 Social Forces 23.Google Scholar
WELLFORD, Charles F. (1975) “Labeling Theory and Crime: An Assessment,” 22 Social Problems 332.Google Scholar
WILKINS, Leslie T. (1969) Evaluation of Penal Measures. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
WOOLDREDGE, John (1988) “Differentiating the Effects of Juvenile Court Sentences on Eliminating Recidivism,” 25 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 264.Google Scholar