Methodology and design of the ISRD-2 study

The Many Faces of Youth Crime: Contrasting Theoretical Perspectives on Juvenile Delinquency across Countries and Cultures

Volumn 9781441994554, Issue , 2012, Pages 21-65

  Marshall, Ineke Haen ^a   Enzmann, Dirk ^b  

^a NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84949179090     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-9455-4_2     Document Type: Chapter

References (76)

1. Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
2. Allardt, E. (1990). Challenges for comparative social research. Acta Sociologica 33, 183-193.
3. Armer, M., & Grimshaw, A. D. (1973). Comparative Social Research: Methodological Problems and Strategies. New York: Wiley.
4. Blaya, C. (2007). ISRD 2 Technical report: France. Bordeaux: Université de Bordeaux 2, Observatoire Européen de la Violence Scolaire.
5. Bovenkerk, F., & Wolf, T. (2010). Surinam. In J. Junger-Tas, I. H. Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee & B. Gruszcynska (Eds.), Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study (pp. 399-407). New York: Springer.
6. Boyce, W., Torsheim, T., Currie, C. & Zambon, A. (2006). The Family Affluence Scale as a measure of national wealth: Validation of an adolescent self-report measure. Social Indicators Research, 78, 473-487.
7. Brener, N. D., Eaton, D. K., Kann, L., Grunbaum, J. A., Gross, L. A., Kyle, T. M. & Ross, J. G. (2006). The association of survey setting and mode with self-reported health risk behaviors among high school students. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 354-374.
8. Currie, C. E., Elton, R. A., Todd, J. & Platt, S. (1997). Indicators of socio-economic status for adolescents: the WHO health behaviour in school-aged survey. Health Education Research, 12, 385-397.
9. Decker, S. H., & Weerman., F. (2005). European Street Gangs and Troublesome Youth Groups. Lanham, MD: Alta Mira.
10. Elder, J. W. (1976). Comparative cross-national methodology. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 209-230.
11. Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Ageton, S. S. (1985). Explaining Delinquency and Drug Use. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
12. Enzmann, D., Marshall, I. H., Killias, M., Junger-Tas, J., Steketee, M., & Gruszczynska, B. (2010). Self-reported delinquency in Europe and beyond: First results of the Second International Self-Report Delinquency Study in the context of police and victimization data. European Journal of Criminology, 7, 159-181.
13. Esbensen, F., Miller, M. H., Taylor, T. J., He, N., & Freng, A. (1999). Differential attrition rates and active parental consent. Evaluation Review, 23, 316-325.
14. Esbensen, F. A., Melde, C., Taylor, T. J., & Peterson, D. (2008). Active parental consent in schoolbased research: how much is enough and how do we get it? Evaluation Review, 32(4), 335-362.
15. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Farrington, D. P. (1987). The origins of crime: The Cambridge Study of Delinquent Involvement. London: Home Office Research and Planning Unit.
17. Fowler, F. (2002). Survey Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Gatti, U., & Verde, F. (2010). Gang membership and alcohol and drug use. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, November 2010, San Francisco.
19. Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. (1950). Unraveling juvenile delinquency. New York: Harper & Row.
20. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A General Theory of Crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
21. Grasmick, H. G., Title, C. R., & Arneklev, B. J. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 5-29.
22. Henry, K. L., et al. (2002). The effect of active parental consent on the ability to generalize the results of an alcohol, tobacco, and other drug prevention trial to rural adolescents. Evaluation Review, 26, 645-666.
23. Hibell, B., Andersson, B., Bjarnason, T., Ahlstrom, S., Balakireva, O., Kokkevi, A., & Morgan, M. (2004). The ESPAD Report 2003: Alcohol and Other Drug Use Among Students in 35 European Countries. Stockholm: Swedish Council for Information on Alcohol and Other Drugs.
24. Hindelang, M. J., Hirschi, T., & Weis, J. G. (1981). Measuring delinquency. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
26. Horney, J., & Marshall, I. H. (1991). Measuring lambda through self-reports. Criminology, 29, 471-495.
27. Huizinga, D., Weher, A. W., Menard, S., Espiritu, R., & Esbensen, F. (1998). Some not so boring findings from the Denver Youth Survey. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Washington.
28. ISRD2 Working Group. (2005). Questionnaire ISRD2: Standard Student Questionnaire. Boston, Hamburg, Utrecht, Warsaw, and Zurich: European Society of Criminology.
29. Ji, P. Y., et al. (2004). Factors influencing middle and high schools' active parental consent return rates. Evaluation Review, 28, 578-599.
30. Johnson, D. P. (2008). Contemporary Sociological Theory: An Integrated Multi-Level Approach. New York: Springer.
31. Junger-Tas, J., & Haen Marshall, I. (1999). The self-report methodology in crime research. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (Vol. 25, pp. 291-368). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32. Junger-Tas, J., Marshall, I. H., Enzmann, D., Killias, M., Steketee, M., & Gruszczynska, B. (Eds.). (2010). Juvenile Delinquency in Europe and Beyond: Results of the International Self-Report Delinquency Study. New York: Springer.
33. Kish, L. (1994). Multipopulation survey designs. International Statistical Review, 62, 167-186.
34. Kivivuori, J. (2007). Delinquent Behavior in Nordic Capital Cities. Helsinki, Finland: Scandinavian Research Council for Criminology.
35. Kohn, M. L. (1987). Cross-national research as an analytic strategy. American Sociological Review, 52, 713-731.
36. Lappi-Seppala, T. (2007). Penal policy and prisoner rates in Scandinavia. In K. Nuotio (Ed.), Festschrift in Honor of Raimo Lahti (pp. 265-306). Helsinki, Finland: University of Helsinki.
37. Lieberson, S. (1991). Small N's and big conclusions: an examination of the reasoning in comparative studies based on a small number of cases. Social Forces, 70, 307-320.
38. Lieberson, S. (1994). More on the uneasy case for using Mill-type methods in small-N comparative studies. Social Forces 72, 1225-1237.
39. Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (1998). The development of male offending: Key findings from the first decade of the Pittsburgh Youth Study. Studies in Crime and Crime Prevention, 7, 141-172.
40. Loewenberg, G. (1971). New directions in comparative political research: A review essay. Midwest Journal of Political Science 15, 741-756.
41. Lucia, S., Herrmann, L. & Killias, M. (2007). How important are interview methods and questionnaire designs in research on self-reported juvenile delinquency? An experimental comparison of internet vs. paper-and-pencil questionnaires and different definitions of the reference period. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 3, 39-64.
42. Marsh, R. M. (1967). Comparative Sociology: A Codification of Cross-Societal Analysis. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
43. Marshall, I. H. (1997). Minorities, Migrants, and Crime: Diversity and Similarity across Europe and the United States. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Marshall, I. H. (2010). "Pourquoi pas?" versus "absolutely not!" Cross-national differences in access to schools and pupils for survey research. European Journal of Crime Policy and Research, 16, 89-109.
45. Marshall, I. H., & Marshall, C. E. (1983). Toward a Refinement of Purpose in Comparative Criminological Research: Research Site Selection in Focus. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 7, 84-97.
46. Marshall, I. H., & He, N. (2010). The United States. In J. Junger-Tas, I. H. Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee & B. Gruszcynska (Eds.), Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study (pp. 138-158). New York: Springer.
47. Marshall, I. H., & Webb, V. J. (1994). Self-reported Delinquency in a Mid-western American City. In J. Junger-Tas, G. Terlouw & M. Klein (Eds.), Delinquent Behavior Among Young People in the Western World: First Results of the International Self-report Delinquency Study (pp. 319-342). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kugler Publications.
48. Maxfield, K. G., & Babbie, E. (2001). Research Methods in Criminology and Criminal Justice. New York: Wadsworth.
49. Messner, S., & Rosenfeld, R. (1997). Political restraint of the market and levels of criminal homicide: A cross-national application of institutional anomie theory. Social Forces 75, 1393-1416.
50. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence Limited and Life Course Persistent Antisocial Behavior: A Development Taxonomy. Psychological Review 100, 674-701.
51. Naroll, R. (1970). What have we learned from cross-cultural surveys? American Anthropologist 72, 1227-1288.
52. Oberwittler, D., & Naplava, T. (2002). Auswirkungen des Erhebungsverfahrens bei Jugendbefragungen zu 'heiklen' Themen - schulbasierte schriftliche Befragung und haushaltsbasierte mündliche Befragung im Vergleich. ZUMA-Nachrichten, 51, 49-77.
53. Pokorny, S. B., Jason, L. A., Schoeny, M. E., Townsend, S. M. & Curie, C. J. (2001). Do participation rates change when active consent procedures replace passive consent? Evaluation Review, 25, 567-580.
54. Presser, S. et al. (Eds.) (2004). Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
55. Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley.
56. Rokkan, S. (1968). Comparative Research Across Cultures and Nations. Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
57. Saint-Arnaud, S., & Bernard, P. (2003). Convergence or resilience? A hierarchical cluster analysis of the welfare regimes in advanced countries. Current Sociology, 51, 499-527.
58. Sampson, R. J. (2006). How does community context matter? Social mechanisms and the explanation of crime rates. In P. O. Wikström & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime. Context, mechanisms and development (pp. 31-60.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Earls, F. (1999). Beyond social capital: Spatial dynamics of collective efficacy for children. American Sociological Review, 64, 633-660.
60. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918-924.
61. Savolainen, J. (2000). Inequality, welfare state, and homicide: Further support for the institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 38, 1021-1042.
62. Scheuch, E. K. (1968). The cross-cultural use of sample surveys: Problems of comparability. In S. Rokkan (Ed.), Comparative Research across Cultures and Nations (pp. 176-209.). Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
63. Smit, P., Marshall, I. H., & Van Gammeren, M. (2008). An empirical approach to country clustering. In K. Aromaa & M. Heiskanen (Eds.), Crime and Criminal Justice Systems in Europe and North America 1995-2004 (pp. 169-195). Helsinki, Finland: HEUNI.
64. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
65. Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2000). The Self-Report Method for Measuring Delinquency and Crime. Criminal Justice 2000 (Vol. 4, pp. 33-83). Washington D. C.: US National Institute of Justice.
66. Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A., & Perter, P. K. (1998). Taking stock: An overview of the findings from the Rochester Youth Development Study. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology.
67. Tracy, P., Wolfgang, M., & Figlio, R. (1990). Delinquency careers in two birth cohorts. New York: Plenum.
68. UNDP (2010). United Nations Development Programme: International Human Development Indicators. [http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/tables/default.html]
69. Van Der Laan, A. M., & Blom, M. (2006). Jeugddelinquentie. Risico's en bescherming: Bevindingen uit de WODC Monitor Zelfgerapporteerde Jeugdcriminaliteit 2005. Den Haag: Boom.
70. Warr, M. (2002). Companions in Crime: The Social Aspects of Criminal Conduct. New York: Cambridge University Press.
71. White, V., Hill, D. J., & Effendi, Y. (2004). How does active parental consent influence the findings of drug use surveys in schools? Evaluation Review, 28, 246-260.
72. Wikström, P.-O. H. & Butterworth, D. A. (2006). Adolescent crime: Individual differences and lifestyles. Collumpton: Willan.
73. Wilcox, P., Land, K. C., & Hunt, S. A. (2003). Criminal circumstance: A dynamic multi-contextual criminal opportunity theory. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
74. Wilmers, N., Enzmann, D., Schaefer, D., Herbers, D., Greve, W. & Wetzels, P. (2002). Jugendliche in Deutschland zur Jahrtausendwende: Gefährlich oder gefährdet? Ergebnisse wiederholter, repräsentativer Dunkelfelduntersuchungen zu Gewalt und Kriminalität im Leben junger Menschen 1998-2000. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
75. Wolfgang, M., Figlio, R., & Sellin, T. (1972). Delinquency in a birth cohort. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
76. Zhang, S., Benson, T., & Deng, X. (2000). A test-retest reliability assessment of the International Self-report Delinquency Instrument. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 283-295.