Journal of Criminal Law and CriminologyVolume 53Issue 1 March Article 1

Spring 1962

Psychological Theory, Research, and JuvenileDelinquencyJohn W. McDavid

Boyd R. McCandless

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclcPart of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal

Justice Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted forinclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons.

Recommended CitationJohn W. McDavid, Boyd R. McCandless, Psychological Theory, Research, and Juvenile Delinquency, 53 J. Crim. L. Criminology &Police Sci. 1 (1962)

The Journal of

CRIMINAL LAW, CRIMINOLOGY, AND POLICE SCIENCE

VOL 53 MARCH 1962 NO. 1

PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY, RESEARCII, AND JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

JOHN W. MCDAVID AND BOYD R. MCCANDLESS

John W. McDa-dd is Assistant Professor of Psychology in the University of Miami, Florida. Hewas formerly Assistant Professor of Child Psychology at the Iowa Child Welfare Research Stationand has pursued extensive programs of research relating to juvenile delinquency in training schoolsin New Jersey, New York, and Iowa. Professor Boyd R. McCandless is Director of the Iowa ChildWelfare Research Station. He is currently on leave from that post to serve as educational consultantin a cultural exchange program in Pakistan. Professor McCandless formerly served on the facultiesof the State University of Iowa, San Francisco State College, Ohio State University, University ofCalifornia at Los Angeles, University of Colorado, University of Southern California, and Universityof Hawaii. In addition, he has served as consultant and psychologist to various elementary andsecondary schools in California, Hawaii, Missouri, and Ohio.

As the authors state in their introduction, "child psychologists, concerned as they are with thestudy of normal human behavior and development during childhood and adolescence, are in a par-ticularly appropriate position to contribute" to the understanding, control, and therapy of adolescentdelinquent behavior. What contributions have psychologists actually made to this end? Where havethey failed? And what is the prospect for future, important contributions? In this paper, the authorsconsider these questions, pointing to the paths of study which they feel offer the greatest promisefor the accumulation of reliable scientific evidence concerning the etiology of delinquency.

The authors prepared this article at the special request of the Board of Editors in commemorationof the journal's fifty years of publication.-EnrroL

It is doubtful if juvenile delinquency has everbefore received the thunderous attention it is nowgetting. Frona sources ranging from pulpits to"slick" magazines come opinions, exhortations,and counsel, but less frequently simple presenta-tions of the facts on the issue. Professional peopleare subject to great (but justifiable) pressure todo research in both the etiology and therapy ofjuvenile criminality, and the number of man-hours invested in such research has increased inresponse to these demands. Unfortunately, how-ever, it does not follow that the quality of theproduct parallels the quantity. An honest andself-critical examination of the net result of thesemany research efforts leaves the evaluator dis-appointed. The bulk of research in" juvenile de-linquency treats at a superficial level what manyalready knew or suspected. Critical questions, suchas those about the developmental processes thatresult in delinquency, the "triggering" of a givendelinquent act, the mediation of social forces sothat the result is delinquent behavior, have notonly been unanswered, but rarely even asked.

As a social problem, crime logically and neces-sarily comes to the attention of several professional

fields. It may be approached from a legal point ofview, a religious or ethical point of view, a soci-ological point of view, or a psychological pointof view. Such differing approaches to the study ofdelinquency -and crime are not independent, butclosely interrelated. It is the psychological ap-proach to the study of juvenile delinquency whichis to be examined here. Such an approach bothappropriates from and contributes to other ap-proaches to criminality.

Like law, religion, and sociology, psychology isinterested in the operation of social systems amonghuman beings. Like religion, more than likesociology or law, psychology is essentially con-cerned with the individual himself and is ad-dressed centrally to the processes within andaround the individual which give rise to specificforms of behavior. Criminal behavior is assumedto be but one abstracted segment of all humanbehavior, and it is assumed that scientific prin-ciples which govern human behavior in generalalso govern criminal behavior in specific. As ascientist, the contemporary psychologist holdsthat behavior is lawfully determined. In his roleas scientist (though not necessarily as a citizen),

MCDA VID & MCCANDLESS

guilt or responsibility for criminal behavior arenot, directly ascribed to the individual himself.Specification of the conditions under which anindividual may be regarded as culpable for hisbehavior constitutes a legal or philosophicalquestion rather than a scientific one. The psy-chologist accepts legal distinctions between sanityand insanity on the basis of arbitrary criteria anddefinitions; but he holds that man's behavior isshaped to a large degree by external forces, bothcontemporary and historical, over which (even asan adult) he often has no control and for whichhe may have no responsibility.

In legal history, one may trace the incorpora-tion of psychological knowledge into the law con-cerning legal culpability. In the practice of law,the ascription of the origin of criminal behaviorto forces beyond control of the individual ordi-narily constitutes limits for his legal culpabilityfor the criminal act. The House of Lords' decisionin M'Naghten's Case in 1843 established the long-standing precedent for determining legal insanityby the "knowledge of right and wrong" test.Eighty years later Clarence Darrow became apotent force in the movement for revised standardsof culpability, and his utilization of psychiatrictestimony in the Loeb-Leopold trial in 1924represents a milestone in the progressive integra-tion of psychological knowledge and law. Hisdistinction between "legal insanity" and "mentaldisease," along with his argument that both re-lieve the individual of personal -ulpability forcriminal behavior, underlies more recent judicialdecisions such as that of the District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals in Durham v. United Statesin 1954. Other courts have recognized "irresistibleimpulse" as outside the limits of legal culpability..

The twentieth century has brought aboutsignificant reform of penal practices through theamalgamation of legal and psychological ap-proaches to criminality. The Code of Hammurabistates the penalties for social transgression largelyin terms of reciprocal treatment or "getting even"with the offender, but this is gradually beingsupplanted by a philosophy of penal practicebased on efforts to rehabilitate or "repair" thefaulty make-up of the offender. Punishment comessecond to the attempt to reshape the criminal intoan acceptable and constructive member of society.

Despite a great degree of mutual dependence,legal, religious, sociological, and psychological ap-proaches to crime differ in emphasis: they use

different procedures, they have different goals, andthey emphasize different aspects of the total humanbeing. The position taken here reflects the convic-tion that scientific psychology can make valuablecontributions, both directly and through otherapproaches, to the analysis and understanding ofcriminal and delinquent behavior. Child psychblo-gists, concerned as they are with the study ofnormal human behavior and development duringchildhood and adolescence, are in a particularlyappropriate position to contribute to this endeavor.The ideas presented here derive from a self-conscious attempt to evaluate the contributions,past, present, and future, that child psychologistsmay be able to make to the study of delinquentbehavior.

PsYcnoLoGicAL RESEARCa IN

JUVENILE DELINQUENc-

A serious problem confronting anyone doing re-search on juvenile delinquency concerns the defi-nition of the term. One may be inclined to makethe naive assumption that "delinquent behavior"is readily identifiable, but this is not at all true.For example, the overt manifestations of delin-quent behavior may differ widely, even within acommon culture, as a function of social class differ-ences in the family background of the youth. The"sowing of wild oats" in the behavior of the middle-class youth may be glossed over by parents whoarrange for dismissal of court proceedings; on theother hand, the same behavior in the lower-classyouth often constitutes grounds for court actionand a police record or even a penal sentence. Thus.great differences are to be expected in the statisti-cal estimates of the incidence of delinquentbehavior as a function of social class, especiallywhen such estimates are derived from police orcourt records. The clearly recognizable "gang" ofthe lower-class delinquent may be supplanted forthe middle-class youth by a group of only one ortwo pals who meet at the local drive-in restaurantduring college vacations or after school. The middle-class delinquent often has access to an automobile,whereas the lower-class delinquent does not. Thestreet gang in New York may be supplanted bythe automobile club in Los Angeles.

Among the arbitrary criteria for defining delin-quent behavior, one commonly employed for re-search purposes is that of legal conviction andsentencing. Other researchers use the criterion ofcourt appearances or records of arrest, regardless

[Vol. 53

PSYCHOLOGY AND DELINQUENCY

of their outcome. However, because police prac-tices and court functions differ from one city toanother, or for one social class or ethnic group ascom~pared to another, such definitions sufferlimitations. Dependent and neglected children aremore likely to be booked and committed thanchildren with families intact. Such facts lead to thedemonstration of spurious relations between familystructure and delinquency or between social classand delinquency.

Other criteria for defining delinquency includethe use of judgmental ratings of behavior byteachers, social workers, or others in close contactwith adolescents. Delinquency may be defined forthe rater in a very general manner, or it may bedefined explicitly in terms of specific kinds ofbehavior such as aggression, property destruction,or dishonesty. Other researchers, instead of usingjudgmental ratings by others, may seek behavioralassessment directly from the adolescent, askinghim to describe his own behavior in terms ofsimilar dimensions. Still other research workersmay base their definition of delinquency on certainassumptions about the attitudes and values heldby the adolescent, with empirical and normativeresearch called upon to determine the nature ofattitudes and values normally held by sociallyaccepted adolescents.

All of these definitions can be useful for researchpurposes, but serious problems arise in the integra-tion of research findings from various sources. Onecannot superficially combine evidence that delin-quency (by one definition) is related, for example,to intelligence, with evidence that delinquency (bysome other definition) is related to social class,without taking careful account of each of thedefinitions employed.

In order to deal comprehensively with psycho-logical research related to juvenile delinquency, arather broad and unspecific definition of delin-quency must be adopted here. A definition ofnormalily of characteristics of personality andsocial behavior in the adolescent may be derivedfrom purely statistical normative bases. Under acultural bias defining social acceptability, then,deviation on the positive or "socially acceptable"side of this norm may be incorporated into adefinition of non-delinquency. On the other hand,adolescents whose social and personality charac-teristics deviate to a large degree from the popu-lation norm in a socially undesirable directionmay be categorically regarded as juvenile delin-

quents. While such a residual definition woulditself have limited utility for research purposes,it is sufficiently broad to include a wide range ofpsychological research activities which bear uponjuvenile delinquency.

Psychological study of juvenile delinquency isby no means new. Virtually all approaches todelinquent and criminal behavior have touchedupon psychological issues and dealt with psycho-logical variables, and there have been many directefforts to approach the problem of juvenile mis-behavior psychologically..Most of these attemptsare psychoanalytic in point of view, and typicallythey make use of the small sample case historyapproach. Freudian psychoanalytic theory pro-vided major impetus to the scientific study ofearly childhood experience as the foundation forlater behavior. This, logically enough, led to thestudy of the young child and his pre-criminal ordelinquent behavior. August Aichorn, BrunoBettelheim,'and Fritz Redl were all pioneers in thepsychoanalytic study of disturbed and delinquentchildren.

In recent years, study of normal human psycho-logical development within conceptual frameworksother than psychoanalysis has developed rapidly.While it is true that relatively little attention hasbeen directed to the study of juvenile criminalityalong these newer lines, their potential contribu-tions seem promising.

The cross-cultural method in psychological re-search has proved valuable in understanding manykinds of human social behavior, especially thosethat deviate from the norms and standards of aparticular culture. The psychologist occupies apeculiar position in science in that his "tool"for scientific study is the same as his "object" ofscientific study-the human organism. When bothscientist and object are members of a commonculture, it is often easy to take for granted certainenvironmental or social conditions as inevitable,rather than as peculiarities of that common culture.Legal systems, customs, mores, taboos, and sanc-tions may differ markedly from one culture toanother. Objective comparison of various culturalsystems, through cooperative research ventureswith sociology and anthropology, has enabled thepsychologist to understand better the role whichthese factors play in human development and be-havior. In dealing with certain problems of juve-nile delinquency, knowledge of socio-culturalsystems may prove to be of great value. For

1962]

MCDA VID & MCCANDLESS

example, the Puerto Rican population of NewYork City has produced a disproportionate num-ber of delinquent adolescents. The important roleof cultural displacement and difficulties of thePuerto Rican youth in assimilating a new cultureare often ignored in analyzing the sources of thisincreased frequency of delinquency among thePuerto Ricans.

The superficiality of much psychological researchdealing with juvenile delinquency is disheartening.While the description of delinquents and delin-quency is necessarily a first stage in analytic re-search, it appears that psychologists may havedwelled unprofitably long at this first level.Studies which report on the average age or rangeof delinquents, their areas of residence and ethniccharacteristics, their socio-economic backgrounds,whether they are first, second, or third generationcitizens, and so on, are essentially descriptive.They may be misleading in that they direct re-search attention away from analysis of the sourcesof these relationships in a causal sense. On theother hand, research studies which deal with aparticular phenomenon of behavior, such asaffectional identification with parents, suscepti-bility to group influence, response to social rein-forcement, or impulsivity in behavior, and whichattempt to analyze the developmental origins andbehavioral consequences of such phenomena maycontribute materially to scientific understanding ofthe negative abnormalities which constitutejuvenile delinquency.

The exploration of individual differences mayalso contribute significantly to the analysis ofdelinquent behavior. Under certain circumstances,analysis of individual differences between cate-gorically defined groups of human beings may pro-vide only descriptive knowledge. For example, if apopulation of institutionalized delinquents and apopulation of noninstitutionalized high schoolstudents are compared on the incidence of homesbroken by divorce or desertion, we may find thatthe delinquent population shows a significantlygreater frequency. This observed correlationbetween delinquency and broken homes does notallow us to conclude that broken homes are thecause of delinquent behavior. There is no way ofknowing, from this information, whether the rela-tion will hold up under all possible variations ofother conditions, or whether it may be due to someconnection between both delinquency and broken

homes and an unidentified third variable. On theface of it, divorce and desertion seem simple con-cepts. But in fact divorce often clarifies andreduces the tensions in the home that lead up to it.Many persons, divorced, may become more satis-factory parents to their children than they werebefore divorce. For others, divorce may lead toincreased tensions and handicapped execution ofparental junctions. Removal of one parent fromthe adolescent's home environment may eliminatenegative influences in on? case, leading to lesslikelihood of delinquency in the youth; but inanother case it may eliminate positive influences,leading to increased likelihood of delinquent be-havior. In other words, under some conditions,descriptive study of differences between popula-tions or groups may not allow the researcher to puthis finger precisely on the relevant variables. It isonly with appropriate intensive follow-up investi-gation that the study of individual differencesactually becomes a profitable avenue of research.It is this kind of follow-up which, unfortunately, isfrequently lacking in psychological research.

ASOCIAL VERSUS ANTisocrAL BEHAVIOR

A number of proposals may be advanced for im-proving and clarifying working definitions ofjuvenile delinquency for psychological researchpurposes. One advantageous step might be to drawa distinction between the inability to control orinhibit impulses toward socially unacceptable actswhich stem from relatively normal motivationalbases, and the directly abnormal motivation tocommit socially unacceptable acts. In other words,asocial behavior may be distinguished from anti-social behavior.

Asocial behavior is socially unacceptable, and itresults from a breakdown in socialization andacculturation of the individual. Accompanying thisis his consequent failure to learn or to acceptsocially defined ethical and moral principles andstandards for behavior, or to acquire normaltechniques for regulating behavior through theinhibition of socially unacceptable acts and thesubstitution of acceptable acts in their stead. Onthe other hand, antisocial behavior may be definedas directed and intentional violation of sociallydefined standards for behavior, motivated byhostility toward the social system. The psycho-analytic approach has emphasized the antisocialaspects of delinquent and criminal behavior,

[Vol. 53

PSYCHOLOGY AND DELINQUENCY

dealing with the delinquent offender as a juvenilerebel against established legal and social tradition.Asocial behavior has been but little considered as aseparate category, more usually having beenlumped together with antisocial behavior. In con-nection with this distinction it is interesting tonote that the linguistic origin and central connota-tion of the word delinquency focuses on "failure ofduty" or "offense through neglect," whereascrime is defined as "aggravated offense againstmorality." It may be profitable, from the psycho-logical point of view, to deal with more precisedefinitions of "delinquency" (asocial behavior) and"criminality" (antisocial behavior) as conceptuallyindependent phenomena.

Asocial Behavior

Socialization refers to the set of experiences,including purposeful training, through whichinfant and child go so as to become adult membersof their society. The process is gradual: the infantbegins to learn ways of behaving and experiencingwhich conform to the values of his society (forexample, to sleep at night and to be awake duringthe day, to eat at set times, tp inhibit toilet func-tions until the proper time and place). Certainways of doing things and* seeing things are en-couraged by parents and other adults. Other modesof behavior are met by neutral reactions, and stillothers are actively discouraged. Actually, thechild's repertory of behavior is narrowed consider-ably from what he is capable of doing: he inhibitssome unacceptable ways of behaving and sub-stitutes other actions designed to satisfy theoriginal impulses.

The adolescent years, which involve the transi-tion from the child to. the adult role in society,represent a period of crisis in socialization. There-are, in our culture, many factors which add to thecomplexity of this phase of development. There areprofound discrepancies between adolescence in the1960's and a century ago. In the nineteenth cen-tury there was almost no such .thing as an adoles-cent; adolescence was certainly not the prolongedperiod that it is currently. Stringent taboos onsexual behavior were not enforced from age 12 toage 22 (as is often the case now) but only from age12 to 16 or so. As soon as the youth was able towork and function as an adult he became an adult.There were virtually no truancy laws or childlabor laws until comparatively recent years. Theeconomy needed the participation of the entire

family: the adolescent had an important role, wasneeded, and belonged. Quite in contrast, thetwentieth century has almost no place for theadolescent. He is denied the protection and exemp-tion from responsibility characteristic of child-hood, but he is also denied the rewards andprivileges of adulthood. He is in a psychosocial"no man's land."

Delinquency may be one consequence of failureof socialization. Aggressive behavior may be con-sidered as a case in point. The impulse towardaggression is considered by most psychologists tobe a natural response to frustration, and in ourculture it is inconceivable that a child could existwithout being frustrated. One goal of socializationis to inhibit certain forms of aggression, such asphysical assault upon the frustrator. Indeed, whenthe frustrating agent is a parent (as it often is),the child is in many families expected to inhibitentirely any open display of aggression. It may bethat he is allowed to (or must) displace his aggres-sive impulse to some other object (such as a peer,a pet, or an inanimate 6bject) or substitute otherresponses in the place of aggression (such asvigorous physical activity in competitive sports).

Aggression, linked as it is to delinquency andcrime, has received much theoretical and researchattention. Some perceive or experience frustrationunder circumstances not experienced by others asfrustrating, and hence are more likely to beinstigated to aggress. "Frustration tolerance"varies widely from person to person: one indi-vidual can be subjected to what would be judgedsevere frustration without giving vent to aggres-sion or other maladaptive behavior (the "patienceof Job"), while another person put in the samesituation "blows his stack." The style of displace-ment of aggressive impulses has also received re-search attention: it is. thought by some thataggression is handled intrapersonally in someinstances (e.g., by developing indigestion or astomach ulcer), while in other cases aggression isdirectly and even criminally acted out.

Bandura and Walters' have recently completedan exhaustive investigation of "antisocial aggres-sion" in adolescent boys. This research is anexcellent example of the kind of contribution tothe analysis of delinquency which can be made byscientific psychology ir its search for the laws andprinciples which govern human behavior and

I BANDuRA & WALTRs, ADoLEscENT AGGRESSION(1959).

19621

MCDA VID & MCCANDLESS

development. By means of various techniques ofpersonality assessment, a group of highly aggres-sive boys was differentiated 'from a group of nor-mally aggressive boys, and intensive direct inter-views were carried out with the boys, their mothers,and their fathers. From careful analysis of datafrom these sources, an impressive body of evidencewas assembled to support certain hypothesesabout the origin and etiology of adolescent aggres-sion. It appears that one of the major antecedentsof adolescent aggression involves disruption of thenormal dependency relationship of the young childupon the parent. A young boy's relationship withhis father lacking warmth and affection, a fatherrejecting the son or spending little time in hiscompany, a son seeking only rarely (or even.resisting) help from his parents and other adults-these conditions were related to exaggeratedadolescent aggression. Further study of otherrelationships revealed links between adolescentaggression and the boy's identification with hisfather, his development of conscience or inter-nalized standards for controlling his own behavior,the parents' use of praise to reward good behaviorand withdrawal of affection to punish misbehavior,and the boy's capacity for experiencing guiltfollowing misbehavior-a network of relationswhich bears directly upon the issue of failures incontrol of aggressive impulses. These findings gobeyond the description of differences betweenhighly aggressive and normal adolescent boys.They allow the development of hypotheses aboutdevelopmental processes which give rise to theoccurrence of exaggerated aggressive behavior inadolescents.

At a general level, psychologists have alsoinvestigated the ability to inhibit the immediategratification of any impulse, or the ability toexperience delay between arousal of an impulseand attainment of its gratification. The humaninfant, for example, is rapidly "sdcialized" ortrained to delay gratification of his hunger driveor need for food. While the new-born infant be-comes hungry every two or three hours anddemands immediate satisfaction, he acquires in asurprisingly short time the ability to sustain delayof several hours before attaining gratification.Psychologists assume that the ability to toleratedelayed gratification (or to "bind tension") of anyimpulse operates in much the same fashion. Arecent study by Mischel2 reports evidence to sug-

2Mischel, Preference for Delayed Reinforcement: AnExperimental Study of a Cultural Observation, 56 J.ABNORMAL & SOCIAL PS YCHOLOGY 57 (1958).

gest that the absence of the father from the homeis related to the child's inability to tolerate delayedreward or gratification when offered by a maleadult in an experimental setting. Other similarstudies have shed light on the role of familydynamics in the socialization of the child. Nye3 hasundertaken a systematic and relatively thoroughexploration of the relati6ns between adolescentdelinquency and particular indices of family struc-ture and function. In a recently published study,Wagner' has explored the relation between certainaspects of parent-child interaction and the child'scontrol of impulses. While even these studiesleave large gaps of knowledge, they represent soundcontributions to the growing body of systematicknowledge about family dyn'amics, child-rearingpractices, and the ability to bind or control be-havioral impulses.

Considerable recent research has been devotedto the development and function of "conscience"(the acquisition of internal, self-imposed standardsof conduct as a device for controlling behavior).At the beginning of a child's life, most of the con-trol of his behavior and activity comes fromparents. They take note of what he does and ex-press their approval or disapproval, usually on thebasis of social or cultural standards which theyhave learned from their parents and others. Thusparents are forced to police the behavior of theirchild. Such direct parental control is essential, ofcourse, in infancy and early childhood when theyoungster is ill-equipped to cope with a complexenvironment. But such policing is not realistic,either for parent or for child, if continued indefi-nitely. The child must learn to control himself, todevelop his own standards for deciding "right"and "wrong" with respect to his conduct. In otherwords, psychologists say, he must develop aconscience. Conscience refers simply to learnedstandards of conduct, acquired primarily fromparents, but to some extent from other contactswith friends, teachers, or other agents of theculture. According to these standards, the child isable to instruct himself as to what he ought orought not to do. Going counter to these self-instructions arouses feelings of guilt or shame,while behaving in accord with them arouses prideor self-satisfaction. A great deal of psychologicalresearch5 on the development of conscience has

3NxE, FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS AND DELINQUENTBEHAVIOR (1958).4 Wagner, Developmental Aspects of Impulse Control,

6 J. CONSULTING PsYCHOLOGY 537 (1960).5 E.g., Mussen & Distler, Child-Rearing Antecedents

of Masculine Identification in Kindergarten Boys, 31

[Vol. 53

PSYCHOLOGY AND DELINQUENCY

revealed that conscience, Appropriate sex-roleidentification, and regulation of impulse are closelyinterrelated and that all are related to certainkinds of interaction between the young child andhis parents. The preponderant use of such dis-,ciplinary techniques as physical punishment anddeprivation of privileges for misdeeds, as well astangible rewards for good behavior, appear toretard the development of conscience. On the otherhand, the use of verbal approval and affection asrewards for good behavior, and the withdrawal ofthese qualities in punishing misbehavior, appear tofacilitate the development of conscience. Chronicrejection, coolness, or indifference toward the childalso seem to interfere with the child's acquisitionof internal controls. One study6 has found that theuse of severe physical punishment is one of fivemajor factors associated with the development ofdelinquency in young boys.

In general, it is likely that obedience to authorityand the meeting of externally imposed obligationsdo not necessarily indicate mature capacity forself-regulation of behavior. A child or adolescentmay behave well in the presence of parents,teachers, or other authorities, but do so onlybecause he fears the physical consequences ofmisbehaving or hopes to acquire a tangible rewardfor his good behavior. But such a child, whenunable to control his behavior through the per-sonal experience of guilt or pride, has no capac-ity for self-management or self-discipline whenexternal sources of control or authoritv are notpresent

The observation is often made that adolescentoffenders appear most often to be the victims notof uncontrollable but of uncontrolled impulse. Theessential difference between the boy who comesbefore a court and eventually faces commitmentto a reformatory, and his counterpart who is ahealthy leader in his high school class, appears veryoften to be one of capacity for self-control. Thepreponderance among adolescents of "crimes ofimpulse," such as assault, public disturbance,breaking and entering, and the like, as comparedwith "planned crimes," such as forgery, extortion,or premeditated murder, is readily apparent fromavailable statistical data. Even in adolescent theftand larceny, the amount stolen is ordinarily small;

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 89 (1960); SEARS, MACCOBY &LEVIN, PATTERNS or CHILD-REARING (1957). Thegeneral analysis of conscience and related empiricaldata discussed here are derived from the latter source.

6 S. & E.T. GLuEcK, UNRAVELLING JuvxiLE DEUiN-QUENCY (1950).

-in adolescent automobile thefts, the car is veryoften taken for a brief joy-ride and then aban-doned. Many of these juvenile offenses appear tobe motiveless, at least from any "sensible" view-point. Why should a boy break into a business tosteal two dollars when he has five dollars at homeor when he could earn as much in a few hours? Whyshould a boy steal an automobile for the simplesatisfaction of riding around the block? The ap-parent lack of purpose in such adolescent offensesis evident only to those of us who almost auto-matically inhibit most of the reckless impulsesthat occur to all human beings. Many an adultmay look at a powerful new convertible in a dis-play window and fancy himself behind its wheelfor a few moments. The annoyance one feels whensomeone tries to push ahead in a line of peoplewaiting at a sales counter may arouse in all of usthe urge to "take a poke at him." Delinquentadolescents appear to lack the capacity for in-hibiting the overt expression of impulses of thissort through the experience of self-disapproval oranticipation of guilt feelings. Many delinquentsappear to behave almost exclusively according tothe dictates of external control and threatenedpunishment, rather than according to those ofconscience or self-control. Anything goes-theft,assault, recklessness, vandalism-, or at least itgoes until someone catches up to administerphysical punishment. It is not that the delinquentis unaware of the punitive legal consequences ofhis misbehavior. Indeed, he may be more awarethan the normal boy of the spjecific penalties forhis offense if he is caught. Certainly he seems tohave at least as adequate knowledge of "right-and-wrong" as the nondelinquent.7 But the key tothe problem is that he seems to operate under theconviction that he will not be caught. As long asthe only force which can curb his impulsiveness isthreat of external punishment, and as long as heremains convinced that he will not be caught so asto be punished, the delinquent has no means forinhibiting his impulse toward socially unaccept-able behavior. Hence the impulse leads uncheckedinto criminal behavior 8

7 Harris, The Socialization of the Delinquent, 19 CHILDDEVELOPMENT 143 (1948).8

SALISBURY, THE SHooK-up GENERATION (1958).

Salisbury's discussions of the role of the twentiethcentury adolescent in society, the delinquent's assump-tion that he himself will not be caught and prosecuted,and the geo-social isolation of the urban adolescent areespecially relevant to the consideration of such issueshere. His observations are based upon his own directexperience as a social worker with New York Citystreet-gangs.

MCDA VID & MCCANDLESS

The lack of conscience or self-control is regardedas. relatively normal for the very young child, butthe normal socialization process is expected toresult in acquisition of conscience by the time ofadolescence. Thus, the lack of this capacity in theadolescent is viewed as an abnormal consequencein development-a distortion of the normal so-cialization process. If the child psychologist, fromsuch research studies as those mentioned here, canoffer scientific accounts of the development andoperation of conscience in normal socialization, hecan contribute vitally to understanding its aber-rational development or operation in juveniledelinquency.

Antisocial Behavior

The motives which underlie asocial behavior arefleeting and in most cases normal in the experienceof most human beings. In the normally socializedindividual, such motives would most likely bedenied, but if accepted would be handled in asocially approved fashion, and perhaps with con-siderable delay of gratification of the impulse. Incontrast, however, antisocial behavior may resultfrom the operation of aberrant or distorted andexaggerated motivation. Responses which satisfysuch motives threaten an orderly society.

Dependency and aggression are regarded asnormal systems of behavioral motivation. Butwhen such motivation occurs at an extremelyintense level, or when the expression of suchmotives is wholly out of line with the tenets ofsociety, they are regarded as abnormal. There isevidence from research 9 that both over-punishmentand over-reward of dependent behavior intensifythe impulse or need to be dependent. While ex-tremely dependent behavior is rarely an overtcomponent in the delinquent youth, it is oftenfound that sudden or abrupt thwarting of strongdependency needs in adolescence may lead toundesirable over-reactions in the form of rebellionagainst authority and exaggerated (but insecureand artificial) independence. The abrupt frustra-tion of strong needs for dependency, which manyyouths experience when their dependency, previ-ously allowed, is too suddenly curbed, may bringabout hostility toward those who have frustratedhis dependency needs. Very easily, these hostileimpulses may be displaced toward the gross society

9 Goldman-Eisler, The Problem of "Orality" and ItsOrigin in Early Childhood, 97 -J. MENTAL Sci. 765(1951); SEARS, MACCOBY & LEVIN, op. cit. supra note5, at 138-75.

as the perceived agent of this frustration. In com-bination with this, the ungratified dependencyneeds may be prematurely transferred away fromparents to peers and age-mates, thus forming thenucleus of "gang" spirit. Such heightened de-pendency on peers may make the youth less docilewith respect to parental and adult guidance as wellas more susceptible to the influence of peers. Ifthese peers, in turn, are delinquent, such a bond ofemotional dependence almost guarantees con-tagion of delinquency to each group member.

In addition, consistently punished kinds of be-havior (for example, in this culture, extremeaggressiveness) may lead to the acquisition ofstrong motivation toward that kind of behavior asan attention-getting device. The child who feelsneglected and ignored except when he excites theattention of his parents by behaving in a mannerwhich annoys them may come to behave in thisfashion simply because the attention it commandsis rewarding to him-a "rebel without a cause." Inother cases, strongly punished behavior mayacquire "adventure" and "excitement" value,leading to its chronic repetition. In fact, theso-called "conscienceless" child who operatesprincipally in terms of external controls, includingthe anticipation of punishment if he is caughtmisbehaving, may eventually find great satisfac-tion in the experience of "getting away with"improper behavior-with taking advantage of orexerting manipulative power over others, yetevading punishment for this. Being able to commitan unacceptable act successfully and withoutbeing caught can become an important secondaryor learned reward, linked to a correspondinglearned motivational system. The juvenile de-linquent typically has rather poor regard oresteem of himself, and such behavior may add tohis status both in the eyes of his delinquent peersand in his own eyes.

Juvenile delinquents very often come from im-poverished environments, not only in an economicsense but also in an intellectual and emotionalsense. Personal relations within the family areoften poor, either actively hostile or casual anddiluted. The homes of delinquents are often barrenand their neighborhoods short on facilities forconstructive out-of-school occupation. School itselfseldom provides satisfactory outlets or experiencesof success for the delinquent. It is possible thatmany delinquent acts may spring directly fromthe frustration of boredom. One psychologist,

[Vol. 53

PSYCHOLOGY AND DELINQUENCY

Hebb, 0 has suggested that a given kind of behaviorcan be reinforced not only by the reduction oftension or drive, but also, when the organism isunderstimulated, by an increase in stimulation.Such activities as hot-rod racing seem to be soughtby many adolescents purely because of theirexciting qualities-the increase in sensory stimula-tion which they provide. Other kinds of activity,including more directly delinquent or sociallyantagonistic activities, may provide similar satis-factions to bored and understimulated adolescents.In addition, boredom provides much time forfantasy, and psychological research" has revealedthat socially unacceptable behavior is often pre-ceded and accompanied by elaborate excesses offantasy.

Phenomena such as these (exaggerated strengthof ordinarily normal learned motivational systems,acquisition of abnormal motivation-reward sys-tems, seeking excitement to relieve boredom andunderstimulation, or arousal of aberrant action-inciting fantasy in the absence of opportunities tobehave constructively) may result in directlymotivated behavior which offends the social order.It may be profitable to consider these phenomenaas separate although overlapping conceptual issuesfrom those involved in delinquency stemming fromthe inability to control normal behavioral im-pulses.

SOCIAL CONTROL OF BEHAVIOR

Social Reinforcement

In the socialization process, social or inter-personal reinforcement constitutes a powerfulforce in manipulating and shaping behavior.Reward may be administered in the form of socialacceptance; display of affection, or verbal com-'munication of approval; likewise, punishment maybe dispensed in the form of social rejection orostracism, withdrawal of affection, or verbal com-munication of disapproval. In one sense, socialreinforcement and punishment function in thesame manner as nonsocial or tangible reinforce-ment and punishment: both operate, to satisfymotivational systems. Thus, they foster establish-ment and retention of behavior that leads to

10 Hebb, Drives and the Conceptual Nervous System,62 PSYCiOLOGICAL, REv. 243 (1955).

1 Mussen & Naylor, The Relationships BetweenOvert and Fantasy Aggression, 59 J. ABNOIRMAL &SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 235 (1954); Purcell, The TAT andAntisocial Behavior, 20 J. CONSLImG Ps YcHoLoGY 449(1956).

reward or avoids punishment, and they discouragebehavior that leads to punishment and loss ofreward. Since such events of human interactionas social acceptance, expression of affection, orcommunication of approval do not themselvessatisfy basic inborn needs of the human being, andsince their value as" rewards must be learnedthrough experience, they are known as "secondaryreinforcers." In general, the course of such learninginvolves sequential chaining oi associationsbetween various events. For example, for the in-fant, his mother's presence and physical contactcome to be closely associated with gratification ofbasic needs, and as a consequence a motivationalsystem or drive toward the attainment of love andaffection arises. In later development, verbalapproval or praise comes to represent love andaffection, while disapproval and criticism indicatetemporary withdrawal of affection. The child thuslearns fairly early to value and seek the approvalof others; he acquires and consolidates behaviorwhich has this result, and he eliminates behaviorwhich fails to secure approval or results in dis-approval. It may be, in fact, that love-orientedtechniques of control are superior in promotingsocialization (in the sense of internalized control)because they induce the child to control his be-havior in terms of interpersonal relations.

Aberrant patterns of experience during thechild's social development, however, may retardor distort the acquisition of such regard and valuefor social approval. While most children experiencerather full and tender satisfaction of their primaryneeds during infancy, receiving-these satisfactionsfrom a close family group, many children do not.The experience of both physicians "and law enforce-ment personnel, especially in urban areas, indi-cates that brutal treatment of infants is by nomeans infrequent. Some children may be dealtwith indifferently by their parents, or may for onereason or another be separated from their parentsto live in an institutional setting. A substantialbody of research 2 concerning the behavior of suchchildren has accumulated. The conclusion emergesthat "classical" institutional rearing of children(and practices in the home which resemble thelimited and unusually cool or indifferent kinds ofpractice typical of the institutional setting) severely

12 Goldfarb, Psychological Privation in Infancy andSubsequent Adjustment, 15 AM. J. ORTHopsYcafATRy247 (1945); Lowrey, Pefsonality Distortion and EarlyInstitutional Care, 10 Am. J. ORTHOPSYCmATRY 576(1940).

19621

MCDA VID & MCCANDLESS

retards socialization. That is, such youngsterscommonly do not learn to value social reinforce-ment, and consequently do not develop or modifytheir behavior so as to gain it. Without regard forsocial reinforcement, the individual is not subjectto one of the most important techniques of socialcontrol over behavior. He is unsocialized, and hence(theoretically) is free to perpetrate those delin-quencies that he can manage without danger tohimself. Research suggests that the probabilityfor such youngsters to become delinquent is sub-stantially higher than for the general population,and there is evidence as well that they are moresubject to other kinds of neurotic, psychopathic,or psychotic maladjustments as adolescents andadults. McDavid and Schroder 3 compared agroup of institutionalized delinquent boys with asimilar group of noninstitutionalized high schoolboys and found the delinquent boys to be strik-ingly less sensitive to statements of verbal praiseor criticism than the nondelinquent boys. In atest designed to gauge the extent to which verbalapproval (or disapproval) from an adult elevated(or depressed) the boy's own evaluation of himselfand his ability, the nondelinquent boys "assimi-lated" social reinforcement at face value signifi-cantly more often than did the delinquent boys.

Although research studies such as these maycontribute eventually to the analysis of the originsof delinquent behavior, psychology still has onlyspotty information about the child-rearing prac-tices that enhance or detract from the effectivenessof adult approval on children's behavior. Theimportant questions about the specific socializationprocesses which are involved remain partiallyunanswered.

A. particularly important issue to be. exploredconcerns the relative effectiveness of peer approval,as contrasted with adult approval, for the juveniledelinquent. In the early stages of development, thechild's close interpersonal contacts are mostlyrestricted to interaction with his family. Thus,parental approval is ordinarily the most importantkind of social reinforcement during early develop-ment. As the child grows older, however', his scopeof interaction broadens, and by the time he startsto school he has developed a high regard for ap-proval from his peers and playmates. Gradually thevalue of peer approval approaches that of parentalapproval, so that during adolescence the youth

13 McDavid & Schroder, The Interpretation of Ap-proval and Disapproval by Delinquent and NondelinquentAdolescents, 25 J. PERSONATITY 539 (1957).

may experience marked difficulty due to the com-peting value of peer and adult approval as rein-forcers. By the time the individual reaches adult-hood, parents usually come to be regarded in arestructured way as a rather special kind of peer,so that peer approval is effectively paramount ininfluencing behavior.

Social reinforcement may operate either at thespecific level, in terms of approval from specifiedsources such as parents or other highly regardedindividuals, or at the general level, in terms ofacceptance by a group of people. Effective specificsources of social approval may include many indi-viduals other than parents. For example, in earlyadolescence especially, a child may come to havehigh regard or "hero worship" for an older adoles-cent. He may try assiduously to behave in such away as to gain and retain the approval of this hero,valuing this approval above other sources of rein-forcement. But social reinforcement may also occurin terms of a group. Usually, though not always,peer reinforcement operates more effectivelythrough generalized group acceptance thanthrough specific delivery of personal approval ordisapproval. When a child reaches school age andbegins to move into expanded contacts withgroups of age-mates, he rapidly learns to valuehighly the satisfaction of belonging to such groupsand becomes acutely motivated to gain the accept-ance of his peers. He soon learns that acceptanceinto the peer group is contingent upon his behavingin certain specified ways, and consequently hisbehavior is subject to manipulation through socialacceptance or rejection by his peers.

Social Influence

The modulation or shaping of behavior throughobservation of how other people behave, includingthose forms of behavior frequently described asimitation, suggestion, conformity, compliance, andso on, may be categorically referred to as socialinfluence. Social reinforcement and the operationof social influence are closely related, for in itsmost potent form social influence usually occursunder conditions of social reinforcement. Ofcourse, similar social influence of behavior mayoccur in the quest for nonsocial rewards, as wherethe source of influence is in a position of expertiseor authority to mediate in the attainment oftangible rewards.

The phenomenon of identification is largely sub-ject to the operation of social influence in conjunc-tion with social reinforcement. Children learn very

[Vol. 53:

-PSYCHOLOGY AND DELINQUENCY

early that behaving like the same-sexed parentusually elicits parental' approval and affectionand generally elicits greater approval, both insideand outside the family, than does behaving likethe opposite-sexed parent. Thus the learning ofspecific adult behavioral roles according to sex is aconsequence of one kind of identification. Simi-larly, when an adolescent selects an older youth asan object of hero-worship, he is likely to adopt thebehavior of the hero, imitating him in order to gainhis recognition and approval. Just ds young chil-dren learn to adopt the behavioral standards oftheir parents, learning eventually to experienceself-approval when they behave according to thesestandards, so may the adolescent youth adopt thelehavioral standards of older heroes and followthem even when the hero is not present to ad-minister direct approval or acceptance. It may bethat mass media heroes, such as comic stripcharacters or television heroes, influence the be-havior of children and adolescents 'in such afashion. It often seems, in examining the behaviorof, for example, teen-age fan clubs, that membersof the group reinforce each other for behaviorconceived as similar to or approved by the commonhero. It is possible that simultaneous subscriptionto a common ideal, coupled with mutual reinforce-ment for dedication to this ideal, operates to in-crease interpersonal bonds in the group situationand, indeed, can lead eventually into mob-typebehavior.

Research suggests that the value of peer ap-proval and susceptibility to peer influence reachesits peak importance during adolescence. Difficultiesresult when requirements for peer acceptancecontradict or conflict with requirements for adultapproval. Fashions in dress or personal appearance(such as black leather jackets, motorcycle boots,and ducktail haircuts) may be so important ingaining peer approval that an adolescent is willingto sacrifice the approval of his parents to gain thatof his peers, and thus he adopts such styles. Tothe extent that the interpersonal relation betweenthe youth and his parents has been deviant ordisturbed in some way, the experiences which leadto the acquisition of high regard for parentalapproval may be lacking. As a .consequence, hisbehavior may be much more subject to modulationby the quest for peer reinforcement than forparental reward. Such a child may then be handi-capped in incorporating parental standards andvalues and may fail to acquire the capacity forself-disapproval and guilt which go to make up

effective conscience. The vestigial conscienceacquired under conditions of restricted or dilutedparental identification may suffice to keep theyouth a law abiding citizen when alone and un-tempted, but when caught up in the influence ofthe peer group, he may easily and happily shrugoff his guilt and go along with the dictates of hisgroup.

In the normal course of human development,both peer influence and peer reinforcement playdirectly constructive roles in the socializationprocess. The peer group functions as an agent ofthe, culture or adult society, and many of the cus-toms, traditions, and standards of the existingculture are communicated'to the child through hiscontacts with peers. Thus, a "healthy" peer groupcontributes directly to the "healthy" socializationprocess. But socializatibn within an unassimilatedsocial sub-system or subgroup may in some casesbe incongruent with the majority or general socialsystem of the culture. The youth who grows upwithin a deviant minority social system may learnan inappropriate set of values and standards,although the basic psychological dynamics of hissocial development may not themselves be aber-rant. The processes through which adolescentdelinquent gangs operate are not in themselvesabnormal; they are simply distortions of normalgroup dynamics. Communication of skills occursin almost all groups, whether this involves teach-ing the member how to make a soap-box racer or azip-gun. The punishment of deviation from groupnorms occurs whether it involves ostracism forcheating at a game, punished by paddling orname-calling, or ostracism for "stooling to thecops," punished by violent physical assault andeven murder. The rites of admission to the BoyScouts or DeMolay involve relatively formalrituals that probably serve the same dynamicpurpose as the rituals of an urban street gang. Bothmay require the demonstration of prowess orachievement, whether this be earning meritbadges in the Boy Scouts, or achieving status inthe gang by a successful assault or rape.

Breakdowns or aberrances in these aspects ofthe socialization process not only communicatedeviant or conflicting standards for behavior, butthey also fail to communicate existing standardsof the larger culture. While it may not necessarilybe regarded as a major etiological factor in delin-quency, such default in socialization (failure tolearn the dominant mores and standards) may

19621

MCDA VID & MCCANDLESS

handicap the youth through his ignorance ofstandards for socially acceptable behavior.

It is probable that the substandard urbanghettos which harbor delinquency cultivate theemergence of social subsystems such as theseamong adolescents. The existence of "gangs"among delinquent youths in large cities is the con-sequence of natural social processes among humanbeings. Affectional poverty and restriction ofparent-child interaction often interfere with thedevelopment of normal adult-child relationships,parental identification, and the development ofconscience, and lead into increased investment inpeer approval and heightened susceptibility topeer standards. A lack of physical mobility oftencharacterizes the adolescent in large cities, so thathe is isolated within a geographically limited worldof experience. (Many adolescents in Brooklynhave never been across the river to Manhattan,a few miles away.) Homogeneity of ethnic andnatioial groups facilitates the strengthening ofgroup ties and the freezing of group boundaries.Such factors should, according to assumed psycho-logical principles, foster the emergence of tightlyknit adolescent subsystems 'or gangs. Unfor-tunately, the explicit scientific verification oflogical speculations such as these is yet to beachieved. While current knowledge of correla-tional association between juvenile delinquencyand the socio-economic level, residence in publichousing projects, broken homes, and other factorssupports such an analysis, adequate research todocument such psychological explanations needsto be undertaken.

The emergence of social subsystems among de-linquents may not only interfere with normalsocialization and social learning, but it may alsobe closely associated with rejection of the dominantsocial system by the adolescent and, vice versa,with the adolescent's feeling that he is rejected bythe dominant social system. There is psychologicalevidence indicating that anticipated acceptanceby a social group increases the likelihood of socialinfluence within that group, and conversely, thatanticipated rejection decreases the likelihood ofsocial influence. 4 If the adolescent delinquent seeslittle or no chance of being accepted by better-controlled and more conventional members of thetotal society, and if he sees relatively greater

14 Dittes & Kelley, Effects of Different Conditions ofAcceptance Upon Conformity to Group Norms, 53 J.ABNORMAL & SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 100 (1956).

probability of acceptance within the deviant sub-system, he may go to great lengths to demonstrateflamboyantly his rejection of one system (and itsstandards) and acceptance of the other. Researchevidence suggests that at least the first of theseconditions-anticipated rejection by the majoritygroup-exists for delinquent and predelinquentyouth.' 5

THEAPY AND CONTROL OF DELINQUENCY

The treatment and social control of juveniledelinquency are the shared task of many agencies,including law-enforcement officers, teachers, socialworkers, psychiatrists, and clinical psychologists.The nature of function and kinds of control whicheach of these groups can most appropriatelyexecute differ widely. Nevertheless, the effective-ness of each can be facilitated through the recog-nition and application of available psychologicalknowledge bearing on delinquency.

The effectiveness of law-enforcement agenciesin controlling delinquency is limited in the sensethat they must ordinarily deal with delinquency"after-the-fact" rather than in a "preventive"

way. It is largely through the threat of punishmentthat law-enforcement groups can help preventdelinquency. Current popular literature frequentlysuggests that delinquency may be curbed byincreasing the stringency of legal punishment foradolescent offenses. In the light of psychologicalknowledge of delinquency, however, the potentialvalue of such procedures must be evaluated con-servatively. If, indeed, delinquent behavior is inpart the consequence of a youth's reliance uponexternal physical reward and punishment forbehavioral control (in contrast to reliance uponinternal standards nd conscience), and if thedelinquent operates largely under the assumptionthat he will not be caught, an increase in theseverity of threatened punishment may contributelittle to the correction of his delinquent behavior.Severe punishment may merely strengthen theoffender's intent to see that he is not caught againin the future. Furthermore, the satisfaction ofescaping severe punishment through not being

15McGuire, White & Novak, Adolescent RoleBehavior and Age-Mate Acceptance (mimeographedpaper presented at meetings of the SouthwesternSocial Science Ass'n in Dallas, Texas, April 1954). Thismaterial has subsequently been incorporated into thefinal report of the Human Talent Research Projectentitled TALENTED BEHAVIOR IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS,

University of Texas Library, Austin 12, Texas.

[Vol. 53

PSYCHOLOGY AND DELINQUENCY

caught may acquire more secondary reward valuefor the delinquent youth than escaping mild pun-ishment. This is not to suggest, of course, thatrigorous and consistent law enforcement is com-pletely ineffective in the control of delinquency.Such rigor may discourage the "I won't get caught"assumption. That is, to the extent that the societycan police the activity of its delinquent or un-socialized members and increase the probabilitythat the offender will be caught and punished,delinquent behavior may be discouraged. But thebroadcast of hollow threats or loud publication ofintent alone are likely to be ineffective. In anyevent, high levels of police activity are not onlyextravagant and costly, they are basically con-tradictory to the fundamental philosophical andpolitical assumptions of a democratic government.By no means does police activity guarantee astable society. Such measures provide only symp-tomatic relief and control of the occurrence ofovert delinquency; they do not attack the etiologyand roots of delinquency.

Social welfare programs designed to relieveharsh economic and social conditions have prob-ably been constructive in alleviating factors asso-ciated with the origins of delinquency. But theimprovement of social conditions in a neighbor-hood has not been found to follow automaticallyupon improvement of physical conditions. Mate-rial improvement, such as the erection of largepublic housing projects, may bring about genuinesocial improvement in one case, but in anothercase the resultant disruption of neighborhood tiesand injection of artificial geo-social boundariescan conceivably be socially destructive. The provi-sion of recreational facilities and supervised centersfor adolescents by the Y.M.C.A., Police AthleticLeague, and other agencies may contribute to thecontrol of delinquency, not so much through"keeping the kids off the street," but ratherthrough providing facilities which adolescentsneed, want, and value-supporting rather thanthwarting the normal adolescent's desire to engagein activities with his peers. Essentially, themnner in which social welfare measures are intro-

duced may be more important than the materialvalue of such measures. It is inmportant to recog-nize the psychological impact of such programsupon the people to whom they are offered.

The "street-dub worker" approach to the con-trol of delinquency shows promise as a preventivedevice. Usually a trained social worker, the "club-

worker" seeks acceptance by the adolescent groupand cultivates the trust and friendship of itsmembers. He does not seek to thwart or dis-organize the adolescent group but, instead, toreshape it and redirect its collective activitiesaway from "bopping" or gang-fighting towardmore constructive efforts in athletics and otheracceptable organized activities. Such approaches,which recognize the normality of motives andsocial phenomena within the delinquent streetgang and channel rather than attempt to suppressthem, have met with reasonable success in thecontrol of juvenile misbehavior.

Because juvenile delinquency represents a diffuseand pervasive syndrome within the personalitystructure of the adolescent, actual psychologicaltherapy may be a necessary technique for the con-trol of delinquency. Unfortunately, the degree oftraining required for capable administration ofsuch therapy keeps its cost at a level beyond theaccess of most delinquen.t adolescents. Only theupper or upper-middle class delinquent is likelyto be referred for psychiatric aid when he firstexperiences a brush with the law. Governmentalemployment of psychiatrists and clinical psy-chologists for work with delinquents is expensive,and even today relatively few communities offerpsychological out-patient care on a charity basis.

Because of reduced cost, group techniques intherapy hold promise in the effort to controldelinquency. In addition, because the etiology ofjuvenile delinquency is founded in social learningand development, the use of group therapy mayhave special advantages. The opportunity forcontrolled and directed experience with an accept-ing (or at least, non-condemning) adult therapistand with peers in the presence of 'this adult maybe particularly favorable to the successful modifi-cation and reshaping of personality and reversalor eradication of the misdirected social learningwhich has occurred earlier in the delinquent'sexperience.

While psychological research is but one ofseveral approaches to the study of delinquencyand crime, all approaches to this common problemare closely interrelated. Recognizing implicitlythe contributions which other approaches to theanalysis of juvenile delinquency have made topsychology, this paper represents the childpsychologist's attempt to evaluate explicitly thekinds of contributions his endeavor may make tothe understanding, control, and therapy of

19621

MCDA VID & MCCANDLFSS

adolescent delinquent behavior. Through theassiduous collection of empirical evidence, scien-tific psychology aspires to formulate theoreticallaws and principles which govern human develop-ment. Such knowledge, then, affords greater under-standing of abnormalities and aberrances inhuman development. The accumulation of reliable

scientific evidence concerning the etiology ofdelinquency has been disappointingly slow, butthere is evidence of significant present attainmentin this area, and there is basis for optimistic pre-dictions about the importance of future psycho-logical contributions to solution of the problemsof juvenile delinquency.

[VoL 53