EXAM 1 STUDY GUIDE

Definitions

• Peer Influence: The mechanisms of social influence that shape values, attitudes, and behaviors through social equals outside the family.

• Peer: A social equal, often someone of similar age and status.

• Compliance vs. Private Acceptance:

  • Compliance: Outward behavior aligns with group expectations but does not necessarily reflect private beliefs.

  • Private Acceptance: Internalization of group attitudes and beliefs, resulting in genuine change.

• Co-offending: Any criminal act involving two or more offenders, also called "group crime" or "group delinquency." The study of co-offending emerged in the 1960s but gained traction in the early 21st century.

• Difference between Gangs and Co-offending:

  • Gangs are structured, with shared norms, identity, and common goals.

  • Co-offending is informal and lacks the organizational elements of gangs.

• Thrasher’s Gang Definition: An "interstitial group" that forms spontaneously and is solidified through conflict. Key features include face-to-face meetings, movement through space, organization, and collective behavior.

• Role of Collective Behavior in Gangs: It fosters group traditions, structure, solidarity, morale, and territorial attachment.

• Federal Definition of a Gang:

  • An ongoing group of 5 or more people.

  • Engages in criminal activity as a primary purpose.

  • Members commit a continuing series of offenses affecting interstate/foreign commerce.

• Distinguishing Peer Groups, Co-offending Groups, and Gangs:

  • Peer Groups: Broad social networks without delinquent behavior.

  • Co-offending Groups: Temporary alliances committing crimes together.

  • Gangs: Institutionalized groups persisting over time, engaging in criminal acts.

Peer Influence

• Peak of Peer Influence: Middle teens to early adulthood.

• Role of Parents in Transition:

  • Early childhood: Dominant influence.

  • Adolescence: Peer interactions increase as parental influence declines.

• Cross-Cultural Variations in Peer Influence:

  • U.S.: High peer orientation, more time spent with friends than family.

  • France, Germany, Soviet Union, Japan: Parental influence remains strong; peer interaction is constrained.

• Changes in Peer Influence Over Time (U.S.):

  • Increased due to industrialization, age-segregated education, mobility (cars), and teenage employment.

• Positive Roles of Peers in Adolescence:

  1. Identity Formation: Peers replace family in shaping self-concept.

  2. Emotional Support: Helps with transitions (puberty, school, responsibilities).

  3. Development of Romantic Relationships: Shift from same-sex groups to dating.

  4. Social Competence: Develops empathy, intimacy, and conflict resolution skills.

• Key Factors in Peer Group Formation:

  • Propinquity: Physical closeness fosters friendships.

  • Homophily: Similarity in age, sex, race, social class, popularity, and aggression drives peer selection.

• Situation Hypothesis:

  • Peers: Influence leisure and social interactions.

  • Parents: Influence long-term decisions (college, careers).

• Parenting Styles Linked to High Peer Orientation:

  • Highly permissive: Minimal monitoring, allowing extensive peer influence.

  • Highly restrictive: Over-controlling, leading youth to seek autonomy through peers.

Peers and Crime

• Mechanisms of Peer Influence on Crime:

  • Fear of Ridicule: Avoiding rejection compels conformity, even to illegal behavior.

  • Loyalty: Peer relationships demand trust, sometimes requiring criminal participation.

  • Status: Crime can enhance social standing, particularly among males.

  • Boredom: Unstructured time increases delinquent behavior.

  • Protection: Peer alliances can emerge for defense, escalating into criminal groups.

• Moral Cover: Peer loyalty can legitimize or justify criminal behavior, diminishing moral opposition.

• Anderson’s Code of the Street:

  • Status and respect are paramount in disadvantaged communities.

  • Disrespect (“dissing”) must be met with violence to maintain standing.

• Interaction of Ridicule, Loyalty, and Status:

  • Ridicule deters non-conformity.

  • Loyalty demands participation.

  • Status compels individuals to assert dominance, sometimes through violence.

• Compliance vs. Magnifying Mechanisms:

  • Compliance: Encourages individual conformity.

  • Magnifying: Transforms individual behavior into group norms.

• Saving Face: Defending personal reputation, often through aggression or crime.

• Role of Witnesses in Peer Delinquency: Presence of peers amplifies aggressive responses.

• Influence of Alcohol and Drug Use:

  • Used in social settings, reinforcing delinquent behavior.

  • Can reduce inhibition, escalate group violence, and facilitate criminal acts.

The Group Nature of Crime

• Offenses Most Likely to Involve Group Offending:

  • Vandalism, burglary, trespassing, public disorder crimes.

• Offenses Less Likely to Involve Group Offending:

  • Assault, shoplifting, solo crimes.

• Events vs. Offenders:

  • Counting events underestimates the prevalence of group crime among offenders.

• Sidney Blotzman’s Case Study:

  • Delinquent career from age 8 to 16, involved in 13 offenses.

  • Always committed crimes in groups, often with older offenders.

• Size of Delinquent Groups:

  • Typically 2-4 members, decreases with age.

• Co-offender Groups vs. Accomplice Networks:

  • Co-offender Group: Directly involved in committing crimes together.

  • Accomplice Network: Broader pool of delinquent peers.

• Factors Influencing Delinquent Groups Over Time:

  • Residential mobility, incarceration, life changes.

Selection vs. Influence Debate

• Selection Hypothesis:

  • Delinquents self-select into criminal peer groups.

• Influence Hypothesis:

  • Peer relationships cause delinquent behavior.

• Hirschi’s Social Control Theory:

  • Delinquent youth lack strong, positive friendships.

• Gottfredson & Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime (1990):

  • Self-control is the main predictor of delinquency.

  • Low self-control leads to association with delinquent peers.

• Kornhauser’s View:

  • Peers do not directly cause crime—delinquency is a byproduct of social activities.

• Thornberry’s Interactional Theory:

  • Delinquency and delinquent peers reinforce each other in a reciprocal process.