THE INTERACTION OF ANTISOCIAL PROPENSITY AND LIFE‐COURSE VARYING PREDICTORS OF DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR: DIFFERENCES BY METHOD OF ESTIMATION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY*

109 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

How Do They ‘End Up Together’? A Social Network Analysis of Self-Control, Homophily, and Adolescent Relationships (2011, background): “Several studies find social amplification effects (Gibson and Wright 2001; Wright et al. 2001; Ousey and Wilcox 2007, cf. Doherty 2006), while others, using more accurate measures of peer delinquency, have found opposite (Meldrum et al. 2009) or null effects (McGloin and Shermer 2009).”
Statistical Models of Life Events and Criminal Behavior (2010, background): “For instance, Moffitt (1993) argued that role transitions such as marriage and employment would have a greater impact for late onset offenders than for early onset offenders (a topic investigated in terms of propensity toward crime by Ousey and Wilcox 2007 , a ndWright et al. 2001).”
Something Old, Something New: Revisiting Competing Hypotheses of the Victimization-Offending Relationship Among Adolescents (2011, background): “One increasingly popular idea along these lines is the notion that an individual’s level of risk propensity—due to personality and environmental factors—is a key moderator of the impact of time-varying variables on one’s involvement in offending and one’s risk of victimization (e.g., Ousey and Wilc”