Posted: August 1st, 2023

Literature Review on Juvenile Delinquency

Literature Review on Juvenile Delinquency
Name
Institution

Literature Review on Juvenile Delinquency
Definitions of Juvenile Delinquency
Several researchers have provided that juvenile delinquency is a significant issue that faces the contemporary world and the criminal justice system. Although the juvenile delinquency problem has increased in the past two decades, the problem is not a new phenomenon as it has existed for as long as other common problems in society. Juvenile delinquency, according to Hulber (n.d), is the act of a child of pretending to act like an adult. In the process of the actions of adulthood, they cause serious concerns and worries. However, social workers consider juvenile delinquency to consist of socially unacceptable actions, while psychiatrist believes that juvenile delinquency involves activities that deviate from the normal. Kusum (1979) notes that juvenile delinquency on sociological aspect involves children that consist behaviours that are not as per the statue and they are alarming to those with the responsibility to care, protect, and educate the children including parents, teachers, neighbours, and the entire community. The Juvenile Justice Around the World (JJAW) report (2003) provides a combination of numerous juvenile delinquency descriptions. The criteria of defining juvenile delinquency provided by the JJAW stipulates that evidence of an offence must be available, there must be prove to indicate that affected children are at risk of misbehavior, the juvenile impacted must be originating from environments that are dangerous, they must have been arrest for inappropriate reason, and that the juvenile or their parents must have seeked asylum. Therefore, this paper defines juvenile delinquency as the antisocial or criminal behaviour committed by individuals of 17 years of age and below.

The Juvenile Delinquency Issues on a Global Setting
The society has struggled with the issue of juvenile delinquency through different periods of history. The problem is linked to a repeat sequence, which has made it a persistent global problem. This section provides historical analysis based on previous studies regarding the juvenile delinquency problem as experienced in different contexts.
Juvenile Delinquency in Conventional Times
The problem of juvenile delinquency, according to Shoemaker (2009), started in the 17th Century in Europe. The author believes that the ideology of puritanism that existed at that time, which backed firm and acceptable individual and shared behaviour, mostly in religious matters creating an environment where juvenile faced harsh punishment for not remaining to the society’s behavioural standards. Shoemaker states that in the early 17th Century, the juvenile was being held responsible for their deeds and treated as adults. The approach resulted in most children being exposed deliberately to behaviours of adults, sexual activities, and hardship as the mean of initiation to adulthood. Corporal punishment was used as a punishment approach since it was believed to be an effective form of discipline. The juveniles who were antisocial and could not comply with religious and social rules were punished by death.
Du Preez & Luyt (2011) support Shoemaker sentiments by providing that the justice practice of the time, which was characterized by corporal punishment and deterrence concept contributed to the way juveniles were being treated. However, as society progressively understood the childhood innocence and that they depend on adults to grow both spiritually and morally, the approach of handling juvenile changed. The principles were formulated that mandated parents to disciple and supervise children. The principles also provided children with protection against inappropriate sexual activities and hardship that is required by adults. The parents were to train children on how to use civil language, antiquate, and dress appropriately. The responsibility for raising and socialization of juvenile was placed on the general society and the families (Du Preez & Luyt, 2011). However, as the juvenile delinquency increased, it was realized that developing children into good citizens was not only the responsibility of the family but a collective responsibility. Hill & Maughan (2001) the society reflection to the juvenile delinquency issue was based on the accountability of families, religious leaders, the state, social and education agents in ensuring children do not misbehave. The society also started considering the possible roles that could help in preventing, restituting, or deterring the young members of the community from delinquency.
Juvenile Delinquency in the Contemporary World
As harsh attitudes that were witnessed in the classical times towards juvenile delinquents evolved into more humane child-rearing practices, the extent of juvenile delinquency continued to rise. According to the World Youth Report of 2003, the modern world is full of new challenges that have increased the difficulties that youth face in society, which has escalated the juvenile misconduct. The report provides some of the concerns in the contemporary world that are a constant source of challenges faced by youths (World Youth Report, 2003). They include a high rate of unemployment among youths, the local communities authority continuing to decline, education systems that are not effective, high population growth rate, the disintegration of structures of families, and increased number in poor areas that are over-crowded. The report considers the challenges as the agent of development of juvenile misconduct issues. The developing countries are the most affected with the challenges. For instance, the report indicates that there was a 50% growth of delinquency among young adults from 1980s to 1990s in most developing countries and a 30% increase since 1955 with common misconduct associated with drug abuse (World Youth Report, 2003). However, developed countries such as the U.S. are currently facing a rising number of juvenile delinquency despite various laws and programs being in place to prevent juvenile delinquency.
Theoretical Perspectives of Juvenile Delinquency
Various studies are available that provide different theories in the attempt of explaining aspects and causes related to juvenile delinquency. The theories are based on a reflection of different versions of cultural and social phenomena developed at different places and time. The juvenile delinquency theories aim at providing a better understanding of delinquency behaviour and demonstrating how behaviour is a result of a particular situation or condition (Pink & White, n.d). The theories of juvenile delinquency provided in this section include:
Social Control Theory
Costello (2017) provides that behaviours associated with crime and delinquencies are the natural result of human nature, whereby crime is used as a quick and easy method for one to achieve their desires. Costello states that the social control theory offers forces or societal bonds that help an individual from not committing the crime. According to Hagan (2012), the theories of control are used to organize the society and failure or lack of social control theories in the community caused social disorganization, which he claims is a result of crime as the environment impact individuals negatively. The individuals are likely to resort to crime when exposed to extreme levels of poverty, deviant community culture and peer, and homelessness when the society does not produce positive socialization. Hagan also provides that based on the Reckless’ Information Social Control theories of 1943, which are based on the concept of “containment” inform how some individuals can resist criminal behaviours while others do not. The containment concept provides that individuals that have the capability to resist criminal behaviour and control their desires to act wrongly possess positive self-concept, inner moral strength, and ethics (Hagan, 2012). Additionally, Information Social Control theories provide that in the process that individuals’ inner ability to deter from inappropriate behaviour fails, the external factors including family, friends, and the broader community through counselling will ensure the individual resists engaging in criminal actions. Therefore, the individuals that cannot access both internal and external containment concept of Information Social Control theories are likely to engage in inappropriate acts.
Delinquent juveniles have used neutralization techniques as a justification for their inappropriate behaviour. Bailey (2004) provides that juvenile delinquent tend to blame other people or situations for their acts, which illustrate the technique of denial of responsibility. Another method used to justify deviant actions by juvenile delinquents is the denial of injury, whereby they consider activities that do not involve causing injury such as stealing a cell phone not to be criminal. Denial of injury is also used as a justification technique when their victim sustained an injury by claiming their action was based on self-defence. Another justification technique provided by the theorist is the condemnation of the condemners, which involves the delinquent individuals shifting blame for their inappropriate actions. For instance, students blaming the teacher for not teaching the learning content, thus resulting in them to cheat in the exam. Lastly, delinquent youths can use the technique of appeal to higher loyalties to justify their actions, whereby they claim their actions were to benefit the disadvantaged, for instance, stealing to help the poor.

Theory of Crime
A General Theory of Crime replaced Hirschi’s original theory of crime, which was based on the notion of social integration. Welch (1998) provides that A General Theory of Crime associate itself with the self-control, which is acquired through social bonds helping individuals to confine from delinquent behaviour engagement. Therefore, in the process that social relationships are weak or not available, an individual would not have enough self-control as a barrier against engaging in criminal acts. Welch considers that risks for the juvenile to engage in inappropriate behaviour can be reduced by being attached to essential individuals, involving or committing in acceptable social behaviour, and believe in values and norms of the society. The theory also stresses the importance of family conformity and integration, rather than one’s personalities. Therefore, the theory suggests that family structure and peer relations are significant aspects of delinquent behaviour. In this regard, the destruction or weakening of the family structure could result in juvenile delinquency.
Strain and Anomie Theory
Strain theory, which was written by Robert Merton in the 1940s provide that delinquent behaviour in juveniles is a result of the lack of resources that can support their happiness (Cann & Kattah, n.d). Since most juveniles have shared goals, aspirations, and values, the differences in terms of economic or social status or success make it difficult for others to have the capability to attain their goals through socially acceptable behaviour, forcing them to engage in inappropriate acts as a mean to attain their goals. Robert Agnew (in Cann & Kattah, n.d) highlight sources of strain and anomie including strain as a result of not achieving positively valued goals or desires; strain as a result of elimination incentives positively valued from an individual; and the strain resulting as a reaction to negative stimuli such as abuse, criminal victimization, neglect, or family or peer conflict.
Social Learning Theory
Social researchers have been in support of Albert Bandura’s social learning theory that provides that new behaviours are learnt by individual observing and emulating exhibited behaviours, attitudes, and emotions towards the setting. Social learning is highly linked to juvenile delinquency, in the essence that most children tend to copy the behaviour posed by the adults. Therefore, juvenile growing around adults or peers that express antisocial conducts are likely to acquire the delinquent behaviours (Nabavi, 2012). The theory emphases that social context is the site for behaviour learning and the shared effect between individuals, the environment, and the behaviour. For instance, parents that demonstrate aggressive behaviour towards each other influence their children, who learn that they can apply the same method in problem-solving. Such children engage in bullying, threatening, assaulting, use of vulgar language against their peers in conflict situations. Therefore, adults expressing inappropriate behaviour that can be observed by children regardless of the environment put juveniles at risk of delinquent acts.
Classification of Juvenile Delinquency
Various researchers have classified juvenile delinquency in different ways to formulate an improved understanding of the subject and for data collection purposes. Hirsh (1937) enumerate different juvenile delinquency related crimes and offences in five classes. The author provides the classification to include out of home in late nights indicating parenting disrespect; absenteeism, either from school or home; those that involve public and private property damage; those that involve society violence through weapons such as guns and knives; and sex-related offences such as rape and assault. Eaton & Polk (1961) classification of juvenile delinquency is based on different kinds of offences. They include traffic violation such as driving while drunk and without a license, automobile theft, addiction to drugs and alcohol, property violation such as theft, and those involving body hurt such as homicide and sexual offences like rape. According to Kvaraceus & Miller (1959), juvenile delinquency is classified in relation to three variables that include individuals’ social class, their degree of comprehending emotional pathology, and there extend in involving in delinquent misconduct.
Sellin & Wolfgang (1964) classified juvenile delinquency into two classes, with each consisting of different kinds of offences. The first-class included offences such as property damage, property theft, and body and physical injuries. In the second class, the offences included coercion, threats for property damage and loss, victimization against others, and victimization against the commercial establishment. Ferdinand (1964) categorized juvenile offenders into two categories that included neurotic offenders and character disorder offenders. The neurotic juvenile offenders are as a result of influential unconscious impulses that develop guilt and motivate juvenile to engage in delinquent behaviour. For example, indulging in stealing as a way of satisfying their peers’ wishes and not personal material gain. The category of character disorder offenders involves juveniles who often feel guilty or regret when they indulge in petty criminal activities. Such delinquents lack positive identification models in their environment which result in failure to developing willpower that enhance the ability to control impulses based in socially acceptable behaviour. Ferdinand asserts that such juveniles are mostly a product of disorganized families that developed a self-centred disorder due to the inhospitable environment in their early childhood.
Juvenile delinquency can also be classified in five categories that include gang organized, unsocialized, accidental, occasional, and professional delinquency (Trojannovicz, 1973). The gang organized delinquency in involve youths organized in groups for conducting legal activities. Most juvenile gangs organized groups consist of frustrated youths due to inability to fulfil their goals or desires through socially acceptable means, thus, diverting to crime alternative as a mean to achieve them. Unsocialized delinquents develop as a result of neglect and rejection in their early childhood. The category represents juveniles that have been exposed to risk factors involving family physical violence, abuse, hate and aggression, which they also acquire and express in other contexts. The juveniles that have always acted in a socially acceptable manner and find themselves involved in criminal activity due to lapse of judgment are categorized as accidental delinquency. Such juveniles tend to reform when they are caught or on the realization of their delinquent actions. Occasional offenders correlate with accidental delinquency, although the category involves a repeatable manner committing minor offences but not habitual. The professional delinquency involves the juveniles that have developed the habitual delinquent that includes committing a crime for economic gain or desire satisfaction.
Juvenile Delinquency Crime Trends
To examine crime trends related to juvenile delinquency over the past years, the National Academy of Sciences (2020) provides three sources of data that were applied by different studies of misconduct in the United States. The article asserts that despite the origins having some disadvantages, they were considered to offer the best-estimated outcomes of the trends in delinquency over the past decades. The sources provided include arrest data, which involves the use of Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) that are compiled from the police arrest data and the federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) annual arrest data around the United States. However, Maltz (1999) states that the data provided through the UCR reporting is voluntary, which affects the accuracy and completeness of the data considering that in the most occasion there is a variance in the total number of police agencies that report yearly. The other source juvenile delinquency data is the victim reports, which is acquired through surveys of crime victims. The last source of teenage delinquency crime rate is the self-report data, which are data that police are not aware of but can be acquired through surveys. The juvenile crime rates according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (1999) are provided based on the violent crimes such as homicide, robbery, aggravated assault, and rape, and based on property crimes that include burglary, auto theft, arson, and larceny and theft.
According to the FBI (1999), crimes arrest rates, the juvenile between the age of 10 and the age 17 accounted for 17.7% of crime-related offences. The violent crimes of 10 to 17 aged youth were 16.4 5 and 32% arrests for the property crimes. The data indicated that young people were more likely to involve in property crimes than violent crimes. Cook & Laub (1998) pinpoint that the arrest rates for black juvenile had also increased since the 1980s compared to white juvenile. According to Blumstein (1995), the development of crack cocaine markets in the 1980s had a significant impact on juvenile involvement in delinquency, considering most of them were recruited for selling and a strong influence of cocaine usage. The rate of adolescent girls arrest involving in delinquent behaviour of running away was recorded to be higher than juvenile boys. Finkelhor et al., (1990) the high rate of arrest of girls aged 10 to 17 due to running away reflects the safety concerns that juvenile face in the society.

Factors Contributing to Juvenile Delinquency
Diversity of the outcome juvenile delinquency studied has created various criteria for risk factors that lead to delinquency. This section provides a review of multiple research studies throughout history that have developed the association between exposure of risk factors and juvenile delinquency. Other researchers consider a single factor while others consider the accumulation of several risk factors as a result of adolescent antisocial behaviour. The major risk factors considered to result in juvenile delinquency include:
Individual-Level Risk Factors
The development of juvenile delinquency has been linked with several individual factors and characteristics. The individual risk factors can occur in early childhood while others may occur in late childhood or during adolescence. Hill & Maughan (2001) acknowledge that physiological, psychological, biological, and etiology factors significantly influence juvenile engagement in inappropriate behaviours. Some of the psychological risks factors as identified by Stephens (2010) that are essential in studying juvenile delinquency include angry outbursts, being cruel to animals, having disciplinary issues, and pre-occupation with weapons. Other aspects that are associated with individual risk factors include alcohol abuse, which hinders the psychological functioning of an individual, sexual abuse, and the context related to both family and t eh neighbourhood of the juvenile (National Academy of Sciences, 2020). Juveniles that have negative self-concept are moreover likely to get involved in misconduct. According to Steyn (2008), some examples of individual risk factors that should be considered in studying juvenile delinquency include juvenile aggressive behaviour, stealing, disobedience, defiance, lack or poor self-control, and destructiveness.
Community Factors
Community is defined by Cindi (2006) as a social set that shares mutual values, interests, and physical borders. In most communities, children are considered an essential factor or as the “mirror of the community”. The juvenile delinquency is then related to the juvenile’s community as the behaviour reflects the shared concepts within that community. National Academy of Sciences (2020) provides an analysis of different community characteristics that are linked to juvenile delinquency, including over-population, ethnic composition, high housing density, racial diversity, and cultural composition. The characteristics are highly associated with cities and most developed countries.
For instance, in most American communities characterized by over-population and high-density housing tends to develop antisocial behaviours that gradually evolve into norms and become culturally acceptable. Communities that exemplifies such behaviours including sexual immorality, theft, violence, and binge drinking enables children growing is such communities to emulate the antisocial behaviours. Steyn (2008) provided additional community factors that are precursors of juvenile delinquency such as high rates of employment, social isolation, drug-related issues, poor social infrastructures, and less institutional support.
Family Related Factors
During the classical and the modern world, the family is correlated overwhelming positive with the juvenile delinquency as a buffer against juvenile misconduct and precursor. However, various researchers consider family as the most probable cause of juvenile delinquency. The family factors presented in this section are those that characterize dysfunctional families that demonstrate the family as a precursor of juvenile delinquency. The family juvenile delinquency factors include broken homes, which is caused by changes in social factors that result in dysfunctional family structure. Horne (2004) provides that children growing up in homes that their parental relationship is associated with regular fights, step-parenting, and break-ups are likely to engage in juvenile misconduct. The deteriorated parental relationship may result in juvenile to divert to substance abuse, engaging in fights with their peers, violent behaviours, and involvement in risky sexual activities.
Another family factor is the role-modelling of antisocial behaviour, whereby parents engage in violent and cruel acts, communicate in foul language, and read pornographic materials, which children emulate and use in other contexts (Sanni et al., 2010). The authors also assert that parental role-modelling of antisocial behaviour can occur when the parents fail to inflict societally acceptable behaviour in their older children, which end up influencing their siblings. Craine, Nishima & Conger (2009) support the notion by providing that most girls are naturally vulnerable in adolescence and can be easily influenced by their older siblings in cases that an incentive is to be earned for the misconduct. Also, mothers have been regarded as the media of juvenile misconduct since they are main caregivers when they engage in bad behaviours such as drug and alcohol abuse.
Risk Factors related to School
The school in the modern world is considered one of the significant factors in children social development. The role of the school in juvenile social development including preparing juvenile for adult through providing relevant knowledge and skills, societal values and proper conduct, and protecting the students from the risk associated with the environment outside school. However, schools have been associated with negative sentiments that link it with risk factors for juvenile delinquency. Some of the risk factors include poor structure and organization, academic failure, and gang activities in the school neighbourhood.
Hagell & Jeyarajah-Dent (2006) provide that poor organization and structure in schools such as poor school ethos heightens the chances of students’ misbehaving, which increases the risk of delinquency for juveniles in the school. The organization and structure of schools also involve leadership that ensures the effective school indicators such as discipline measures, conducive settings for learning and teaching, and school management is achieved. However, the school with poor leadership, especially that involving the management of teachers, it develops factors that result in juvenile misconduct. Limited resources within the school that support the caring ability that should be provided in the school environment can result in developing juvenile misconduct. Schools in poor communities or in communities that are marginalized tend to face resource availability issues with also lack of government support creating an environment that cannot promote effective school indicators.
Academic failure is considered as a factor of juvenile delinquency when students’ performance continues to be poor to the extent that they choose outlets that are risky such as drug abuse, alcohol consumption, fighting, stealing and other socially unacceptable behaviours to suppress the frustration feelings (National Academy of Sciences, 2020). Teachers are also considered as precursors for students’ underperformance and for the latter delinquency when they engage in misconducts. According to Seale (2012), teachers, misconduct such as arriving at school late can affect student performance and contribute to frustration and lose interest in studies, hence revolving to delinquent conducts. Lastly, the school as a risk factor can also be associated with gang activities in the school neighbourhood. With most juvenile having a high risk of being easily influenced, students in institutes that are situated in gang-related neighbourhoods are at high risk of facing delinquency (National Academy of Sciences, 2020). However, the correlation between neighbourhood poverty and gang crimes within the location of the school increases the rates of youth engaging in delinquency.
Dealing with Juvenile Delinquency
Juvenile Delinquency and Juvenile Justice Early Perceptions
The early perception regarding dealing with the issue of juvenile delinquency was based on the state mandatory intervention through the ‘parens patriae’ principle whereby the state took over the children control. The principle came into play due to evolving societies’ reaction to youth misconduct, which perceived parents to have failed in rearing their children (Shoemaker, 2009). The government to ensure effective achievement of the principle, established juvenile detention centers including industrial schools, house of refuge, and reformatories. The juvenile detention centers were to provide children with adult supervision for nurturing and care, which according to Hill & Maughan (2001) created a notion that societies considered teenagers as “criminal in the making”, thus the necessity of controlling their behavior through juvenile detention centers.
Current Perceptions about Juvenile Delinquency and Prevention of Juvenile Misconduct
The societies have moved from the notion of criminating youths by developing measures that treat offenders humanely. Juvenile justice that involves treating youth offenders differently from adults started as early as the 1800s. Juvenile justice awareness was based on the factors that are considered precursors of delinquent behaviour such as biological and psychological influence that comes with the adolescence development stage (Hagell & Jeyarajah-Dent, 2006). Currently, the collective responsibility perception has been adopted in handling with youthful delinquency, which has seen the establishment of various approaches to preventing juvenile misconduct.
The prevention of juvenile delinquency is being conducted through different approaches, including family intervention, which involves mechanisms of parent-child interaction that can decrease the child’s likelihood of later delinquent behaviour. Kazdin (1997) provides that with parent management training, which is offered through the family intervention programs, the improvement in juvenile behaviour is achievable. The family intervention programs that have been established include parents and elementary schoolchildren intervention program, parents and adolescents intervention programs, and intervention with future parents. The programs focused on training parents regarding the best parenting aspects that they should focus on during the child development process to ensure their children do not get exposed to delinquency risk factors.
School-based prevention intervention programs have also been established. The school-based intervention programs are designed to children cognitive functioning, which reduces the possibility of delinquency. The program also enables teachers to relate the students’ behaviour in school to later delinquency providing the opportunity to prevent the growing antisocial misconduct before it becomes a delinquent issue (Hawkins, Laub, & Lauritsen, 1998). Stattin & Klackenberg-Larsson (1993) add that with school intervention, it is possible to identify in the early stages the children who display behaviour issues and those struggling academically, which are considered risk factors of delinquency. Examples of school-based delinquency intervention programs include behaviour modification programs, which involves the teacher regularly consulting with parents and students through group meetings; and fast track program that involves social and emotional competency training for students, home visits, and parent training.

References
Bailey, J. (2004). Gresham Sykes: major theorist paper. Florida State University. Retrieved from criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/drafts/Sykes_draft.doc
Blumstein, A. (1995). Youth violence, guns and the illicit-drug industry. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 86(1): 10-36.
Cann, V., & Kattah, J. (n.d). Article: On Juvenile Delinquency. Academia. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/38408220/Juvenile_Delinquency.pdf
Craine, L., Nishima A., & Conger, J. (2009). Understanding adolescent delinquency: the role of older siblings’ delinquency and popularity with peers. Merryll-Palmer Quarterly. 55 (4): 436-453.
Costello B.J. (2017). Social Control Theory. Preventing Crime and Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44124-5_4
Cook, P.J., & Laub, J.H. (1998). The unprecedented epidemic in youth violence. Youth Violence, Crime and Justice. Vol. 24, Pp. 27-64.
Du Preez, N., & Luyt, W. (eds). (2011). Fundamentals and developmental psychology in youth corrections. (2nd ed). Unisa Press.
Eaton, J. W. and Polk, K. (1961). Measuring Delinquency. Pittsburg; university Pittsberg Press
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1999). Crime in the United States 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Ferdinand, T.N. (1964). The Offence Pettrans and Family Structure of Urban, Village, and Rural Delinquents. Journal of criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science. 55: 86-93.
Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G., & Sedlak, A. (1990). Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrown away Children in America: Numbers and Characteristics. Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.
Hagan, E. (2012). Introduction to criminology: theories, methods and criminal behaviour. (8th ed). Mercyhurst College: Sage Publications.
Hagell, A & Jeyarajah-Dent, R. (2006). Children Who Commit Acts of Serious Interpersonal Violence: Messages for Best Practice. London & Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Hawkins, F., Laub, H., & Lauritsen, L. (1998). Race, ethnicity, and serious juvenile offending. Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions. Pp. 30-46.
Hill, J & Maughan, B. (2001). Conduct Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence. Cambridge University Press.
Hirsh, N. (1937). Dynamic Causes of Juvenile Crime. Cambridge; Mass, Sci-Art Publisher.
Horne, A. (2004). “Gonnae no’ dae that!” The Internal and External Worlds of the Delinquent Adolescent. Journal of Psychotherapy. 30 (3): 330 – 346.
Hulbert, H. (n.d). Chapter-2: Definition, Meaning and Concept of Juvenile Delinquency. Retrieved from https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/145628/6/06_chapter2.pdf
Juvenile Justice Around the World (JJAW). (2003). Chapter 13. (Based on the World Youth Report 2003). Retrieved from www.sagepub.com/upm-data/38670 – 13.pdf
Kazdin, E. (1997). Parent management training: Evidence, outcomes, and issues. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 36(10): 1349-1356.
Kusum, K. (1979). Juvenile Delinquency- A Socio-legal Study. KLM Book House, New Delhi
Kvaraceus, W. C. & Miller, W.B. (1959). Delinquent Behaviour; Cultuer and The Individual. Washingoton; National Education Association.
Maltz, M.D. (1999). Bridging Gaps in Police Crime Data. Bureau of Justice Statistics NCJ 176365. September. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Nabavi, R.T. (2012). Bandura’s Social Learning Theory & Social Cognitive Learning Theory. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267750204_Bandura’s_Social_Learning_Theory_Social_Cognitive_Learning_Theory
National Academy of Sciences. (2020). The Development of Delinquency. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/read/9747/chapter/5
Sanni, B., Udoh, A., Okediji, A., Modo, N., & Ezeh, N. (2010). Family types and juvenile delinquency issues among secondary school teachers in AKWA Ibom State, Nigeria: counselling implications. Journal of Social Science, 23(1): 21- 23.
Seale, L. (2012). Late teachers lambasted. Independent Media. Retrieved from https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/late-teachers-lambasted-1233715
Sellin, T. & Wolfgang, M. (1964). The Measurement of Delinquency. New York; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Shoemaker, D.J. (2009). Juvenile delinquency. Lanham, Md: Rawson & Littlefield Publishers.
Stattin, H., & Klackenberg-Larsson, I. (1993). Early language and intelligence development and their relationship to future criminal behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 102(3): 369-378.
Stephens, D. (2010). School associated violent deaths. The National School Safety Center Report. Retrieved from http://www.schoolsafety.us/
Steyn, F. (2008). Lifeskills training for children with deviant behaviour: The Nouwpoort Youth Community Development Project. Acta Academica. 40 (2): 205 – 243.
Trojannovicz, R.C. (1973). Juvenile Delinquency; Concept and Control. New Jersey; Prentice Hall Inc. 57-60
Pink & White (n.d). Chapter 2: Review of Literature. https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/34880/10/10_chapter%202.pdf
Welch, K. (1998). Two major theories of Travis Hirschi. Retrieved from http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/hirschi.htm
World Youth Report. (2003). Report of the Secretary-General (official document: A/58/79 & E/CN.5/2003/4). Pp. 189 – 211. www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/documents/cho7.pdf

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Masters Essays, PSY Papers, PSYC, Psychology Assignment, Psychology Dissertations