© 2013 JARED SCOTT ROSENBERGER ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CRIME, MEDIA, AND THE AMERICAN DREAM: THE ROLE OF MEDIA CONSUMPTION IN INSTITUTIONAL ANOMIE THEORY A Dissertation Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Jared S. Rosenberger May, 2013 CRIME, MEDIA, AND THE AMERICAN DREAM: THE ROLE OF MEDIA CONSUMPTION IN INSTITUTIONAL ANOMIE THEORY Jared Scott Rosenberger Dissertation Approved: Accepted: _______________________________ _______________________________ Advisor Department Chair Dr. Valerie J. Callanan Dr. Matthew T. Lee _______________________________ _______________________________ Committee Member Dean of the College Dr. Matthew T. Lee Dr. Chand Midha _______________________________ _______________________________ Committee Member Dean of the Graduate School Dr. Stacey Nofziger Dr. George R. Newkome _______________________________ _______________________________ Committee Member Date Dr. Richard Rosenfeld _______________________________ Committee Member Dr. Richard E. Adams _______________________________ Committee Member Dr. William T. Lyons Jr. ii ABSTRACT Messner and Rosenfeld’s Institutional Anomie Theory (IAT) is based on the assumption that the “American Dream” produces a society that is obsessed with the pursuit of success and dominated by the economy. Thus, crime is prevalent in the United States because individuals are willing to cut corners in order to attain the “dream” for themselves. This dissertation expands the work of Messner and Rosenfeld (1994), contending that the “American Dream” is transmitted directly to citizens through the consumption of media representations, using over 6000 cases from the public use portion of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (ADD Health). A series of logistic regressions were conducted to determine the influence of television consumption on committing multiple forms of serious criminal behavior. As hypothesized, television consumption directly increases the odds of committing three types of serious criminal behavior (economic based, violent, and general). In addition, the results suggest that compared to light television consumers, heavy consumers are less influenced by crime-curbing noneconomic institutions like education and the family. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………….xv LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………..xvi CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………….…..1 II. INSTITUTIONAL ANOMIE THEORY…......…………………………………...…..8 The Development of Institutional Anomie Theory…………….……………….....8 Empirical Tests of IAT……………………………………………………....…..15 The institutional dynamics of IAT……..…………………..……….……16 The cultural dynamics of IAT………...………………………….………21 IAT at the individual level.……………...………………………..…..….24 Critiques, limitation, and unanswered questions.…..…….….……..…....26 III. MEDIA, CRIME, AND THE “AMERICAN DREAM”………………….………...30 The Transmission of the “American Dream”……….……………………..….....30 Cultivation Theory.………………………………………………………32 Media representations and the “American Dream”..……………..…...…36 Contribution to IAT and hypotheses...…………………………….…......41 IV. DATA AND METHODS……………………………………………………….…..45 The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health……………….……......45 Dependent variables………………………….………………….….........48 iv Independent variables..……………………………………..………........50 Institutional variables………………………………………...….….........51 Media variable…………………………….…………………….…....….53 Criminal predisposition………..……………………..…………....……..54 Control variables………..………………………….....…………...……..55 Analytical Plan………………………………………….…………..…………....55 Mediation and moderation…………………………………………….…58 Summary…………………………………………………..………...…...59 V. ANALSIS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………..……61 Descriptive and Bivariate Results………………………………………………..61 Media Effects Models………………………………………………....…...…….67 Media effects models: discussion……………...…...…….……....…...…74 Moderating Effects Models……..………………………..………....….…….….81 Comparison of Coefficients Test..…………..………..………………….87 Moderating effects models: discussion.…….………...………………….88 Summary of Hypotheses…………………………..……………………………..93 VI. CONCLUSION………………………………………………...……………………96 Summary of Findings…………………………...………………………………..98 Media effects…………………………………………………...…..…….99 Moderating effects………..……...………………...………………...…100 Limitations……………..…………………………………..………...……....…102 Future Research……………….…………………..…………………………....105 Implications for the Field of Criminology…..…………….………...………….107 v Summary……………………………………..…………………..………….….108 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………110 APPENDICES………..………………………………………………….…….……….118 APPENDIX A: DATA SOURCES…………..…………………..………….….119 APPENDIX B: MEASURMENT..…………..…………………..………….….120 APPENDIX C: MEASURMENT.. ……….....…………………..………….….121 APPENDIX D: MEASURMENT.. ……….....…………………..………….….122 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Descriptive Characteristics of the Sample…………………………………….………63 2 Pearson Correlations…………………………..………………..………….…….……66 3 Odds Ratios of the Influence of Television on Committing Crimes of Economic Attainment ……………………….……………..…..…….69 4 Odds Ratios of the Influence of Television on Committing Violent Crimes ………………………………..……………………….…..…….71 5 Odds Ratios of the Influence of Television on Committing General Criminal Behavior ……………………..…………………….…...…….73 6 Odds Ratios of the Influence of Institutional Factors on Committing Crimes of Economic Attainment by Levels of Television Consumption..…...….82 7 Odds Ratios of the Influence of Institutional Factors on Committing Crimes of Violence by Levels of Television Consumption.....…………….…….84 8 Odds Ratios of the Influence of Institutional Factors on Committing General Criminal Behavior by Levels of Television Consumption .……...….….86 9 Tests for Equality of the Influence of Institutional Factors on Criminal Behavior across High and Low Television Consumption ....……..……….…….87 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1.1 Analytical Model of Social Organization and Crime in IAT……....……………….11 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION America incarcerates more of its populace than any other nation in the world. Over 2.2 million citizens are currently behind bars, with an additional 1 in every 100 citizens under supervision by state, federal, and local correctional authorities (Bureau of Justice Statistics 2010). While much of the high incarceration rate can be explained by the United States’ sentencing laws (Tonry 1999), rates of murder, rape, and other violent crimes are consistently amongst the highest when compared to other industrialized nations (Interpol 2007). In 2009, the United States had a murder rate of 5.1 per 100,000 (Federal Bureau of Investigation 2009), which was highest amongst comparable post- industrial nations, despite being the lowest in recent U.S. history (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2011). The high rates of crime and violence even hold true when compared to countries with far less affluence than that of the United States, even in places with much political and social unrest. For example, in a survey of 73 countries with comparable crime data collected by the United Nations, the United States had the 10th highest mean robbery rate (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2002). One would expect the world’s wealthiest nation, which has enjoyed long periods of political and economic stability, to have much lower levels of violent or property crime. It seems that there is something different about American culture, something that influences individuals to turn to serious and violent crime far more often than in other countries. 1 As one of the first attempts to address the question of why certain nations or societies have high rates of crime, Robert Merton (1938) used insights from Durkheim, coupled with observations about cultural goals, to formulate the anomie theory of crime. Merton proposed that the cause of national-level differences in crime is the result of an imbalance between cultural goals and the institutional means for attaining them. He argued that societies become preoccupied with their culturally prescribed goals, while the institutionally acceptable means of attaining those goals hold little value. In America, cultural goals surround one primary mode of success: the pursuit of money. It is argued that the goal of economic attainment seems to trump all other measures of success (Schoepfer and Piquero 2006) so that the goods associated with economic success have become the markers of happiness. The means to attain these goals seem to be of little concern, an idea that is highlighted by the high rates of corporate and property crime observed in the United States (Messner and Rosenfeld 2001). For Merton, the emphasis put on the goal of financial success in the United States leads to a separation from the norms and values associated with pursuing these goals. Thus, America is highly anomic as individuals find themselves in a state of normlessness. To demonstrate how a culture can become preoccupied with cultural goals while being unconcerned with the institutionally appropriate means of attaining these goals, Merton (1938) uses the example of sports. In competitive sports the goal of winning often outweighs the importance of how winning is achieved. There are multiple examples in the sporting world where coaches, players, and owners cut corners in order to win at their particular sport. Perhaps no example is more famous than that of Major League Baseball’s Gaylord Perry; a successful baseball player who stopped halfway 2 through