The Role of Violence Within and Across Self-Identified Gang Outhy

University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Dissertations UMSL Graduate Works 12-11-2014 The Role of Violence within and across Self-identified Gang outhY J. Michael Vecchio University of Missouri-St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://irl.umsl.edu/dissertation Part of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Vecchio, J. Michael, "The Role of Violence within and across Self-identified Gang outhY " (2014). Dissertations. 8. https://irl.umsl.edu/dissertation/8 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the UMSL Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Role of Violence within and across Self-identified Gang Youth J. Michael Vecchio M.S.C.J., Criminal Justice, Bowling Green State University, 2008 B.S.C.J., Criminal Justice, Bowling Green State University, 2007 A Dissertation submitted to The Graduate School at the University of Missouri-St. Louis for the partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Criminology and Criminal Justice December 2014 Advisory Committee Finn-Aage Esbensen, Ph.D. Chairperson Beth M. Huebner, Ph.D. Terrance J. Taylor, Ph.D. Jody Miller, Ph.D. Dena C. Carson, Ph.D. Copyright, J. Michael Vecchio, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Disclaimer vii Acknowledgements viii Abstract xii Chapter One: Introduction 1 Chapter Two: Relevant Literature 8 Prevalence of Gang Membership 8 Defining Gang Membership 12 The Gang Experience 16 Pathways into Gangs 17 The Period of Active Membership 20 Pathways Out of Gangs 23 Chapter Three: Theoretical Framework 28 Models of Gang Membership 28 Social Learning Theory 31 The Current Study 38 Chapter Four: Methodology 45 The National Evaluation of the G.R.E.A.T. Program 45 A Multi-method, Multi-site Study of Gang Desistance 49 The Dissertation: Site Selection, Sources of Data, and Analytic Strategy 58 Nashville Site and Youth Characteristics 59 Gang Status Classifications 61 The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site and Youth Characteristics 63 Gang Status Classifications 65 Sources of Data and Analytic Strategy 66 The Prevalence and Patterns of Violence 73 The Nashville Site 74 Youth with Experienced Violence 74 Youth without Violence 77 The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site 79 Youth with Experienced Violence 79 Youth without Violence 82 Conclusions 88 Chapter Five: Violence in the Neighborhood Domain 90 The Nashville Site 91 Violence in Neighborhood Parks 101 i Chapter Five: Violence in the Neighborhood Domain (cont.) The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site 103 Violence in Neighborhood Parks 117 Conclusions 119 Chapter Six: Violence in the School Domain 122 Violence in Middle School 124 The Nashville Site 124 The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site 129 Violence in High School 135 The Nashville Site 135 The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site 146 Conclusions 155 Chapter Seven: Violence in the Peer Domain 160 Inter-group Peer Violence 162 The Nashville Site 162 The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site 170 Intra-group Peer Violence 183 The Nashville Site 183 The Dallas-Fort Worth Area Community Site 189 Conclusions 202 Chapter Eight: The Role of Violence with the Gang Tenure 208 Violence around the Formation of Gang Ties 209 Violence during the Period of Gang Involvement 216 Joining and Affiliation 216 Active Gang Involvement 226 The Role of Protection 227 The Role of Inter-group Violence 231 The Role of Intra-group Violence 239 Violence during the Period of Gang Disassociation 247 Motivations for Gang Group Leaving 249 Methods of Gang Group Leaving 258 Consequences of Gang Group Leaving 265 Conclusions 272 Chapter Nine: Discussion of the Role of Violence 273 Summary of Findings 274 The Role of Violence within the Gang Tenure 276 The Role of Violence across the Gang Tenure 281 Summary of Contribution 290 Policy Implications 292 Primary Prevention 292 Social Intervention 295 Limitations and Directions for Future Research 297 ii References 300 Appendix A: Study of Youth Peer Groups: Youth Interview Guide 313 Appendix B: Youth Survey Questionnaire: Relevant Questions 320 iii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 1: Typology of Self-Identified Former Gang Members 15 Table 1: Prevalence of Gang and Eurogang Youth by City 50 Table 2: Breakdown of Data Collection Outcomes for Total Selection Sample 57 Table 3: Gang Member Type for the Interviewed Sample 57 Table 4: Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics, Nashville 59 Table 5: Characteristics of Self-Reported Gang Youth, Nashville 60 Table 6: Characteristics of Interviewed Youth, Nashville 61 Table 7: Gang Status Classifications, Gang Desistance Study 62 Table 8: Gang Status Classifications – Prospective vs. Retrospective, Nashville 63 Table 9: Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics, DFW Community 63 Table 10: Characteristics of Self-Reported Gang Youth, DFW Community 64 Table 11: Characteristics of Interviewed Youth, DFW Community 65 Table 12: Gang Status Classifications – Prospective vs. Retrospective, DFW Community 66 Table 13: Scale Measures for Youth in Nashville and DFW Community 70 Table 14: Experienced Violence, Nashville 74 Table 15: Domains of Experienced Violence, Nashville 75 Table 16: Frequency of Domains of Experienced Violence, Nashville 75 Table 17: Demographics of Youth without Violence, Nashville 78 iv Table 18: Experienced Violence, DFW Community 80 Table 19: Domains of Experienced Violence, DFW Community 80 Table 20: Frequency of Domains of Experienced Violence, DFW Community 81 Table 21: Demographics of Youth with Violence in the Neighborhood, Nashville 91 Table 22: Violence in the Neighborhood Domain, Nashville 91 Table 23: Violence in the Neighborhood Domain – Parks, Nashville 101 Table 24: Demographics of Youth with Violence in the Neighborhood, DFW Community 103 Table 25: Violence in the Neighborhood Domain, DFW Community 103 Table 26: Demographics of Youth with Violence in the School, Nashville 122 Table 27: Demographics of Youth with Violence in the School, DFW Community 123 Table 28: Violence in the School Domain – Middle School, Nashville 124 Table 29: Violence in the School Domain – Middle School, DFW Community 129 Table 30: Violence in the School Domain – High School, Nashville 136 Table 31: Violence in the School Domain – High School, DFW Community 147 Table 32: Demographics of Youth with Violence in the Peer Domain, Nashville 160 Table 33: Demographics of Youth with Violence in the Peer Domain, DFW Community 161 v Table 34: Violence in the Peer Domain – Inter-group, Nashville 162 Table 35: Violence in the Peer Domain – Inter-group by Sex, Nashville 169 Table 36: Violence in the Peer Domain – Inter-group, DFW Community 171 Table 37: Violence in the Peer Domain – Inter-group by Sex, DFW Community 182 Table 38: Violence in the Peer Domain – Intra-group, Nashville 183 Table 39: Violence in the Peer Domain – Intra-group, DFW Community 190 Table 40: Violence in the Peer Domain – Intra-group by Sex, Nashville 205 Table 41: Violence in the Peer Domain – Intra-group by Sex, DFW Community 206 Table 42: Demographics of Youth with Violence during Gang Involvement 226 Table 43: Violence and Disillusionment-oriented Motivations for Gang Leaving 248 vi DISCLAIMER This project was made possible, in part, by the support and participation of seven school districts, including the School District of Philadelphia. The project was supported by Award No. 2006-JV-FX-0011 and 2011-MU-MU-0027 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, and U. S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U. S. Department of Justice. vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Throughout my collegiate tenure I have been fortunate to have drawn support and encouragement from a number of incalculably wise and selfless individuals. This dissertation would not have been possible without the patience and guidance of my committee: Finn, Beth, T.J., Jody, and Dena. First and foremost, both this work and this degree would not have been possible without my mentor. Finn – I thank you for your willingness to make each day in the office an opportunity to better understand the nuances of our field and academia. You have provided me with opportunities to see the world and indulged my consuming obsession with the Desistance Study narratives. Most importantly, you have my deepest and most sincere gratitude for your staggering patience both in my development as a criminologist, methodologist, academic, and a man. Jody – you have been an invaluable source of inspiration and knowledge in my leap into to the qualitative method. Your dedication to teaching the approach through a hands-on research project not only afforded me the opportunity to be published, but gave me the confidence to embrace the challenges presented in Desistance Study. T.J. – had it not been for our hour-long phone conversation in April 2008 (Alaina remembers this too), I may not have come to UMSL. I thank you not only for that initial moment, but for your friendship forged over long drives to Chicago and for throwing me a line in some of my darkest hours of graduate school. Last but not least, Beth – thank you not only for your guidance on this manuscript, but for your ability to inspire confidence in those around you through your radiant positivity. Apart from my committee, I would like to thank the many other academics who I have been fortunate to have been influenced by. Dana Peterson – it was tremendously viii gratifying to work with someone who shared my excitement in attaining the lowest possible attrition rate in all those SDP schools. Chris Melde and (the) Bradley T. Brick – thank you both for your camaraderie and guidance. To my former faculty at BGSU – Melissa Burek, Michael Buerger, Bill King, John Liederbach, and Steve Lab, thank you all for helping me get to where I am today and for your continued investment in my success.

Load more