Patterns of offending

What is the age crime curve?

Prevalence of offending peaks at a bout 17 years.

What did Moffitts find about who was in this age crime curve?

The people that form that peak are adolescence-limited offenders (AL)

and Life-course persistent offenders (LCP)

What are Adolescence limited offenders (AL)?

Offend during adolescence only

grow out of offending by adulthood

What is Life-course persistent offenders (LCP)?

Problem behaviour/ conduct disorder in childhood.

offend as an adolescent

offending continues onto adulthood

What are the characteristics of LCP offenders?

Exhibit behavioural continuity- tend to behave fairly continuously- the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour.

exhibit heterotypic continuity- underpinned same attributes early, adolescent and adult behaviour, this can change overtime. 

• Continuity of a range of behaviours assumed to be underpinned by same trait/attribute

how do longitudinal research provide support for the idea of LCP?

provides evidence for continuity of antisocial behaviours over the life course, starting at very young age.

this can be seen in studies: Cambridge study, Pittsburgh youth study, Dunedin study

Minority of offenders fall in LCP groups- consitent with research showing that minority of offenders commit majority of crime.

What is the Onset of LCP offenders?

• early start- can manifest as childhood conduct disorder, if behaviour is stable and starts early, need to be looking for causes from early life.

• early experiences- underlying deficits in neuropsychological functioning.

• Verbal functioning deficits- can lead to poor problem solving and impact o children’s experience of school/ school failure.

• Executive functioning deficits.

• Impact of ante-natal events- maternal smoking, drug taking.

• birth complications 

• post natal events

• Neuropsychological deficits can manifest in ‘difficult’ temperament and/or behaviour of young children

• Impact on parenting

• Child’s ‘difficult’ behaviour evokes poor parenting

• Child’s ‘difficult’ behaviour is a family stressor

• So impact of neuropsychological deficits/difficult temperament exacerbated by poor parenting/adverse family conditions

What other risk factors are likely to be experienced by this group of people?

• Parenting/child-rearing

• Family functioning

• Family antisocial behaviour/criminal behaviour

• Socio-economic deprivation

What is the maintenance of LCP offenders?

• persistence of antisocial behaviours and onto offendinng.

• negative behaviour evokes reactions at school and from peers.

• impact of poor problem- solving akilla processing on social interactions.

• opportunities to desist are not available or not taken.

• ongoing and cumulative consequences of antisocial behaviour.

• antisocial behaviour and offending becomes entrenched in LCP’s lifestyle.

• Continue to offend into adulthood.

What is the onset of the AL offenders?

Cross-situational inconsistency- e.g., obey rules at school but antisocial out of school.

offending as a response to certain circumstances. 

What did Moffitt (1993) suggest the onset of AL offenders are? 

Social mimicry

• Mimicking of behaviour to obtain a desired outcome

• Offending as ‘mimicry’ of LCP peers’ behaviour

·      But

• What is the desired outcome that AL offenders want to get?

• Why will copying their delinquent/antisocial behaviour allow them to obtain it?

Maturity gap

• Biological maturity & perceived social (im)maturity of adolescents

• Dependent on parents (various legal milestones at 16 years & 18 years)

• Maturity gap has increased in past century

• Maturity gap leads to adolescents wanting to act in ways/engage in behaviours that make them feel mature & independent of parents

• LCP offenders perceived as having these things

• So, AL copy (mimic) behaviour of LCP offenders

• Temporary ‘coming together’ of LCP and AL offenders

• AL offenders not characterised by early risk factors found among LCP offenders (neuropsychological deficits, difficult temperament, poor parenting, adverse family & socio-economic conditions etc.)

• Instead importance of peers (temporarily) and role of reinforcement

  • Model LCP’s antisocial/offending behaviours

  • immediate consequences reinforce behaviour.

What is the desistance of AL offenders?

What might lead offenders to stop offending?

• sometimes AL offenders shift to an LCP trajectory of ongoing delinquency/antisocial behaviour.

• ‘Snares’, school failure, get caught and official sanctions.

• therefore, the options to shift back to non-offending as typical AL are ‘ closed down’

What is Abstention?

• a small proportion of adolescents have no involvement at all in antisocial behaviour/ delinquency?

• research estimate 6%-12%

Why do some adolescents abstain altogether?

• lack of opporunity (to mimic peers) due to personal characteristics.

• social isolation

• dont perceive the maturity gap

What is evidence for Moffitt’s theory?

• body of research testing Moffitt’s theory

• research for longitudinal studies generally support moffitts’ taxanomy.

• other research examining offending trajectories.

• also supports moffitt’s work, but other subgroups also identified.

What is offending trajectories?

• sophisticated analytic strategies for identifying offending trajectories from longitudinal data.

• narrative review of 105 studies by Jennings and Reingle (2012) shows that number of trajectories ranged from 2-7.

• most studies found 3 or 4 groups (including non-offenders)

• all found an AL group.

• all found at least one LCP group

  • often broken down reflecting level of offending (low, high, etc)

  • sub-divided by age range in terms of specific label

• generally consistent with Moffitt’s taxonomy.

• comparisons of people in different offending trajectories.

• methological issues follow-up time: If follow-up time is too short it might not identify all AL offenders.  There might be a group of offenders whose level of offending is relatively low, so labelled persistent offenders to distinguish from chronic offenders.  But it might be that some of these ‘persistent’ offenders will desist and fall into the AL group

What is the research for offending trajectories research: Keijsers et al 2012?

N = 503 boys followed from 7 – 19 years

Five ‘offending’ trajectories found

• Non-offenders – 24%

•  Moderate childhood only offenders – 29%

• Adolescence limited offenders – 9%

• Serious childhood only offenders – 24%

• Serious persistent offenders – 13%

Examined trajectories with specific reference to parent-child relations

Non-offenders – good quality relationships

Adolescence limited – good quality relationships in childhood, quality deteriorated in adolescence

Serious persistent offenders – poor quality relationships in childhood, deteriorated even further in adolescence

Moderate/serious childhood offenders – poor quality relationships in childhood, but not clear what prevented them from maintaining their offending into adolescence.

 

What is the research for offending trajectories: Wiesner et al (2012)?

•      N = 203 boys followed from 10 – 19 years

•      Three offending trajectories found

–      Rare offenders (almost never arrested) – 68.5%

–      Low-level chronic offenders (slight peak in mid-adolescence) – 22.3%

–      High-level chronic offenders – 9.2%

•      Compared three groups on childhood predictors of offending

–      High level chronic predicted by higher levels of childhood antisocial behaviour, childhood attention problems, parental antisocial behaviour

–      Low level chronic predicted by higher levels of child attention problems & parental antisocial behaviour

–      No predictors differentiated between two chronic offender groups

–      Association with deviant peers was associated with levels of offending within each group

What is the Male vs. Female trajectories?

Fergusson and Horwood (2002) examined this issue using data from birth- 21 yrs

followed five groups

• low risk offenders.

• 3 groups of adolescent- limited offenders (differed by age of onset- early, intermediate, late)

• chronic offenders.

identical offending trajectories for boys and girls but different propotions.

• females more likely to show low-risk and early onset adolescent-limited offending.

• males more likely to show late onset adolescent limited and chronic offending trajectories

number of family functioning and early adjustment variables that discrimianted between the offending trajectory groups, these were the same for boys and girls.

What is Abstention researched by Piquero et al (2005)?

•      N = 1,685 young people aged 17 yrs

–      1,454 offenders

–      231 abstainers

•      Data on delinquency, peer associations (delinquent & prosocial peers), peer involvement (dating behaviour), attachment to teachers, maternal monitoring, physical maturity, sadness/depression, autonomy

•      Abstainers :

–      Lower proportion of delinquent peers

–      Higher proportion of prosocial peers

–      Date less

–      Greater attachment to teachers

–      Higher degree of maternal monitoring

–      Less physically mature

–      Relatively low levels of sadness/depression

–      Less autonomous

•      Abstainers don’t seem to be socially isolated or troubled/sad introverts

•      They have friendships in peer groups, but more likely to be prosocial peers

•      Good, compliant students who become (temporarily) unpopular with ‘newly popular delinquent groups’