Reconciling Race and Class Differences in Self-Reported and Official Estimates of Delinquency

Delbert S. Elliott, Suzanne S. Ageton

American Sociological Review · 1980 · 924 citations · 10 references

TL;DR

The study investigates whether resolving methodological issues in self‑report delinquency research will align its race and class patterns with those seen in official arrest data. The authors analyze methodological critiques, apply a novel self‑report delinquency measure in a national youth sample, and compare its race/class results to prior studies and official arrest data. The study finds race and class differentials in self‑report delinquency that align more closely with official data, suggesting that earlier self‑report measures lacked sensitivity and that methodological improvements can reconcile the two data sources.

Abstract

This paper addresses the general question of whether or not the satisfactory resolution of the methodological criticisms of self-report research will result in greater consistency between self-reported and official data with respect to the race and class distributions of delinquent behavior. We review the specific methodological criticisms of self-report delinquency (SRD) research; discuss the use of a new SRD measure in a national youth study; compare the race/class findings of this study with previous SRD research and with official arrest data; and examine the epidemiological and theoretical implications of these findings. Both class and race differentials are found in this study. It appears likely that the differences between these findings and those in earlier SRD studies are a result of differences in the specific SRD measures used. Additionally, these findings suggest a logical connection between SRD and official measures, and they provide some insight into the mechanism whereby official data produce more extreme race and class (as well as age and sex) differences than do self-report measures. The results of this study also have implications for previous tests of theoretical propositions which used self-report delinquency data. In short, prior self-report measures may not have been sensitive enough to capture the theoretically important differences in delinquency involvement.

References

10