CCJ 6619: Crime and the Life-Course Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law University of Florida Fall 2013
Professor: Chris L. Gibson, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Criminology & Research Foundation Professor Office: Turlington Hall 3330 Office Hours: Tuesday 9:00am-11:00am Email: [email protected] Time: Wednesday, 1:55pm- 4:55pm Room: Matherly 0119
Course Description
A life course perspective of human development for understanding behavioral continuity and change has become an important framework for studying criminal behavior. It has been applied to the study of criminal and antisocial behavior for the past 30 years. In this course, we will first explore the historical roots of the life course perspective that include theoretical works in sociology and developmental psychology, as well as research on career criminals and criminal careers. Second, we will focus on the collection of longitudinal panel data and the development of appropriate statistical methods for analyzing longitudinal data. Third, we will examine the relevant theory and research on various developmental stages pertaining to the outcomes of crime and antisocial behavior. The course concludes by examining how the life course perspective can inform intervention, prevention, and policy to reduce antisocial behavior.
No Required Textbooks
Required readings for this course are posted as pdf files on e-Learning.
Assignments
Reaction Papers:
Four times through out the semester students will be required to type a 2-page paper that provides their own reaction to the assigned weekly readings. I DO NOT want students to simply summarize or regurgitate what the readings state. These assignments are designed for students to think critically about theory and research. Please do not take these assignments lightly, as they will be an important part of your final grade. Remember, I can summarize the articles myself and I already know the arguments made in the articles/book chapters, so give me something more than what I already know. REACTION PAPERS MUST BE EMAILED TO ME 24 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF OUR WEEKLY CLASS SESSION. IF YOU FAIL TO DO YOU WILL BE ASSIGNED A ZERO FOR THE ASSIGNMENT.
Leading and Participating in Discussions:
I expect students to play an important role in leading and participating in scholarly discourse. Students will be matched with one or two peers and will lead discussions. Leading discussion requires the discussant to identify major points in the readings and develop questions around those points. Below are a few suggestions:
1. You are NOT lecturing, but rather leading a discussion. Leading discussion is not a test of your knowledge and you do not need to know the answers to questions you ask.
2. Read critically and make sure you try to bring out major themes in the readings. You should decide for yourself what you think is important from the readings
3. Before class prepare a list of questions that will help bring out important themes and major points from the assigned readings
4. Try to ask questions that require more complex answers that will lead to more discussion rather than asking questions that may have only one correct answer.
5. If conflicting views or controversy emerges don’t try to smooth over it! Ask the students (or professors!) to define their positions and leave time for rebuttal. Also, don’t feel as if you must resolve the controversy, instead try have those with opposing positions achieve clarity of points they are making.
6. If you are not leading the discussion, then you are responsible for actively participating in the discussion.
7. Don’t panic! A discussion is an exchange of ideas!
Mid-Term Exam:
Your mid-term exam will mimic a comprehensive exam question. Students will be asked to answer a question that requires them to show mastery of theory and research covered up to the point of the mid-term exam. The answer will be a 10 page double spaced essay (excluding citations). I will allow 3 days to complete the essay. This means that you must have a very good understanding of the material covered during the first half of the semester when you sit to write this mid-term, and you must be very organized. We will discuss the structure for the mid-term at a later date.
Examples of two questions that have been used on the Tool Comprehensive Exam can be found below (the mid-term question will be an original question that I create from the readings you have had for this course up to the point of the mid term):
1. Most theories of crime have not incorporated biological explanations into their primary set of propositions. In turn, biosocial research has been criticized for being a perspective and not a theory. To be sure, we now have compelling evidence that genetics exert a non-trivial influence on criminal behavior. With this in mind, please address the following: a. Choose and discuss one criminological theory that is a candidate for incorporating findings from genetic research and why you think this to be the case (cite relevant studies). b. Provide a review of the genetic studies (molecular and behavior genetic studies) related to the particular theory you identify and why the genetic studies would be relevant. c. Develop and discuss three genetically informed propositions that could be incorporated into the identified theory that would result in testable hypotheses.
2. Research results function to inform criminological theory. Results may be particularly important in continuing to entertain a theory, in suggesting we should no longer pursue a theory, or in suggesting ways to modify the theory. a. Please identify three research results dating back to no earlier than 1993 that are especially important to our theoretical understanding of crime (make sure to cite relevant studies). b. Describe the research that produced each of these results and provide a thorough exposition of the results (make sure to cite relevant studies). c. Then discuss why these results are especially important in terms of what they should suggest for the theory(ies) and what the actual consequences of the reporting of those results were for theory development (make sure to cite relevant studies).
Grant Proposal or Quantitative Research Paper:
Students are required to write a grant proposal that centers on a life-course criminology research question(s) or an empirical research paper that includes an original quantitative analysis to address a research question related to life course criminology.
Students choosing to write a research proposal will follow guideline provided for the National Institute of Justice graduate dissertation fellowship. Below you can find links to the Request for Proposals (RFP), which will clarify guidelines, criteria, etc. I will provide students with example proposals.
Importantly, I must approve proposal ideas and research question before students begin their projects.
Proposal or paper topics should be identified and a statement of the research question along with a problem statement must be sent to me via email by week 5. THIS IS NOT OPTIONAL.
National Institute of Justice http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/sl000836.pdf
Below are the criteria in which your proposal will be graded and evaluated:
Understanding of the problem and its importance 1. Clarity of problem statement. 2. Awareness of relevant research. 3. Connection between proposed research and problem. Quality and technical merit 1. Awareness of the state of current research or technology. 2. Soundness of methodology and analytic and technical approach. 3. Feasibility of proposed project and awareness of pitfalls. 4. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate). Impact of the proposed project 1. Potential for significant advances in scientific or technical understanding of problem. 2. Potential for significant advances in the field. 3. Relevance for improving the policy and practice of criminal justice and related agencies and improving public safety, security, and quality of life.
Grading
Four Weekly Reaction Papers: 100 points (25 per paper) Leading /Participating in Discussion: 100 points Mid-Term Comp Essay: 200 points Proposal: 600 points ______1000 points Grading Scale
A 100- 92 (1000 to 915 points) A - 91-90 (914 to 895 points) B + 89-88 (894 to 875 points) B 87-82 (874 to 815 points) B - 81-80 (814 to 795 points) C + 79-78 (794 to 775 points) C 77-72 (774 to 715 points) C- 71-70 (714 to 695 points) D + 69-68 (694 to 675 points) D 67-62 ( 674 to 615 points) D - 61-60 (614 to 595 points) F 59 or below (594 and below)
Tentative Course Outline
Week # 1 (Aug. 24) Introduction to life course criminology
Week # 2 (Aug. 31) Why should a life-course perspective be used to understand human behavior?
Required Readings: Benson, M.L. (2013). Chapter 1: An Overview of Life Course. Crime and the life course: An introduction. Pp: 1-18.
Cullen, F. (2011). Beyond Adolescence-Limited Criminology: Choosing Our Future-The American Society of Criminology 2010 Sutherland Address. Criminology, 49: 287-330.
Elder, GH. (1998). "The Life Course as Developmental Theory." Child Development. 69:1-12.
Elder, G.H. (1975). "Age Differentiation and the Life Course." Annual Review of Sociology 1:165-190.
Week # 3 (Sept. 7) Research that set the stage for life-course criminology?
Required Readings: Blumstein, A., Cohen, J. & Farrington, D.P. (1988). "Criminal Career Research: Its Value for Criminology." Criminology 26:1-35.
Blumstein, Alfred, Cohen, J. & Farrington, D.P. (1988). "Longitudinal and Criminal Career Research: Further Clarifications." Criminology 26:57-74.
Gottfredson, M. & Hirschi, T. (1988). "Science, Public Policy, and the Career Paradigm." Criminology 26:37-55.
Piquero A.R., Farrington, D.P. & Blumstein, A. (2003). The criminal career paradigm. In M. Tonry (Ed.). Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 30, pp. 359-506). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Loeber, R. (2013). Does the Age-Crime Curve have a future. In R. Loeber and B. Welsh (eds). The Future of Criminology. Oxford University Press.
Week # 4 (Sept. 14) Exploring continuity and change in antisocial behavior
Required Readings: Le Blanc, M. and Rolf Loeber (1998). Developmental criminology updated. In M. Tonry (Ed.). Crime and justice: A review of research . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nagin, D. & Paternoster, R. (2000). “Population heterogeneity and state dependence: state of the evidence and directions for future research.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 16:117–144
Wright, J. Beaver, K. and Gibson, C. (2010). “Behavioral Stability as an Emergent Process: Toward a Coherence Theory of Concentrated Personal Disadvantage.” Journal of Youth and Adolescences
Loeber, R. (1982). “The Stability of Antisocial and Delinquent Child Behavior: A Review.” Child Development 53: 1431-1446.
Horney, Julie, D. Wayne Osgood, and Ineke Haen Marshall, “Criminal Careers in the Short- Term: Intra-Individual Variability in Crime and its Relation to Local Life Circumstances,” American Sociological Review, 1995, 60, 655-673.
Blokland A, Nagin DS, Nieuwbeerta P. Life span offending trajectories of a Dutch conviction cohort. Criminology. 2005;43:919–954
Week # 5 (Sept. 21) Moffitt’s Dual Taxonomy / Sampson and Laub’s-Age Graded Theory
Required Reading: Moffitt, T.E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life course persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100: 674-701.
Moffitt, T. (2003). “Life-Course-Persistent and Adolescence-Limited Antisocial Behavior: A 10 Year Research Review and a Research Agenda” in Lahey, Moffitt, & Caspi. “Causes of Conduct Disorder and Juvenile Delinquency. ”New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Laub, J., and R. Sampson (1993). Turning points in the life course: why change matters in the study of crime. Criminology, 31: 301-325.
Sampson, R. and J. Laub (2005). A life-course-view of the development of crime. ANNAL AAPSS, 602: 12-45.
Week # 6 (Sept. 28) Life-Course Research Methods I: Basics of Longitudinal Data and Research
Required Reading:
TBA
Week # 7 (Oct. 5) Life-Course Research Methods !!: Group Based Trajectory Analysis
Required Reading:
Nagin, D.S..2010. “Group-Based Trajectory Modeling: An Overview,” In Piquero, A. R. and D.Weisburd,( eds.) Handbook of Quantitative Criminology. New York, New York: Springer:
Nagin, D., and C. Odgers (2010). Group-based trajectory modeling (Nearly) two decades later. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26: 445-453.
Skardhamar, TorbjØrn. (2010). Distinguishing facts and artifacts in group-based modeling. Criminology 48: 295-320.
Special Issue: Developmental Criminology and Its Discontents: Trajectories of Crime from Childhood to Old Age (Section 2, pp. 82-154). The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Week # 8 (Oct. 12) Life Course Research Methods III: Individual Growth Curve Analysis
Required Readings:
TBA
Week # 9 (Oct. 19) Introduction to Biosocial Research and Pre/Perinatal Insults
Required Readings: Udry, J. R. (1995). Sociology and biology: What biology do sociologists need to know? Social Forces 73:1267-1278.
Wright, John P., and Danielle Boisvert. (2009). What biosocial criminology offers criminology. Criminal Justice and Behavior 36: 1228-40.
Glover, V (2011). Annual research review: Prenatal stress and the origins of psychopathology: An evolutionary perspective. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52: 356-367.
Gibson, C., A. Piquero, and S. Tibbetts (2000). Assessing the relationship between maternal cigarette smoking during pregnancy and age at first police contact. Justice Quarterly, 17: 519-542.
Wright et al. (2008). “Association of Prenatal and Childhood Blood Lead Concentrations with Criminal Arrests in early Adulthood.” PLoS Medicine 5: 0732-0740.
Week # 10 (Oct. 26) Behavioral and Molecular Genetics: How do genes help us understand environmental Influence on Behavior?
Readings: Rowe, David C., and D. Wayne Osgood. (1984). Heredity and sociological theories of delinquency: A reconsideration. American Sociological Review 49:526-40.
Turkheimer, Eric. (2000). Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean. Current Directions in Psychological Science 9: 160-64.
Scarr, Sandra, and Kathleen McCartney. (1983). How people make their own environments: A theory of genotype ! environment effects. Child Development 54:424-435.
Beaver (2009). Introduction to Genetics. Biosocial Criminology: A Primer. Pp 51-68. Belsky, J. & Pluess, M. (2009). Beyond Diathesis-Stress: Differential Susceptibility to Environmental Influences. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 885-908.
Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J., Craig, I. W., Taylor, A., and Poulton, R. (2002). Role of Genotype in the Cycle of Violence in Maltreated Children. Science 297:851- 854.
Week # 11 (Nov. 2) Are individual differences in early childhood irrelevant?
Required Readings:
Tremblay, R. (2003). Why Socialization Fails: The Case of Chronic Physical Aggression. In Causes of Conduct Disorder and Juvenile Delinquency. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Broidy LM, Nagin D, Tremblay RE, Brame B, Dodge K, Fergusson D, Horwood J, Loeber R, Laird R, Lynam D, Moffitt T, Bates JE, Pettit GS, Vitaro F. Developmental trajectories of childhood disruptive behaviors and adolescent delinquency: a six site, cross national study. Developmental Psychology, 2003, 39:222–245.
Hay, Carter and Walter Forrest (2006). “The Development of Self-Control: Examining Self Control Theory’s Stability Thesis.” Criminology 44:739-774.
Mishcel, W. et al. (1989). Delay of gratification in children, Science, 244, 933-938.
Casey, B., J. et al. (2011). Behavioral and neural correlates of delay of gratification 40 years later. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences, 108; 14998-15003.
Moffitt et al. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts, health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 1-6..
Week # 12 (Nov. 9) Emerging Adolescents: Socialization and Emerging Adolescence: How and When Do Parents and Peers matter?
Required Readings:
Thornberry, T.P. and M.D. Krohn 2005 “Applying Interactional Theory to the explanation of continuity and change in antisocial behavior.” Pp 183-209 in David Farrington (ed.) Integrated Developmental & Life-Course Theories of Offending. Advances in Criminological Theory (vol 14). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.
Simons, R.I. Wu, C., Conger, R.D. and Lorenz, F. O. (1994). Two routes to delinquency: Differences between early and late starters in the impact of parenting and deviant peers. Criminology 32: 247-275.
Warr, M. (2002). Chapters 2 and 3. Companions in crime: The social aspects of criminal conduct. Cambridge University Press.
Turkheimer, Eric and Mary Waldron. 2000. Nonshared environment: A theoretical, methodological, and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin 126:78-108.
Harris, J.R. (1995). Where is the child’s environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychological Review, 102: 458-489.
Plomin, R. (2011). Commentary: Why are children in the same family so different? Non- shared environment three decades later. International Journal of Epidemiology, 40: 582- 592.
Week # 13 (Nov. 16) ASC MEETINGS (NO CLASS) Possibly reschedule
Week # 14 (Nov. 23) THANKSGIVING (NO CLASS) Possibly reschedule
Week # 15 (Nov. 30) Transitioning to Adulthood and Desistance
Required Readings:
Krohn, M., Gibson, C., and T. Thornberry. (2013). “Under the protective bud the bloom awaits: A review of theory and research on adult onset and late blooming offenders.” In C. Gibson and M. Krohn (eds.). Handbook of Life-Course Criminology. Springer Verlag. New York.
Lopes, G., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A.J., Vásquez, B. E., Schmidt, N., M., Bernburg, J. G. "Labeling and Cumulative Disadvantage: The Impact of Official Intervention on Life Chances and Crime in Emerging Adulthood."
Uggen, C. (2000). Work as a turning point in the life course of criminals: A duration model of age, employment, and recidivism. American Sociological Review, 67: 529-564.
Laub, J.H., & Sampson R. (2001). "Understanding Desistance from Crime.” Pp. 1-69 in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (Volume 28), edited by Michael Tonry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Warr, Mark (1998). “Life Course Transitions and the Desistance from Crime.” Criminology, 36:183-216.
Sampson, R. and John Laub (2003). Life Course Desisters? Trajectories of Crime among Delinquent Boys. Criminology, 41: 301-340.
Week # 16 (Dec. 7) Should a life-course perspective be used for Intervention and Prevention?
Required Readings:
Piquero, A. R., Farrington, D. P., Welsh, B. C., Tremblay, R., & Jennings, W. (2009). Effects of early family/parent training programs on antisocial behavior and delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 5, 83–120.
Olds, D. et al. (1998). Long-term effects of nurse home visitation on children’s criminal and antisocial behavior.
Fagan, A., and Hawkins D. (2013). “Preventing substance use, delinquency and other problem behaviors over the life course using the Communities that Cares System.” In C. Gibson and M. Krohn (eds). Handbook of Life-Course Criminology. Springer Verlag. New York.
Farrington, D., Loeber, R, and Howell, B. (2012). Young Adult Offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 11, 429-450.
Gibson, Chris L., and Marvin M. Krohn. (2012). “Raising the age: Issues in emerging adulthood and adult court referral of youthful offenders.” Criminology and Public Policy, 11, 759-768.
Mears, D., et al. (2013). Life-course perspectives and prisoner re-entry. In C. Gibson and M. Krohn (eds). Handbook of Life-Course Criminology. Springer Verlag. New York.
______FINAL PROPOSAL OR PAPER DUE DATE: December 8th by 5pm (MUST EMAIL COPY OF PROPOSAL to [email protected])