Introduction
The scientists engaged in the research into human learning and development have long emphasized the importance of the environment and community surrounding a young individual since these factors impact the behaviors and values that a person adopts. Juvenile delinquency is defined as “the habitual committing of criminal acts or offenses by a young person, especially one below the age at which ordinary criminal prosecution is possible” (Jardine Law Offices P. C., n. d., para. 1), suggesting that some crimes are committed by minors who cannot be charged for their actions under the existing legislation. Juvenile delinquency often leads to the continuation of criminal behaviors in the future, as young people go through adulting. Moreover, the SLTs suggest that the environment the juveniles reside in has a substantial impact on the probability of a juvenile engaging in these adverse behaviors. The proposed study will focus on the investigation of the dependence of teenagers’ drug abuse as juvenile delinquency on SLTs. It is important to investigate this specific topic in order to find effective theoretical means to mitigate the problem of drug abuse in adolescents to avoid its destructive effects in their adulthood.
Research Question
The problem of youths’ criminal behavior and its causes found in sociological theories are of significant importance to the contemporary research of the problem of juvenile delinquency. There exist numerous theoretical approaches to the explanation and solving of this issue. However, it is important to investigate which of them are most applicable to the demographics of young individuals, teenagers in particular, given their specific developmental stage of socialization (Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner, 2018; Nicholson and Higgins, 2017). Therefore, the general research question of the present study is as follows:
RQ: How effective is SLT in explaining teenage drug abuse and providing tools for its prevention?
Purpose of the Study
Despite many research studies, the problem of juvenile delinquency in general and adolescent drug abuse in particular, persists and requires academic attention. Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner (2018) state that numerous studies in neuroscience and developmental psychology have proven that “the typical teenage brain is not mature, and that young people are routinely characterized by poor judgment and impulsivity” (p. 2). Such a piece of evidence urges the researcher to investigate the problem of juvenile delinquency approaching it from a theoretical perspective to find the most effective tools for preventing and controlling the issue. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to review the most common theories explaining teenagers’ likelihood to abuse drugs and assess the effectiveness of SLTs to solve this problem.
Significance of the Study
The significance of the study is validated by its multifaceted nature due to the incorporation of the discussion of several theories to validate the applicability of SLT. The study is anticipated to contribute to the body of scholarly literature on the topic of juvenile delinquency by advancing the evaluation of the theoretical approaches. In particular, the research results are aimed at clarifying and reinforcing the effectiveness of the SLT as a prospective theoretical approach to explaining and preventive such a tentative social issue as juvenile delinquency.
Study Objectives
Given the complexity of the issue at hand and the purpose and research question having an evaluating and exploring nature, the objectives of the present research study are as follows:
- Study Objective 1: to investigate the body of literature on the topic of theoretical approaches to juvenile delinquency with specific attention to drug use in teenagers;
- Study Objective 2: to identify major theories of crime committed by youth;
- Study Objective 3: to investigate and evaluate the premises of SLT;
- Study Objective 4: to collect and analyze statistics on juvenile crime associated with illegal drug intake;
- Study Objective 5: to evaluate the effectiveness of SLT as applied to juvenile criminal behavior.
Scope of the Study
To investigate the problem of teenagers’ abuse of illegal drugs as one of juvenile delinquent behaviors, the researcher will concentrate on the area of Trinidad. The drug using behaviors of both male and female teenagers residing in Trinidad will be within the focus of the current study. Such a specification of the context of the research will allow for obtaining accurate and practically applicable findings. The data on the dependence of teenagers’ illegal drug intake as a determinant of juvenile delinquency on SLTs will allow for Trinidad-based authorities, non-profit organizations, and correctional facilities to employ evidence-based theoretical background for effective problem-solving.
Literature Review
Since the problem of juvenile delinquency and its dependence on the influence of society have long been present in academic circles, the body of scholarly literature on the topic is substantial. Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner (2018), Williams and McShane (2018), Roberson and Azaola (2021), and Shoemaker (2017) have devoted books to the discussion of the various theories approaching criminological behavior in general and in youth in particular. These scholars address juvenile delinquency from various perspectives, using SLT as one of the possible ways of explaining deviance in teenagers. According to SLT, the juveniles learn the adverse behavior patterns from others (Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner, 2018; Crime Causation: Sociological Theories, n.d.; Nicholson and Higgins, 2017; Roberson and Azaola, 2021). The association with people, either adults or peers, who commit crimes is, therefore, the primary factor that causes juvenile delinquency under the SLT.
Moreover, not only the behavior of the people that surround one affects their inclination towards criminal behavior but also the reinforcement of criminal models and beliefs. An individual growing in a normal social environment would view a crime as undesirable behavior, as opposed to a juvenile whose environment reinforces the belief that crime is either desirable or justifiable (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). Hence, there is a basic difference between the young people who grow in an environment where conforming behaviors are encouraged by their social circle, and those who witness criminal behaviors and their social circle perceive this as a norm. The primary conclusion from this premise of the SLT is that the understanding of the normal behavior is formed under the impacts of the community members and based on the social interactions a child has, and therefore, these can differ (Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner, 2018; Kruis, Seo, and Kim, 2019; Williams and McShane, 2018). Evidently, some groups of people have a bigger influence on a child and on the formation of their understanding of normal behavior; for example, parents or peers will affect most juveniles more than teachers or other community members.
The SLT is a result of the works in the field of developmental studies, psychology, and human motivation studies. Ronald Akers is a criminologist who developed the SLT applicable to criminology and juvenile delinquency (Nicholson and Higgins, 2017). Under Akers’s theory, the behavioral outcomes of juveniles who commit crimes are the result of the same conditions that affect the behavior of children who do not commit crimes. The underlying reason that affects the behavior of both groups is their social environment, from which the juveniles either learn that crime is unacceptable or that it can be committed.
There are some social groups that affect the learning of juveniles. According to the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services (n.d.), these social groups include family members and peers. Moreover, Kruis, Seo, and Kim (2019) note that there are two indicators of delinquent behavior, either previous engagement in crime or association with peers who commit crimes. The family members are the first line of the influencers since the child is often in close contact with them and learns the basics of behavior patterns from their actions (Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, n.d.). Another way in which social learning affects the delinquent behavior of children and youth is the media or observation of the behaviors of other individuals not associated with the person.
The SLT determines specific conditions necessary for learning. According to it, there are three ways in which the learning occurs: “differential reinforcement, beliefs, and modeling” (Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, n.d., para. 3). This model of learning is the result of the reinforcement or punishment of delinquent behavior (Kruis, Seo, and Kim, 2019). Indeed, as stated by Williams and McShane (2018), “the contingencies of reinforcement and punishment (aversive stimuli) determine whether the frequency of any particular behavior is increased or diminished (p. 151). For example, a young individual may receive reinforcement in the form of social approval from peers, which will likely result in the development of a behavior model. Such a juvenile will learn through reinforcement that criminal behavior results in a favorable outcome for them, which is the approval of their peers. Another example is committing a crime that is not punished, which also creates a behavior model under which delinquency is viewed as acceptable behavior.
Differential Association Theory
Differential association theory can be viewed as a theory encompassing two essential dimensions. The first one is behavioral-interactional, and it shows that deviance occurs through “direct association and interaction with others who engage in certain behaviors, as well as… indirect association and identification with more distant reference groups” (Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, n.d., para. 10). The people or communities with whom a person is in social contact constitute the social circle in which each premise of the SLT operates. In this environment, juveniles are exposed to different variations of acceptable or unacceptable behavior, combined with models of behavior that may reinforce criminal and conforming actions distinctively. These models also become a source of imitation of different behavior.
The social contacts with whom the juvenile associates are divided by scholars into secondary and primary sources. Primary associations incorporate those who are a person’s immediate family and close friends. Secondary sources of this concept consist of a much wider range of people, such as teachers, neighbors, and church members. Each of these associations predetermines the perceptions and values an individual gains, as well as how they perform their roles in different social contexts.
According to differential association theory, it is generally assumed that the timing, duration, nature, and frequency of contact are the critical factors of behavior. In other words, the stronger impact on a person’s behavior, the earlier the association manifests itself, the longer the timing of the contract, the more often the association, and the closer the association (Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, n.d.). Thus, from the perspective of social learning, early formed contacts with family are likely to play a vital role in building one’s behavior.
Differential Reinforcement of Behavior
As part of the Differential Association Theory, there is also the differential reinforcement of behavior, which explains why deviant actions become a norm and even a habit for a young individual. People can teach others to become engaged in crime through two mechanisms: the reinforcement and punishment they provide for the latter’s behavior. A crime has more chances to happen if it is often reinforced and is not adequately punished. This, in turn, causes large volumes of reinforcement, for instance, much money, approval from society, pleasure, and little punishment. Thus, it has more chances to be reinforced than alternative forms of behavior. Reinforcements can be categorized into being positive or negative. With positive reinforcement, the actions result in something good, some positive consequence (Crime Causation: Sociological Theories, n.d.). This consequence can involve things like money, the pleasant feelings associated with substance abuse, parental attention, approval from peers, or a social status increase. With negative forms of reinforcement, the feeling of punishment disappears, and an individual behaves less carefully due to this (Crime Causation: Sociological Theories, n.d.). One may cite an example when a juvenile’s friends have called them a coward because they refuse to take drugs with them. The person eventually decides to take these drugs with them, and then, their peers stop calling them a coward. Drug use by the individual has been negatively reinforced in this scenario.
According to the SLT, some people live in settings where crime has more chances to be reinforced and is not often punished. In some situations, this reinforcement may be deliberate, and in other cases, it is part of the community life and the socially approved behaviors (Crime Causation: Sociological Theories, n. d.). For example, delinquent children’s parents can motivate their kids to act aggressively in relation to peers, or alternatively, the juvenile’s friends can support drug use. Sometimes, the enforcement of crime may manifest itself not so deliberately. For instance, the embarrassed adult can give their screaming child a sweet in the checkout line at a grocery store.
While having no intention to do so, caregivers have provided reinforcement for the child’s deviant behavior and therefore made it acceptable, which means that it will likely occur again in the future. The data indicate that people who count on reinforcement for crimes participate in subsequent offenses more often. This particularly concerns the cases when they are in situations similar to those in which they previously experienced (Crime Causation: Sociological Theories, n. d.). Hence, with juvenile crimes, the SLT brings attention to the practice of reinforcement and punishment, which occurs naturally within a person’s social environment and creates either a motivation to do something or a precaution to avoid certain behaviors.
Reinforcement of Criminal Behavior
The mechanism of reinforcement is the basis of human motivation, which causes one to perform any actions, for example, exercise, complete tasks at work, or compete with others. However, as was discussed earlier, not all good behaviors are reinforced, and sometimes a person learns to repeat adverse or criminal behaviors if they receive approval or another form of reinforcement for these actions. Reinforcement plays an important role in the Social Learning Theory because it implies that an individual continuously chooses to engage in a certain behavior, even behaviors such as juvenile crimes, only if their actions are supported with an external reinforcement (Nicholson and Higgins, 2017). Moreover, the type of reinforcement can vary based on the specific conditions; for example, in some cases having the approval of peers serves as a sufficient element for supporting further adverse behaviors of the juveniles. Hence, reinforcement plays a vital role in terms of human motivation and behavior, and it makes certain behaviors habitual.
Methodology
Given the qualitative nature of the proposed study and the theoretical implications of the anticipated findings, the secondary data will be collected and analyzed. For this purpose, a method of the systematic review will be utilized. Studies published within the past five years with teenagers and their engagement in delinquent behaviors of illegal drug intake will be selected. Particular attention will be paid to the studies conducted in Trinidad. The findings of the studies will be collected and categorized depending on the explanation of the causes of delinquent behavior. The correlation with SLTs will be measured based on the collected findings. Moreover, the practical usage of the SLTs for prevention will be analyzed, and necessary recommendations based on the literature review will be made. Ultimately, the results of the proposed study will allow for measuring the effectiveness of preventive efforts for teenager illegal drug intake as informed by SLTs for the purposes of mitigating the frequency and severity of juvenile delinquency cases.
Social Learning Theory Background
Burgess and Akers first introduced the SLT in association with juvenile crime in 1966 in their work “A differential association-reinforcement theory of criminal behavior” (Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, n. d.). In general, this theory is a combination of earlier works written on the psychology of youth and human behavior and the theory of reinforcement. This section will provide some background into the SLT and other theoretical approaches that address the impact of the social environment on a person’s likelihood of becoming a criminal at a young age.
The SLT was selected as a basis for this paper and the analysis of deviant behaviors because it is the most popular framework for explaining why juveniles engage in crime at the present moment. According to the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services (n.d., para. 10), “the theory is also arguably one of the most tested contemporary theories of crime and deviance and has undergone considerable elaboration and testing since the 1970s.” The recent developments in the field of SLT were focused on finding an association between the macro-level factors and the meso-level social structures, which would help explain the different variables and elements that affect delinquent behaviors.
The basis of the SLTs is the focus on human behavior and the interactions between people in a group, or more specifically, the influence that the social environment has on a person. From a broader perspective, the SLTs can be understood as “a social, behavioral approach that emphasizes the “reciprocal interaction between cognitive, behavioral and environmental determinants” of human behavior” (Ministry of Children, Community, and Social Service, n.d., para. 15). The basic principle of this theory suggests that the same processes affect the formation and development of conforming and deviant behaviors. Therefore, there is no difference in how a child learns to engage in conforming behaviors when compared to them learning to commit criminal acts. This points to the idea that external factors play a more important role and influence the probability of a juvenile committing a crime or not doing so, which helps in creating an environment where the juveniles would not be prompted to commit crimes.
The SLT, however, is not the only approach to explaining why criminal behaviors occur and especially why juveniles demonstrate criminal inclinations in the first place. Theories of criminality and deviant behavior take into account personal, cultural, and social factors in different ways (Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner, 2018). These theories help one to understand the causes of crime but do not necessarily provide recommendations for its elimination. While there are links between theories of crime and the approaches taken to prevent deviant behaviors, it is generally accepted that criminality is rooted in attitudes and social fabric rather than the politics and practice of criminal justice (Shoemaker, 2017). Therefore, the SLT forms the basis for understanding why crimes occur in specific social settings.
With the development of medical science throughout the XIX century, the interest in the internal biological triggers of crime intensified. There emerged an interest in the possibility of the existence of a “criminal personality,” which can be identified by biological and mental anomalies that cause an individual to engage in crime (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). This school of thought was recognized by scholars as positivist criminology (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). Its basic principles are that crime is provoked or determined by hereditary and environmental factors; it can be investigated to predict and prevent crime instead of punishing criminals. Hence, the SLTs, in combination with the positivist approach, help both understand why crimes occur and prevent their occurrence altogether.
However, in opposition to the SLT’s approach, the positivists believe that it is not the environment but the innate characteristics of a person that make them susceptible to engagement with a crime. Well-known positivist theories of criminality assume that the criminal has physical characteristics, the predominance of a certain physique, a set of chromosomes, low intelligence, and extraversion, which makes a person susceptible to bad examples (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). Such theories consider rehabilitation as the main principle of sentencing.
Their opponents dispute technical validity, such as scientific evidence is unreliable, sociological validity, which is explaining crime too narrowly, ignoring issues of power and inequality, and political validity, which is the “treatment” required to “heal” the offender may not match the severity of the crime, which violates civil liberties and the principle of just retribution, of similar views (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). Despite all this, the idea of learned criminal behavior and the ability to eliminate this reflex in the last decade has gained popularity again: the service of work with conditionally released widely uses cognitive and behavioral approaches. Offenders analyze their criminal behavior, identify factors provoking it, and expand their social skills to cope with the situation in socially acceptable ways.
Another approach to viewing juvenile delinquency is examining the person’s childhood as the primary predictor of such behaviors. Psychodynamic theories of crime focus on the early emotional experiences of offenders (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). Criminal activity is considered an attempt to compensate for maternal deprivation in childhood and the inability to resolve internal emotional conflicts associated with personal growth as a healthy person would. Crime is seen as disturbed demonstrative behavior, an adequate response to which is psychotherapeutic intervention (Bartollas, Schmalleger, and Turner, 2018). In the middle of the 20th century, such theories were especially popular with juvenile delinquents, but their impact declined with the return to the principle of just retribution (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019).
Social organization theories originated in the United States in the 1920s and were the first attempt to provide a sociological basis for crime (Roberson and Azaola, 2021). Social space theories have studied the influence of urban planning on the attitudes and behavior of urban dwellers. It was assumed that the consequences of poor living conditions provoke the development of an unofficial socioeconomic hierarchy and subcultures conducive to the commission of crimes (Shoemaker, 2017). Closely related to “social space” were theories dealing with “social opportunities” (Kratcoski and Kratcoski, 2019). With the growth of social welfare, people at the bottom of society suffered from the contemplation of wealth and abundance and the impossibility of achieving them legally. In response to these experiences, delinquent subcultures and tendencies to delinquency arose.
Theories of social reaction and social control pay less attention to the causes of crime and investigate the intensification of criminal behavior resulting from social reactions to the offender. Social reaction theory postulates that the official response to a crime (detention, harsh sentence) stigmatizes the offender and prevents him from reintegrating into society as a law-abiding citizen. Consequently, the offender is forced to communicate with his kind, realizing negative predictions about his behavior. Thus, deviance increases, there is a danger of panic in society from the submission of the media, which reinforces stereotypical reactions and plays on the fears of the population about the growth of crime.
Social control theories go further (taking into account the principles of classical criminology). If it were not for the achievements of socialization and the fear of being caught, most people during certain periods of their lives would commit crimes. The intention to commit or not to commit a crime depends on how profitable we think it is to remain law-abiding; the intensity of this sensation can change over time and in different situations. The label and stigma of the perpetrator can be critical to the continuation of the criminal activity.
The main objection of opponents of all these theories is that they do not take into account the distribution of power and social conflicts. Conflict theories speak of the impossibility of separating specific criminals (as well as the local environment and reactions) from the mechanism of protection of the interests of those in power in society by criminal law and legal proceedings. The defendants are usually workers and unemployed, but the most serious crimes (especially financial) are committed by wealthy and powerful people. Expressed class and ethnic conflicts are attempted to be resolved with the help of criminal proceedings instead of considering them in the context of the whole society.
Likewise, feminist crime theories highlight the fact that crime and criminal justice are almost exclusively masculine, requiring an analysis of the distribution of gender roles in society. Theories of criminality and deviant behavior provide different explanations for this phenomenon, and these explanations do not always contradict each other. Professionals working with criminals often take an eclectic approach that combines elements of the structural, cultural, and biographical background.
Juvenile Crime Statistics and Background
Juvenile delinquency has been a serious issue in the United States and other developed nations. The definition of juvenile delinquency implies that a child or someone below the legal prosecution rate has committed a crime (Jardine Law Offices PC, n.d.). However, due to their age and the legal system limitations, they cannot be charged for such a crime in the same way a grownup would be charged.
Importantly, there is a distinction between delinquency committed because it is a crime that an individual of any age would be convicted for and delinquency for which juveniles are convicted only due to their age. For example, the legal age when drinking is permitted in the US is commonly known to start at 21, and therefore, all individuals below this age are committing a crime if they consume alcohol. However, such actions are typically not harmful and are a direct result of the main principle of the SLT, which is that the juveniles learn their behaviors from their peers and adults surrounding them. Still, status offenses occur for similar reasons that prompt juveniles to commit other types of crimes. More attention should be given to the former category of delinquencies as they involve crimes that hurt other people, such as robbery, casting an injury on another individual, consuming or selling drugs, and others. These are more significant types of delinquencies because their consequences and the motivation of a person committing them differ greatly from those of an individual who drinks at a young age or commits a similar type of administrative delinquency.
The statistics prove the urgency of the issue in question. According to Youth (n.d.), in one year, approximately 2.1 million juveniles are arrested in the United States due to criminal acts. The governmental agency notes that the rates of juvenile crime have been declining in recent years, but still, there is a large number of crimes that are committed by individuals under the age of 18, and many of these cases go to the court where the individuals receive their sentencing. When reviewing the statistics, Youth (n.d.) states that 37% of juvenile crimes are property offenses, and 27% are public order offenses. Notably, the statistics do not account for severe crimes, such as violent offenses, because the US legal system requires these cases to be reviewed in adult courts.
The issue that is the basis of analysis in this paper is the fact that the juveniles convicted for crimes are influenced by their social environment, and after a conviction, they are subjected to conditions that do not promote their learning and abandonment of the criminal behaviors. For example, Youth (n.d.) states that many convicted juveniles are placed into conditions where they experience overcrowding, violence, trauma, and these individuals are at risk of committing suicide. Hence, the legal system has to review the theory and practical advice on how to aid the juveniles who engage in criminal behaviors to ensure that they do not commit crimes, are not placed in the detention facilities, and therefore are not subjected to violence and risk of continuing their adverse behaviors once they are free.
Social Learning and Juvenile Delinquency
This section will specifically focus on how the SLTs help explains juvenile delinquency. Mainly, the process of reinforcement and lack of examples of conforming behaviors are examined as the primary drivers of delinquent behaviors. In addition to encouraging criminal behavior, other people can also teach the personal beliefs that are conducive to committing a crime, which confirms the distinctive nature of the problem.
According to studies conducted with criminals, beliefs that contribute to deviant behavior can be separated into three groups. Firstly, this concerns the approval of some minor cases of crime, such as gambling, the use of alcohol, and violation of the curfew for adolescents (Kruis, Seo, and Kim, 2019). Secondly, the justification or approval of severe forms of crime, which should be regarded more closely. Such people suppose that the crime, in general, is a deviant form of behavior but that some crimes, in turn, may be justified or even considered desirable in some situations. For example, people commonly consider fighting as a negative behavior; however, in some circumstances, such as self-protection, it might be justifiable. Thirdly, for some people, shared values exist, which explain their inclinations and turn a crime into more attractive conduct compared to other forms of behavior. This may concern a strong desire for excitement or thrill when one perceives in a more favorable light than others.
However, the behavior should not be regarded only as a product of belief and reinforcement or punishment that people receive. It is a product of others’ conduct, as was discussed earlier in this paper. People tend to imitate others’ forms of behavior, especially if they follow their role models (Shoemaker, 2017). For instance, a person who witnesses a crime committed by someone they respect and then receives reinforcement for that crime is then more likely to commit the crime himself. Hence, the imitation of behaviors is another element that forms the basis of the SLT because it implies that juveniles imitate the behaviors of others when they commit a crime.
Recidivism
One of the central issues with the exciting legal system, and that is in line with the ideas of the SLT, is recidivism, which is the repetition of criminal activity after one is released from a detention facility. According to Youth (n.d, para. 10), recidivism, “as measured by various levels of reinvolvement with the justice system (e.g., rearrest, probation violations, reincarceration, etc.), is fairly high for youth under the age of 21.” For example, within 12 months, approximately 55% of the juveniles were arrested for a criminal offense (Youth, n.d.). Again, these statistics further prove that the juveniles are placed into conditions where their criminal behavior is a loop, and they continue to engage in criminal activities, which is supported by their social environment. Hence, under the SLT, one has to be retaught the behaviors that are conforming in order to avoid engaging in crimes again.
Conclusion
In summary, this paper applies the SLT to the field of criminology and addresses the issue of juvenile delinquency. Under this theory, the juveniles are very susceptible to the impact of their environment, and therefore, their behaviors are often the result of what their peers and other people in their community do. As a result, this theory provides a valid method for helping juveniles, especially the ones living in disadvantaged communities. This paper reviews the SLT in comparison to other approaches that attempt to explain criminal behaviors. For example, the positivist approach implies that people’s criminal behaviors are a result of their innate characteristics, and only rehabilitation can help change these tendencies. In opposition to this idea, the SLT argues that it is the environment and not the individual’s genes that cause the engagement in crime.
In conclusion, according to the theory under consideration, crime is the result of an experimental act in which young people gain new experiences to value their involvement in crime and some other forms of deviant behavior. The SLT can be viewed through a strictly behavioral prism, or it can include the independent role of communication and relationships. The behavioral aspect of this concept suggests that young people gain experiences about crime by learning the processes of reward and punishment. The interaction perspective suggests that delinquency can be learned through peer exchanges and other close contacts. It is through relationships that young people learn to define crime as indecent or deviant and to justify their involvement in unlawful behavior.
References
Bartollas, Clemens, Frank Schmalleger, and Michael Turner. 2018. Juvenile Delinquency. New York: Pearson.
Crime Causation: Sociological Theories. n.d. “Crime Causation: Sociological Theories. n.d.”
Jardine Law Offices P.C. n.d. “Juvenile Delinquency Attorney Salt Lake City.”
Kratcoski, Peter and Lucille Dunn Kratcoski. 2019. Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Research, and the Juvenile Justice Process. New York: Springer International Publishing.
Kruis, Nathan E., Chunghyeon Seo, and Bitna Kim. 2019. “Revisiting the Empirical Status of Social Learning Theory on Substance Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Substance Use & Misuse, 55 (4): 1–18.
Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services. n.d.
Nicholson, Jackson and Higgins George. 2017. “Social Structure Social Learning Theory: Preventing Crime and Violence.” Advances in Prevention Science, 20-56.
Roberson, Cliff and Elena Azaola. 2021. Juvenile Delinquency: Why Do Youths Commit Crime. London: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Shoemaker, David. 2017. Juvenile Delinquency. London: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Williams, Frank P. III and Marilyn D. McShane. 2018. Criminological Theory. 7th ed. New York: Pearson.
Youth. n.d. “Juvenile Justice.”