Cours 4 Flashcards
What is the definition of prevalence?
Prevalence refers to the proportion of individuals who participate in crime at any given time period.
What are the findings of piquero and al study about prevalence?
Their analyses showed that the 1) early to middle teenage years saw a steady increase in annual prevalence. 2) the cumulative prevalence of convictions through age 40 evinced a rapid rise until about age 18, at which point it became asymptotic up to age 40. 3) there were few differences in offending prevalence across offence types, as involvement across most offence types decreased over time. 4) offending prevalence assessed using self-report surveys among the south london males approached 100% by age 40.
What are the findings of moffitt et al. about prevalence?
First through age 21 and across multiple data sources, males emerged as more antisocial than females with two exceptions: a) males and females were most similar in their antisocial behaviour during middle adolescence and b) males and females were most similar in their drug and alcohol related offences. Second, males tended to engage in more serious offences than females, and not surprisingly tended to be overrepresented in official criminal records. Third , chronic offending was observed among both males and females, but even the most active females offended at much lower rate than the most active males. Finally prevalence rises through late childhood into adolescence, peeking in the mid-to-late teens and declining soon thereafter.
What is the definition of frequency?
Frequency references the number of crimes committed.
What are the findings of loeber et al about the frequency of violence and theft in the two pys- based cohorts at different age blocks?
Their analysis indicated that the average annual frequency of moderate and serious violence increased over three age blocks, while annual reported violence frequency peaked at about four offences per offender per year during late adolescence before dropping off in early adulthood. To summarise, the annual self-reported frequencies of all thefts were higher among the older pys cohort and theft-frequency tended to be higher in most comparisons than violence-frequency. Frequent that was more common in the early part of criminal careers for the oldest cohort while frequent violence was more common in the later part of their careers and the frequency of offending largely followed an age-crime curve in the oldest but not the youngest cohort.
What are the finding of loeber et al when they examined persistence in offending
using an all-source measure that combines self-reports and official conviction records, and found that: 1) almost one in five young serious offenders became persistent serious offenders over a period of 6+ years; 2) a higher level of persistence of serious offending (71%) was found for those with an onset during late childhood, compared to those with an onset during early adolescence and serious offenders early in life persisted in their offending over a period of about 7-9 years.
What do we need to remember about continuity?
Across most studies, there exists strong continuity in offending, particularly in adjacent time periods and the strength of
this continuity increases linearly with the number of offences previously committed; that is the most frequent offenders tend to exhibit the strongest and longest continuity in their offending behaviour. At the same time, there does not exist a pattern of discontinuity such that not all offenders have continuous and persistent criminal careers, a finding that is in a large part a function of the number of offences committed. Stil, some evidence suggests that the measurement of offending continuity may lead to some bias in the conclusions reached. For example,not all offenders who commit crimes are detected and subsequently punished by the criminal justice system. If police think someone is an offender, they may be more likely to arrest that person.
What are the findings of kratzer and hodgins search about adult onset-offenders?
Findings regarding the predictors of adult-onset offending indicated that measures of childhood and adolescent characteristics, specifically intelligence test scores, could be important predictors of adult-offset offending.
What are Eggleston and Laub finding about adult onset-offenders?
The authors concluded that adult-onset involves a nontrivial percentage of cases, regardless of time period, country and measurement of crime.
What are the findings about trends in specialisation, diversification, and escalation from adolescence into adulthood?
First, most studies indicate that frequent offenders engage in a wide variety of crimes over their criminal career, with only a few concentrating on a select set of crime types. Second, those offenders who show some evidence of specialisation appear to concentrate their offending within a large category of offences (e.g. property crimes) and appear to switch within these larger categories (e.g. from theft to burglary to fencing. Third, there is some minimal evidence regarding a slight trend toward increasing specialisation with age, but its premature to draw any definitive conclusion regarding this finding.
What are the findings about piquero et al trends in specialisation, diversification and escalation from adolescence into adulthood?
Found little evidence of specialisation-in-violence, and also concluded that the strongest predictor of a violent conviction over the course of a career was the number of convictions. First, there was much diversity in individual, officially recorded offending patterns over the life course. Second, the authors found evidence of an age-diversity curve, in which there was an increasing diversity between early adolescence and young adulthood but then specialisation during adulthood. Finally when they isolated frequent offenders and further disaggregated the age- diversity curve, they found that high diversity was the most common pattern during adulthood, followed by a pattern of specialisation
What are the findings of loeber et al relating to trends in specialisation, diversification and escalation from adolescence into adulthood?
First, using an all-source measure of offending based on self-reported delinquency and convictions, they found that, while most offenders were versatile in committing theft and violence, a non-trivial proportion committed only theft or only violence. Second they found mixed evidence regarding changes in specialisation across age. Based on the all-source measure of offending, offence specialisation for theft and violence in the youngest cohortspecialisation in violence increased with age, whereas theft specialisation was curvilinear, lowest during late adolescence and increasing during early adulthood. Third, when they examined the specialisation question through the lens of dual-trajectory analysis, they found that boys who follow a specific trajectory in one form of serious delinquency also tended to follow a similar trajectory in the other forms of serious delinquency.
What does escalation mean?
Escalation refers to an increase in the severity of offences committed by individuals over time while de-escalation relates to the opposite process, a progression from serious to minor offending over time.
What are the findings about stability and change?
The former explanation suggests that the correlation is due to time-stable population differences in the underlying proclivity to crime. The latter explanation suggests that crime exerts an undesirable effect on social bonds, conventional attachments, and so forth. A third explanation combines the two perspectives and suggests that both processes relate to future criminal activity in varying respects and magnitude over the life course.
What are the findings of stattin and magnusson?
First they observed modest correlation reflecting the stability of officially recorded criminal activity. Second, there was little evidence of specialisation in crime across the time periods and into adulthood, even among those individuals who offended across time periods. Finally, as found in many other criminological studies, a small number of males who offended in all three time periods were responsible for most of the crime in the sample, and showed little specialisation.
What are the findings of ezell and cohen?
Found 1) a positive association between past and future arrests; 2) after controlling for persistent unobserved heterogeneity using both parametric and nonparametric methods there was still a significant relationship between prior and future offending, i.e., a state dependence effect; and 3) the state dependence effect did not vary across distinct latent classes of offenders.
