Criminology Review. All Rights
Rebecca S. Katz
Citation: Katz, Rebecca S. 1999. "Building the Foundation for a Side-by-Side Explanatory Model: A General Theory of Crime, the Age-Graded Life-Course Theory, and Attachment Theory." Western Criminology Review 1(2). [Online]. Available: http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v1n2/katz.html.
A general theory of crime and the
age-graded life-course theory are considered disparate explanatory
models of the development of criminal behavior. However, both can be
linked in a side-by-side fashion utilizing John Bowlby's theory of
attachment. Early theoretical work by Travis Hirschi and Delbert
Elliott discussed the necessity of theoretical integration to more
thoroughly explain multiple pathways leading to deviance without
reconciling divergent theoretical assumptions. Using a longitudinal
sample of four hundred and eleven men, this research finds that
self-control is not a time stable trait and that attachments to
coworkers in early adulthood act as constraints on low self-control,
leading to desistance.
Keywords: crime, criminal
behavior, self-control, state dependence theory, attachment theory,
life-course theory, violence, parental behavior, social capital,
The persistent heterogeneity and
state dependence paradigms dominate criminological explanations of
delinquency and crime (Nagin and Farrington 1992; Nagin and
Paternoster 1991). Although both assume a causal relationship between
early and later deviant behavior, the primary tenet of the persistent
heterogeneity approach is that the relationship reflects an enduring
personality characteristic that remains stable over time. In
contrast, the state dependence paradigm views it as a product of
enduring social circumstances that can be mediated by other
Gottfredson and Hirschi's (1990)
general theory of crime and Sampson and Laub's (1993) age-graded
life-course perspective are representative of these two respective
themes. Gottfredson and Hirschi posit that both imprudent and
criminal behaviors can be predicted by a common characteristic: lack
of self-control. They explain that lack of self-control does not
require crime to exist and that self-control can be modified by
opportunities and other constraints (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990:
89). Numerous tests of Gottfredson and Hirschi's theory support their
prediction concerning self-control and crime although some believe
the theory does not explain enough variance in criminal behavior
(Longshore, Turner, and Stein 1998). Finally, the general theory of
crime assumes that although the individual's personality (i.e., the
characteristic of self-control) remains stable through time, the
relationship between self-control and crime is amenable to change.
Conversely, Sampson and Laub's age-graded life-course perspective
posits that both continuity and change exist throughout the
life-course and that modifications in individual behavior may occur
through new experiences or social circumstances.
Thus, these perspectives hold
different assumptions about likely offenders. Nonetheless, they share
a focus on a pivotal causal process: for Gottfredson and Hirschi, it
is the emotional investment of the parents in the child's development
of self-control; for Sampson and Laub, it is the emotional attachment
of a previous offender to a job or a marriage, which leads to
desistance. This similarity allows them to be linked using a
psychological theory of deviance called attachment theory (e.g.
Bowlby 1944; Horner 1991). This paper combines these approaches using
a side-by-side theoretical linking
and tests it using data from the Cambridge Youth Study (West
integration allows partial theories to be placed side-by-side and
segregates the cases to which they are considered applicable (Elliot,
Ageton, and Canter 1979; Hirschi 1979). Such an approach addresses
the question of the relative importance of each perspective in
explaining criminal behavior and allows each theory to maintain its
own definition of delinquency. It is not considered comprehensive
integration since the compatibility of theoretical assumptions is not
addressed (Liska, Kroh, and Messner 1989). This side-by-side model
links theories through a common independent variable, in this case
infant-parent attachment (Bowlby 1969), emotional investment in the
child (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990), and attachment to a spouse or
the workplace (Sampson and Laub 1993).
Attachment theory assumes that the
development of an attachment between the primary caretaker and the
child is the basic foundation of all future development (Bowlby 1969,
1988; Horner 1991), that there is a structure of personality present
within each individual that is modified based upon on-going
socialization experiences, and that the feeding behavior and the
dependency needs of the child are motivational interpersonal focuses
(Bowlby 1988: 24-26). Bowlby argues that attachment occurs in early
childhood as the child perceives that some person in his or her
environment behaves in a protective and nurturing manner. This is
someone who is conceived of as being able to "better cope with the
world" and, through the provision of safety and security to the
child, begins the process of bonding (Bowlby 1988: 27). Thus, a child
or infant develops a secure base when "he is nourished physically and
emotionally, comforted if distressed, reassured if frightened...."
(Bowlby 1988: 11).
Bowlby explains that delinquents
are really "affectionless," that is, they have been unable to
intimately connect with others. His original work (Bowlby 1947)
describes a number of events occurring in the lives of children that
appear to interfere with the development of a secure primary
attachment to a caregiver, such as multiple placements, traumatic or
arduous conditions in early childhood, and the early absence of a
parent. The most delinquent boys and girls in Bowlby's original study
were unable to intimately connect with others and were insecurely
attached to their primary caretakers in early childhood. Since then,
other researchers have demonstrated that loving and responsive
parents or significant others facilitate a secure attachment style,
while parents or significant others who do not demonstrate these
qualities will be more likely to have children who develop an
insecure attachment style (Howing et al. 1993; Isabella, Belsky, and
von Eye, 1989).
Unfortunately, most research has
not taken mother-infant attachment, early infant, or childhood
attachment with caretakers into account to explain conformity or
deviance. Farrington and Hawkins (1991) emphasize that childhood
events prior to the age of eight are significant predictors of later
adult criminality. Recent evidence (e.g., Raine, Brennan, and Mednick
1997) also indicates that insecurely or poorly attached children are
more likely to engage in later violent behavior. An insecure
attachment produces low levels of empathic understanding (e.g.,
Chaffin, 1992; Richardson et al. 1994). Horner
(1991) suggests that the central underling factor involved in a
secure attachment is the experience of
empathy. A child develops
self-control and empathy as the result of receiving empathic
understanding from a parent or guardian. When potential offenders can
perceive others as humans rather than as objects, they are less
likely to inflict injury upon them.
Bowlby views the development of a
secure attachment as a process by which the primary caretaker
emotionally invests in the child. Thus, Gottfredson and Hirschi's
emotional investment process and Bowlby's attachment process appear
quite similar and allow both theories to be linked together in a
side-by-side fashion. This emotional investment or attachment process
facilitates the development of self-control by fostering empathic
understanding and the development of trust, leading to non-deviant
behavior. Such attachments--to a spouse, a workplace, or to
coworkers, may occur later in life and repair the original attachment
relationship. Only a limited number of studies take empathy into
account in explaining criminality and most focus exclusively on sex
offenders (Pithers 1994; Chaffin 1992). However, the absence of
empathy is not unique to sex offenders (Richardson et al. 1994).
The General Theory of Crime
Although Gottfredson and Hirschi
propose that person-level explanations of criminal behavior are all
that are required, they also indicate that low self-control is not
the "motivating force" leading to criminal behavior and that ".....
the link between self-control and crime is not deterministic, but
probabilistic, affected by opportunities and other constraints"
(Hirschi and Gottfredson 1993:53). The existence of these "other
constraints" may include later attachments to significant others or
to work that prevent those with low self-control from offending. As
mentioned above, Gottfredson and Hirschi also posit that lack of
self-control predicts a wide variety of behaviors, including crime
and the inability to commit to long-term relationships. While this
position seems inconsistent with Sampson and Laub's assumption that
attachment to others can lead to desistance, the present study
assumes that low self-control will not predict marital or job
attachments. If this is substantiated, then linking their construct
of constraints to Sampson and Laub's construct of later attachments
can be easily accomplished. Thus, by redefining Gottfredson
and Hirschi's construct of self-control as a continuous rather than a
dichotomous trait, I hope to develop a clear explanation of both
change and continuity throughout the life course.
According to Gottfredson and
Hirschi, low self-control is evident in early childhood through
specific personality characteristics, such as an inability to
postpone gratification, a low tolerance for frustration, and a
tendency to engage in high levels of risk-taking behavior.
Self-control develops through parental emotional investment in the
child, monitoring the child's behavior, recognizing deviance when it
occurs, and punishing the child. Parental emotional investment is
necessary in order to activate the three forms of parental management
(Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990: 95-97).
Although Gottfredson and Hirschi
propose that children either develop self-control by the end of early
childhood or fail to develop it at all, I suggest that self-control
is not an "all or none" personality trait but rather that it exists
on a continuum. Moreover, while Gottfredson and Hirschi assume that
person-level traits are stable predictors of imprudent and criminal
behavior, I argue that self-control does not uniformly predict
behaviors. Some individuals with higher rather than lower levels of
self-control may be more susceptible to the effects of
A variety of
studies support the assertion of a causal relationship between
self-control and criminality (McGee and Newcomb 1992; Pulkkinen and
Pitkanen 1993). Further, other cross-sectional research indicates
that low self-control predicts involvement in some crimes of force
and fraud, especially among men (e.g., Grasmick et al. 1993; Nagin
and Paternoster 1993). Longshore
et al. (1998) nonetheless maintain that self-control is a weak
predictor of crime. They note that "self-control seems not to improve
predictive power or conceptual clarity regarding the etiology of
crime" (Longshore et al. 1998: 179). Others hold that Moffitt's
(1997) developmental model has more support than Gottfredson and
Hirschi's general theory of crime (Bartusch et al. 1997).
The state dependence theory of
Sampson and Laub assumes that the causal relationship between early
delinquent offending and later adult deviant behavior is not solely a
product of individual characteristics; social events may change some
individuals while others continue to offend. Their theory contains
three main components. First, the micro-level structural context is
mediated by informal family and school social controls, which can
explain delinquency in childhood and adolescence. Next, there is
continuity in antisocial behavior from childhood through adulthood in
a variety of life domains. Finally, informal social bonds to family
and employment during adulthood explain changes in criminality over
the life span despite early childhood propensities (Laub and Sampson
1993: 7). Sampson and Laub's research and subsequent replications of
their work substantiate their hypotheses (Sampson and Laub 1993;
Paternoster and Brame 1997; Laub et al. 1998; Sommers et al. 1994;
Horney et al. 1995).
Most important for the current
study, Sampson and Laub find that attachments or social bonds in
adulthood increase some individuals' social capital, leading to
desistance from most types of deviant behavior, with the exception of
men involved in drunkenness and violence. This paper links job and
marital attachments in a side-by-side fashion to Bowlby's construct
of infant-parent attachment. Men who become attached to coworkers or
a spouse will increase their self-control; alternatively, as
Gottfredson and Hirschi hypothesize, constraints in the form of job
or marital attachments may prevent those with low self-control from
In summary, combining attachment
theory with the general theory of crime and life-course theory -- by
linking the constructs of parental emotional investment to
attachments and social bonds -- may strengthen the predictive power
of each perspective. The development of self-control may be explained
without attempting to reconcile the competing assumptions of these
distinctive theories. Further, Bowlby's prediction that early secure
attachment precludes deviant behavior resonates with Sampson and
Laub's findings that later attachments to work or to a partner
explain desistance. Linking these perspectives through Bowlby's
attachment theory may better explain crime and desistance over the
Prior research shows that family
structure and processes influence the likelihood of later delinquent
behavior (Sampson and Laub 1993; Rosen 1985). Sampson and Laub (1993)
delineate nine structural and five process variables and find that
most structural variables have indirect effects on delinquency
through family process variables.
Moreover, McCord (1991) finds that
the behavior of fathers and mothers are distinct and multiplicative
in their impact on the probability of later delinquency. The findings
of these studies, and a review of the literature (Wright and Wright
1994), lead to two important conclusions. First, family structure has
both direct and indirect effects on delinquency while family function
or process mediate some of these structural effects. Second, although
the behavior of the mother influences adolescent deviance, some early
behaviors of fathers also affect adult deviance.
Figure 1 illustrates the proposed order of early family process and structural variables that are expected to influence the development of self-control. The first four hypotheses reflect the proposed order as illustrated, from the beginning of the child's life (early attachment and absent father) through the development of (low) self-control.
Hypothesis 1: Early absent
father is positively related to insecure attachment of the
Substantial research reveals that
the absence of a father figure early in male lives increases later
delinquency (e.g. Bowlby 1947; Gabel 1992). Moreover, research finds
that such an absence will directly affect a boy's ability to develop
self-control (Johnson 1986; King 1993; Wenk et al. 1994) over the
life-course. The secure attachment or emotional investment process
facilitates the child's ability to develop and demonstrate both
empathy and self-control. By extension, an insecure attachment will
lead to lower levels of empathy and self-control, and to an increase
in violent behavior.
Hypothesis 2: Insecure parent-infant attachment is inversely related to self control and empathy and positively related to violent behavior across the life-course.
Hypothesis 3: Insecure parent-infant attachment is positively related to inadequate attention to the child.
A child must receive parental
attention in order to be monitored by the parent. I anticipate that
the lack of parental attention will increase the rigid administration
of parental rules and the over-vigilance of the parents. I also
expect that attachment, or the emotional investment of the parent in
the child, affects parental attention, which is a precursor to
communicate parental rules to the child. Clearly, parental attention
and the existence of specific parental rules are necessary in order
to observe or monitor the child. Monitoring is measured here by a
construct called vigilance. Vigilance will affect parental ability to
discipline the child, which is then expected to directly affect
self-control. Lack of parental attention is utilized as an indicator
which precedes the other parental management behaviors. This is
measured by the presence of physical neglect and the absence of
parental praise. Physically neglectful parents, and parents who do
not reward their children for good behavior, are quick to provide
unreasonable and harsh punishments or to over-control their child
(Bronstein et al. 1996; Cusinato 1994; Mosley and Thompson 1995).
of the lack of parental attention resembles indicators used by
Sampson and Laub, such as parental rejection of the boy. Rigid rules
and over-vigilance are similar to the indicators used by Laub and
Sampson (1988:365) called Ferractic and Merratic. Laub
and Sampson utilized these variables to separately measure mother's
and father's behaviors that elicited fear and resentment in the
child. Thus, this sequential ordering of parental behaviors is an
elaboration of previous research on parental behaviors as well as an
attempt to replicate and improve upon Sampson and Laub's work.
Hypothesis 4: The rigid
and disinterested discipline of mother and father decrease child
self-control. Mother's discipline and father's discipline have a
Gottfredson and Hirschi discuss
the importance of including what they refer to as the punishment of
the child in the development of self control. The parental
disciplinary indicators used here are measures of Gottfredson and
Hirschi's construct of parental punishment. It is important to
include both conjoint and separate indicators of the disciplinary
styles of both parents because research finds that mother's and
father's harsh, rigid, or lax forms of discipline increase
delinquency (e.g., McCord 1979, 1991; Cernkovich and Giordano
Hypothesis 5: Self-control
is inversely related to violent behavior; self-control is unrelated
to job or marital attachments.
As noted above, studies find a
link between self-control and criminal behavior but not between
self-control and long-term commitments (marriage or work).
Hypothesis 6: A
work-related attachment is inversely related to violence and
positively related to self-control.
Hypothesis 7: Attachment to
a woman is unrelated to desistance from violence or self-control.
Sampson and Laub's research
clearly shows that attachments to marriage and work decrease most
types of offending. However, attachment to wives has no effect on
desistance from drunkenness and violence. They explain this finding
through their qualitative analysis, which reveals that some of the
substance-abusing men abuse their spouses (Sampson and Laub 1993).
Thus, although work attachments have desistance effects upon public
violence, marital attachments may provide men with a private arena in
which to commit violent acts. Attachments to wives will have no
effect on desistance from private violent behavior.
Figure 1 shows how the early
family-of-origin indicators are expected to influence self-control.
First, the absence of the father will positively influence insecure
attachment. The development of an early insecure parent attachment
will lead to low levels of both empathy and self-control. Empathy has
a positive effect on self-control. The remainder of the model
representing the sequential order of parenting attempts to follow
Gottfredson and Hirschi's explication of the development of
The data for this research are
taken from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development, a
twenty-year longitudinal study of males living in a working class
neighborhood in London, England (West 1973). Data collection began in
1961 and 1962, and the last wave available for study was collected in
1980. The men remaining in the study at that point were approximately
twenty-four years of age. This secondary data set is ideal for this
research as early family-of-origin variables are available.
Initial interviews were conducted
with 411 boys at ages eight, ten, and fourteen by male and female
psychologists. The respondents were also interviewed at ages sixteen,
eighteen, twenty-one, and twenty-four by young male social science
graduate students. Family members were interviewed throughout the
boys' adolescence. This data set is restricted primarily to white
males, as only twelve of the original group of 411 males are
variables include early parental management indicators, and early and
later attachment variables. Tables
1-A to 1-E (follow link
to examine tables--Ed.) show the coding for each variable as well
as the means, standard deviations, and factor loadings for each item
or scale. An attempt has been made to include some of the same
indicators of parenting used in Cernkovich and Giordano's (1987)
analysis of delinquent behavior; Gottfredson and Hirschi's constructs
of parental monitoring, parental recognition of deviant behavior, and
punishment; and Laub and Sampson's constructs of Ferratic and
The indicators of early
infant-parent attachment include the fretfulness of the baby and
feeding difficulties with the infant. Both items were retrospectively
reported by the mothers when the boys were approximately age eight.
Although these may not be the best indicators of insecure attachment,
they are the only available measures of the early nature of the
mother's relationship with her infant son.
Two items were combined to measure
(low) self-control. The first was a combination of peer judgments
about the daring of the boy at age ten to eleven and an earlier
measure of the adventuresomeness of the boy as judged by his parents
at age eight and nine. The second was the singular measure of the
adventuresomeness of the boy. These two variables were not so highly
correlated as to pose a problem of mulitcolinearity.
components factor analysis was conducted on these two variables and
revealed that they loaded together into one dimension
(alpha=.877, see Table 1 for details).
This paper assumes that changes in
empathy are a result of receiving empathy, leading to increases in
self-control. The indicator used to represent empathy is measured at
a point in time later than the two measures used as indicators of
self-control. The indicator of empathy was a questionnaire item that
asked respondents what kept them out of trouble at age sixteen.
Three types of
responses were recorded, the first included the boy's mention of
conscience and fear as most important in preventing his "getting into
trouble." The second response reflected that their conscience was
more important and the third response indicated that neither was
important. Responses were coded such that a zero reflects both fear
and conscience as important and singularly only conscience as
important. A code of one represents fear of being caught as important
or that neither fear nor conscience was important.
The implications of the
selection of conscience are that the boys experienced guilt or shame
when considering deviant behavior. Such a selection is assumed to
represent the capacity of the boy to have some sense of empathy. It
is assumed here that those without empathic abilities are less likely
to choose conscience as a more important consideration.
The parenting variables used are
those measured early in the child's history.
delinquency research measures parental behaviors during the later
years of the child's life, concurrent with indicators of delinquency,
here I examine earlier parental behaviors which occur prior to the
onset of delinquency in adolescence. As previous research indicates,
these also influence adult criminal behavior (McCord 1991).
First, parental behaviors of
the mother were factor analyzed. This
reveals that the harsh discipline of the mother as well as her strict
discipline loaded on one dimension (alpha=.235).
variable measuring the physical neglect of the boy and a second
representing poor levels of parental praise loaded onto another
dimension labeled as parental neglect (alpha=.273).
Rigid rules of the parents and parental over-vigilance loaded on
another factor and are described in Table 1-B
A scale that represents discipline
of the father is also included. The first variable in the scale
measures the strictness of the father's discipline; higher scores
indicate stricter discipline. The second variable measures the
father's overall quality of discipline; high scores represented
disinterested discipline or harsh discipline (alpha=.325). The
high factor loadings of these two item scales may preclude any
serious problems with their use. Early analysis of the data also
revealed that a very large proportion of these boys had already
experienced the absence of their father for at least one month by the
time they reached the age of five. Therefore, the structural variable
of absent father is also included in the analysis.
There is strong evidence that
adolescent deviant behavior is greatly influenced by the behavior of
their peer group even after parental variables are taken into account
(for reviews see Warr 1993; Moffitt 1997). Therefore, a measure of
group deviance at age fourteen is included in the model that attempts
to explain interpersonal violence at age fourteen. Previous research
also shows that the best predictor of future deviance is previous
deviance. Therefore, a measure of deviance from the preceding age
category is included as an explanatory variable in each subsequent
time period analyzed.
Several scales were developed to
measure later attachment to marriage or work. At age eighteen two
variables loaded on one factor, one of which measures job stability
and the other positive feelings about the job
(alpha=.612). Another scale measures job attachment at
age twenty-four; it consists of two variables measuring job stability
and job satisfaction. These loaded well on another factor
(alpha=.505). Next, two forms of attachment to women
are utilized, each represented by separate variables that measure
long-term relationships with females at age eighteen and twenty-four
(see Tables 1-C and 1-E).
Using ordinary least squares
regression, self-control is regressed on the early parenting and
early empathy indicators. Mother's discipline is regressed on the
early parenting variable of lack of attention, insecure attachment,
rigid rules, and over-vigilance of the parents, the scale measuring
the father's disciplinary style, and absence of father. Similarly,
father's disciplinary style is regressed on the same variables as
mother's disciplinary style with mother's discipline now included as
an independent variable. Lack of parental attention is regressed on
early attachment and absent father. Rigid rules and over-vigilance of
the parents are regressed on early insecure attachment, absent
father, and the absence of parental attention.
In addition, regression analysis
is used to examine predictors of self-reported involvement in
fighting at different ages. Initial equations include early
family-of-origin predictors and low self-control while the final
equations include the later attachment variables (both marriage and
job). These analyses examine the assumption of Gottfredson and
Hirschi regarding the stability of self-control, as well as the
assumption of the age-graded life-course theory that both change and
stability are likely. Concurrent attachment relationships are
utilized in regressions on violence. Current marital relationship is
used to predict current violence and desistance. Listwise deletion of
data is used to deal with loss of cases in later waves of the
The bivariate results indicate
that there is no problem with multicolinearity among the independent
variables (table not shown but available upon request). There is a
positive relationship between absent father and early insecure
attachment but it is not statistically significant. Thus, Hypothesis
1 is not supported.
Early empathy is positively but
insignificantly related to attachment. It was expected that early
insecure attachment and an absent father would be inversely related
to empathy. However, when empathy is regressed, using logistic
regression, on early insecure attachment and absent father, the model
is a poor fit. Thus, Hypothesis 2 is unsupported here.
To test Hypothesis 2, the absence
of parental attention is regressed on insecure attachment and absent
father. The effects are in the expected direction but only absent
father increases the likelihood of poor parental attention. Next, the
parental rules scale is regressed on absent father, insecure
attachment, and the absence of parental attention. Only insecure
attachment increases the likelihood of the parent's use of rigid
rules. Then, father's rigid discipline was regressed on the same
independent variables listed previously along with mother's strict
and disinterested disciplinary style and rigid parental rules and
vigilance. Both the lack of parental attention and the harsh
disciplinary style of the mother significantly increase the strict
discipline of the father. When the parent's rigid rules and
over-vigilance are included, eighteen percent of the adjusted
variance is explained, whereas the other models only explain about
one to five percent of the variance (results not shown but available
Next, the predictors of self-control are examined in the order specified in Figure 1. The results show that absent father and the discipline of the father decrease self-control while the rigid and over-vigilant rules of the parents significantly increase self-control. The effect of insecure attachment is marginal. Thus, Hypotheses 2 through 4 enjoy some support with the exception of the finding that rigid rules and parental over-vigilance act to increase the child's self-control. It may be that rigid parental rules and vigilance provide better monitoring of youth with insecure attachments while it is the father's rigid discipline that is most detrimental to the youth's self-control.
Fighting at age fourteen is
regressed on all the early family-of-origin measures and peer
involvement in delinquent activity (see Table 2). Twenty-two percent
of the variance in aggressive behavior is explained; however, only
two effects are significant. Early insecure attachment and peer
delinquency increase involvement in fighting at fourteen, although
the effect of the former is marginal. Thus, Hypothesis 2 gains some
Regression of Self-Control and Violent
on Independent Variables
Fighting at 14
Fighting at 18
Fighting at 18
Fighting at 21
Fighting at 21
Fighting at 24
Lack of parents' attention
Rigid rules and over-vigilance
Dad's rigid discipline
Mom's rigid discipline
Peer deviance at age 14
.10 < p >.10
As expected, fighting at eighteen is inversely related to self-control and empathy, respectively (see Table 2). Those young men with lower levels of self-control and empathy are more likely to be involved in aggressive behavior at eighteen. Before including the later attachment indicators in the model, it was necessary to determine whether self-control is significantly related to job or marital attachments. As predicted, the bivariate relationship between self-control and these attachment indicators is insignificant, thus partially substantiating Hypothesis 5 (correlations not shown but available upon request). The next model adds job and female attachments. As expected, job attachment significantly decreases fighting while attachment to a female increases fighting. It appears that marital attachments do not lead violent men to desistance, partially substantiating Hypothesis 7 and the previous work of Sampson and Laub. A recent review of the literature on violence against women also supports this expectation (Crowell and Burgess, 1996). Empathy and self-control continue to have a positive effect on violent behavior, although the latter becomes marginally significant. The decrease in the effect of self-control is contrary to expectations, it may be that Gottfredson and Hirschi are mistaken when they insist that self-control can not be changed. The adjusted explained variance increases to eight percent with both types of attachment included in the model.
In the next model, fighting at
twenty-one is regressed on the early family-of-origin variables and
fighting at eighteen. The model is not significant, and only previous
involvement in fighting ("previous violence" in Table 2) has a
positive effect on fighting at twenty-one. Similarly, when attachment
to a female is included in the model, only previous involvement in
fighting increases fighting at twenty-one, and the model is a poor
fit (model not shown). However, job attachment significantly
decreases fighting and decreases the strength of the effect of
previous involvement in violent behavior. Only six percent of the
variance in violent behavior is explained by this model.
Finally, using logistic
regression, the dichotomous variable of involvement in fighting at
twenty-four is regressed on all the early family-of-origin variables
and involvement in fighting at twenty-one. The initial model was a
poor fit; only self-control predicts involvement in violent behavior
at twenty-four (data not shown). Next, marital attachment at age
twenty-four is included in the model. Although the effect of
self-control is suppressed, marital attachment at age twenty-four
increases male involvement in violence, but the effect is not
significant (p=.11). However, the effect of marital attachment
is greater than the other items in the model (data not shown).
Job attachment at age twenty-four
is not included in this model because of the small sample size. The
equation is estimated using job attachment at age eighteen rather
than at age twenty-four. However, even after this adjustment the
sample size remains quite small. Nonetheless, the model is
significan: only marital attachment has statistically significant
effect on violence (see Table 2).
Overall, the evidence from each of
the models reveals substantial evidence to refute Gottfredson and
Hirschi's assumptions that low self control is a stable trait and
that it consistently predicts deviant behavior. There is more support
for Sampson and Laub's age-graded life-course theory that change
through time is possible. Furthermore, Sampson and Laub's previous
findings are supported in regard to the lack of desistant effects of
marriage on violent offending and the desistant effects of job
attachment among violent offenders.
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
Sampson and Laub's age-graded
life-course theory appears to be a viable explanation of how change
occurs in the lives of some men, while Gottfredson and Hirschi's
perspective also has some support. However, contrary to Gottfredson
and Hirschi's predictions, self-control appears to be a trait that
exists on a continuum; it can be directly modified and does not
consistently predict crime and imprudent behavior. Additionally, low
self-control does not preclude the later likelihood of job or
relational attachments among formerly persistent offenders. Clearly,
these perspectives are capable of being linked in a side-by-side
fashion through the use of the common construct of attachment. What
this research also suggests is that empathy may be critical to the
development of an attachment relationship.
Future research must continue to
investigate the role empathy plays in the process of attachment and
desistance. To accomplish this, criminologists must utilize findings
from sociological and psychological research on marital quality,
martial satisfaction, and work satisfaction in order to better
understand how these relationships can supplant a damaged attachment
template through the provision of empathic understanding. This may be
the key to more clearly explaining how the early experience of
empathic understanding leads to secure attachment, the development of
empathy, and desistance. Clouding this process are the findings noted
both in this research and in Sampson and Laub's work, which reveal
that marital attachments do not lead to desistance among substance
abusing men or violent men. Although not investigated here, Sampson
and Laub discovered that these men did not desist from violence
partly as the result of their history of substance abuse. Also,
Sampson and Laub found, through their qualitative analysis, that
violent men who were substance abusers physically assaulted their
wives. Thus, future work must include indicators of substance abuse
in investigating violent behavior, empathic understanding, and
attachments to partners. Such work may find that there is something
about substance abusers which precludes their accurately receiving
James Messerschmidt's (1993)
structured action theory may be useful in explaining the relationship
between violence against women, substance abuse among men, and these
men's inability to receive empathy. Messerschmidt proposes that
adherence to an ideology of hegemonic masculinity interferes with
men's relationships with women and men's capacity to adequately
parent their own children. This hegemonic ideology may interfere with
the receipt of empathic understanding, thus suppressing the effects
of otherwise desistance-producing relationships. Therefore, future
work should include hegemonic masculinity and empathic understanding,
as well as both early family-of-origin and family of procreation
indicators, into explanations of adult deviance and change through
The inclusion of both early
family-of-origin and later family-of-procreation indicators with
hegemonic masculine ideology, substance abuse, and empathic
understanding should increase the explained variance in this
side-by-side model. Although the inclusion of early family-of-origin
behaviors did not substantially increase the explained variance in
this test, such early parental behaviors appear to affect later adult
behavior through their effects on self-control. Additionally, a
distinctive sequential order of parenting was uncovered which should
be further explored through the use of path analysis techniques.
Although the order of these parenting behaviors is somewhat different
than expected, a sequential order clearly exists. The sequential
order of parenting behaviors is best illustrated as shown in
2: absent father affects
poor parental attention, which then affects father's and mother's
disciplinary style. Moreover, all the parenting variables examined,
with the exception of the mother's harsh discipline, appear to have
direct effects on self-control. Also as expected, most of the early
family variables affect later violent behavior through their effect
on self-control. Obviously, if later marital attachments have effects
on violence and self-control, later family-of-procreation indicators
may also have similar effects. For example, recent work by Farrington
and West (1995) examines the desistance effects of fatherhood within
the context of marital relationships and finds that fatherhood
decreases the likelihood of subsequent conviction. Thus, families of
procreation may play as large as a role in the development of
desistance as early family-of-origin processes play in the
development of self-control and delinquency.
Although Gottfredson and Hirschi
are accurate in their outline of how parental management behaviors
affect self-control, linking their work in a side-by-side fashion
with Bowlby's attachment theory and Sampson and Laub's
age-graded-life-course theory clearly improves their model. Finally,
although this research leads the way for a further elaboration of all
three perspectives, some problems remain which must be addressed
before future tests are conducted. These
relate to both measurement and generalizability issues and require
the accomplishment of three objectives in order to clarify the
complex effects of attachment and empathy on deviance. First, early
infant-parent attachment, and later attachment relationships, must be
more carefully operationalized through the ethnographic measurement
of parental behaviors, including parental nurturing, empathic
responsiveness of the parent to the infant, and the timeliness of
these responses in accordance with the child's needs. Second, path
analysis will help untangle the nature, direction, and strength of
these effects. Third, although this data set contained only white
males, the approach taken is developed to provide a good fit for
females as well as males and for racial/ethnic minorities. Deviance
among women and minority groups also need to be thoroughly examined
using this model.
1. I would would like to thank Constance Hardesty and Shelley White for their editorial assistance on earlier drafts of this paper.
Bartusch, Jeglum, J. Dawn, Donald
R. Lynam, Terrie E. Moffitt, and Phil A. Silva. 1997. "Is Age
Important? Testing a General Versus a Developmental Theory of
Antisocial Behavior." Criminology 35:13-48.
Bowlby, John. 1947. Forty-four
Juvenile Thieves: Their Characters and Home Life. London:
Bailliere, Tindall, and Cox.
________. 1969. Attachment and
Loss, Volume I. Basic Books.
________ . 1988. A Secure Base:
Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development. Basic
Bronstein, Phyllis, Paula Duncan,
Adele D'Ari, Jean Pieniadz, Martha Fitzgerald, Craig L. Abrams,
Barbara Franskowski, Oscare Franco, Connie Hunt, and Susan Y. Oh Cha.
1996. "Family and Parenting Behaviors Predicting Middle School
Adjustment: A Longitudinal Study." Family Relations
Cernkovich, Stephen A., and Peggy
C. Giordano. 1987. "Family Relationships and Delinquency."
Chaffin, Mark. 1992. "Factors
Associated with Treatment Completion and Progress Intrafamilial
Sexual Abusers." Child Abuse and Neglect 16:251-265.
Cusinato, Mario. 1994. "Parenting
Over the Family LIfe Cycle." Chapter 5 in Handbook of
Developmental Family Psychology and Psychopathology, edited by
Lucinao L'Abate. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Elliot, Delbert, Suzanne S.
Ageton, and Rachelle Canter. 1979. "An Integrated Theoretical
Perspective on Delinquent Behavior." Journal of Research in Crime
and Delinquency 16:3-27.
Farrington, David and J. David,
Hawkins. 1991. "Predicting Participation, Early Onset and Later
Persistence in Officially Recording Offending." Criminal Behavior
and Mental Health 1:1-33.
Farrington, David P. and Donald J.
West. 1995. "Effects of Marriage, Separation, and Children on
Offending by Adult Males." Current Perspectives on Aging and the
Life Cycle 4:249-281.
Gabel, Stewart, M.D. 1992.
"Behavioral Problems in Sons of Incarcerated or Otherwise Absent
Fathers: The Issue of Separation." Family Process 31:303.
Gottfredson, Michael and Travis
Hirschi. 1990. A General Theory of Crime. Stanford University
Grasmick, Harold, G., Charles R.
Tittle, Robert J. Bursik, and Bruce J. Arneklev. 1993. "Testing the
Core Empirical Implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's General
Theory of Crime." Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency
Hirschi, T. 1979. " Separate and
Unequal is Better." Journal of Research in Crime and
________ and Michael Gottfredson.
1993. "Commentary: Testing The General Theory of Crime." Journal
of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30:47-54.
Horner, Althea J. 1991.
Psychoanalytic Object Relations Therapy. Janson Aronson
Horney, Julie, Wayne D. Osgood,
and Haen Ineke Marshall. 1995. "Criminal Careers in the Short-Term:
Intra-Individual Variability in Crime and Its Relation to Local Life
Circumstances." American Sociological Review 60:655-673.
Howing, Phyllis, T., John S.
Wodarski, David P. Kurtz, and Martin Gaudin, Jr. 1993.
Maltreatment and the School-Age Child. The Haworth Press
Isabella, Russell A., Jay Belsky and Alexander von Eye. 1989. "Origins
of Infant-Mother Attachment: An Examination of Interactional Synchrony
During the Infant's First Year."
Developmental Psychology 25:12-21.
Johnson, Richard E. 1986. "Family
Structure and Delinquency: General Patterns and Gender Differences."
King, Valarie. 1993. "Nonresident
Father Involvement and Child Well-Being. Can Dads Make a Difference?"
Journal of Family Issues 18:78-96.
Laub, John H., Daniel S. Nagin,
and Robert J. Sampson. 1998. "Trajectories of Change in Criminal
Offending: Good Marriages and the Desistance Process." American
Sociological Review 68:225-238.
Laub, John H., and Robert J.
Sampson. 1993. "Turning Points in the Life Course: Why Change Matters
to the Study of Crime." Criminology 31:301-325.
Longshore, Douglas, Susan Turner,
and Judith A. Stein. 1998. "Reliability and Validity of Self-Control
Measure: Rejoinder." Criminology 34:175-182.
McCord, Joan. 1991. "Family
Relationships, Juvenile Delinquency, and Adult Criminality."
McCord, Joan. 1979. "Some Child
Rearing Antecedents of Criminal Behavior in Adult Men." Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 37:1471-1486.
McGee, Lina, and Michael D.
Newcomb. 1992. "General Deviance Syndrome: Expanded Hierarchical
Evaluations at Four Ages from Early Adolescence to Adulthood."
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 60:766-776.
Messerschmidt, James W. 1993.
Masculinities and Crime: Critique and Reconceptualization of
Theory. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Minty, Brian. 1988. "Public Care
or Distorted Family Relationships: The Antecedents of Violent Crime."
The Harvard Journal 27(3):172-187.
Moffitt, Terrie E. 1997.
"Adolescent-Limited and Life-Course Persistent Offending: A
Complementary Pair of Developmental Theories," Pp. 11-54 in
Developmental Theories of Crime and Delinquency, Advances in
Criminological Theory, edited by Terence P. Thornberry.
Mosley, Jane and Elizabeth
Thompson. 1995. "Fathering Behavior and Child Outcomes: The Role
of Race and Poverty." Chapter 8 in Fatherhood Contemporary Theory,
Research, and Policy: Research on Men and Masculinities, edited
by William Marsiglio. Sage Publications.
Nagin, Daniel, S. and David P.
Farrington. 1992. "The Onset and Persistence of Offending."
Nagin, Daniel S. and Raymond
Paternoster. 1991. "On the Relationship of Past to Future
Participation in Delinquency." Criminology 29:163-189.
Nagin, Daniel S. and Raymond
Paternoster. 1993. "Enduring Individual Differences and Rational
Choice Theories of Crime." Law and Society Review
Paternoster, Raymond, and Robert
Brame. 1997. "Multiple Routes to Delinquency? A Test of Developmental
and General Theories of Crime." Criminology 35:49-84.
Pithers, William. 1994. "Process
Evaluation of a Group Therapy Component Designed to Enhance Sex
Offenders' Empathy for Sexual Abuse Survivors." Behavior Research
and Therapy 32:656-571.
Pulkkinen, Lea and Tuuli Pitkanen.
1993. "Continuities in Aggressive Behavior From Childhood to
Adulthood." Aggressive Behavior 19:249-263.
Raine, Adrian, Patricia Brennan,
and A. Sarnoff Mednick. 1997. "Interaction Between Birth
Complications and Early Maternal Rejection in Predisposing
Individuals to Adult Violence: Specificity to Serious, Early-Onset
Violence." American Journal of Psychiatry 154:1265-1271.
Richardson, Deborah R., Georgina
S. Hammock, Stephen M. Smith, and Manuel Gardner. 1994. "Empathy as a
Cognitive Inhibitor of Interpersonal Aggression." Aggressive
Behavior 20: 275-290.
Sampson Robert, J. and John H.
Laub. 1993. Crime in the Making Pathways and Turning Points
Through Life. Harvard University Press.
Sampson Robert, J. and John H.
Laub. 1996. "Socioeconomic Achievement in the Life Course of
Disadvantage Men: Military Service as a Turning Point, Circa
1940-1965." American Sociological Review 61:347-367.
Sommers, Ira, Deborah R. Baskin,
and Jeffrey Gagan. 1994. "Getting Out of the Life: Crime Desistance
by Female Street Offenders." Deviant Behavior 15:125-149.
Warr, Mark. 1993. "Parents, Peers
and Delinquency." Social Forces 72: 247-264.
West, D.J. 1973. Who Becomes
Delinquent? Second Report of the Cambridge Study in Delinquent
Development. London, Heinemann Educational Center: Publishers for
the Cambridge Institute of Criminology.
Wenk, DeeAnn, Constance L.
Hardesty, Carolyn S. Morgan, and L. Blair Sampson. 1994. "The
Influence of Parental Involvement on the Well-Being of Sons and
Daughters." Journal of Marriage and the Family 56:229-234.
Wright, Kevin, N. and Karen E. Wright. 1994. Family Life, Delinquency, and Crime: A Policymaker's Guide, Research Summary. Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice.