556609

research-article2014
IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X14556609International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyTong et al.

Article
International Journal of
Offender Therapy and
The Influence of Culture- Comparative Criminology
2016, Vol. 60(5) 535­–554
Specific Personality Traits © The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
on the Development of sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0306624X14556609
Delinquency in At-Risk Youth ijo.sagepub.com

Tat Seng Tong1, Lisbeth Ku1, and Charles Mark Zaroff1

Abstract
The association between culture-specific personality variables and family factors, and
juvenile delinquency, was assessed in a sample of 402 adolescents of Chinese ethnicity
between 12 and 17 years of age (Mage = 15.13, SD = 1.41; 135 girls), a subgroup of
whom were considered at risk for juvenile delinquency owing to addictive behavior
tendencies. Culture-specific personality variables were assessed using the Chinese
Personality Assessment Inventory–Adolescent version Interpersonal Relatedness
factor. The General Function subscale of the Chinese version of the Family Assessment
Device was utilized to assess the influence of perceived levels of family functioning.
Both culture-specific personality variables and non-culture-specific familial factors
were significantly and negatively associated with self-reported juvenile delinquency (p
< .001). However, in a sample of at-risk adolescents, only a culture-specific variable
measuring orientation toward the family was able to predict self-reported juvenile
delinquency (p < .001). Implications of the current results are discussed.

Keywords
juvenile delinquency, China, harmony, aggression

Although juvenile delinquency is a global concern, rates of juvenile delinquency can

vary considerably across cultures. In Chinese culture in particular, rates of juvenile
delinquency are often lower than those observed elsewhere. For instance, in 2010,
approximately 4% of individuals below the age of 19 were arrested for a criminal

1University of Macau, China

Corresponding Author:
Charles Mark Zaroff, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Macau, Avenida
da Universidade, Taipa, Macao, China.
Email: charleszaroff@umac.mo
536 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

offense in the United States (Puzzanchera & Kang, 2013). In contrast, in the same
year, less than 1% of individuals between 10 and 20 years of age were arrested for a
criminal offense in Hong Kong (Hong Kong Police Force). Data similar to those
reported in Hong Kong were recorded in 2009 in Macao, which like Hong Kong is
designated as a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China
(Education and Youth Affairs Bureau, 2013). The difference becomes even more strik-
ing when rates of violent crimes are considered. In the United States in the year 2000,
about 100,000 juveniles were arrested for serious crimes, including aggravated assault
(e.g., attempting to cause serious injury to another, often using a deadly weapon),
homicide, or rape (Snyder, 2002). In contrast, the overwhelming majority of crimes
committed by juveniles in Macao consist of non-violent offenses, such as crimes
against property (Education and Youth Affairs Bureau, 2013). In general, crimes con-
sisting of antisocial behavior, such as homicide and gang violence, tend to be rather
uncommon in Chinese societies (Chen, 2010).
Etiological factors involved in the development of juvenile delinquency in Hong
Kong are similar to those found in non-Chinese cultures, namely, variables related to
the family (e.g., parent–child conflict), and peer influence (Lau & Leung, 1992; Ma,
Shek, Cheung, & Lee, 1996). However, research into the nature and etiology of juve-
nile delinquency in Chinese societies is somewhat limited in scope, and prior studies
could be best described as exploratory. Thus, for example, excepting a study by Y.
Deng, Dou, and Zhang (2000), very little work has been conducted on personality and
its relationship to juvenile delinquency, and even less focusing on culture-specific
personality traits. This is a glaring omission, as criminal behavior has long been con-
nected to personality traits (Cloninger, 1987; Eysenck, 1977; Zuckerman, 1989).
Essential trait models, which focus on those traits most central to the understanding of
personality (Funder, 2013), have contributed substantially to the understanding of
juvenile delinquency. Essential trait approaches are among the models with the great-
est degree of empirical support, and studies have been rather consistent in showing a
link between specific essential traits and criminal behavior (Cale, 2006; Miller &
Lynam, 2001). In addition, higher order trait dimensions are posited to underlie not
only delinquent behavior but also more specific traits, which might yield additional
predictive power (Paunonen & Ashton, 2001; Reynolds & Clark, 2001).
Studies with Eyesenck’s Big Three model (Cale, 2006) and the Five-Factor Model
(Miller & Lynam, 2001) have found that personality traits linked to criminal behavior
tend to be a manifestation of either low agreeableness or low conscientiousness. These
traits are manifested more specifically in a tendency toward heightened sensitivity to
aversive emotional states, an indifference to others, and impulsivity (Blonigen, 2010).
Importantly, crime, and low levels of conscientiousness and high levels of disagree-
ableness are connected across socioeconomic strata (Caspi et al., 1994; Moffitt, Caspi,
Silva, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1995) and across the life span (Krueger et al., 1994;
Lynam et al., 2000; Raine, Reynolds, Venables, Mednick, & Farrington, 1998). This
connection holds regardless of the methodological approach utilized (Blonigen, 2010),
and is found even after controlling for overlapping item content between personality
and deviance assessment measures (Krueger et al., 1994). Of note, implied in essential
Tong et al. 537

trait theories is that essential traits are rooted in biology and genetics (Ebstein et al.,
1996; Finkel & McGue, 1997; Loehlin, McCrae, Costa, & John, 1998; Tellegen et al.,
1988), biology which manifests in behavioral tendencies that extend beyond traits
(Meehl, 1986; Tellegen, 1991), and are thus able to predict a host of outcomes. In this
respect, traits possess potential causal explanatory power.
Clearly, the study of personality has proven helpful in the understanding of delin-
quency. However, the utility of an essential approach to personality traits in explaining
behavior may be limited by culture. Although the Five-Factor Model possesses cross-
cultural validity (McCrae & Terracciano, 2005), questions nonetheless remain about
the viability of this model in Asian cultures. For instance, Yang and Bond (1990), uti-
lizing the lexical hypothesis and an essential trait approach, found five essential fac-
tors in a sample from Taiwan, labeled social orientation, competence, expressiveness,
self-control, and optimism. These terms overlapped with the Five-Factor Model traits
but possessed no one-to-one correspondence. The authors were thus forced to con-
clude that at most, central attributes of personality could be said to be similar, but also
different, across cultures.
Evidence suggests that personality traits may differ between Western and Asian
cultures, and may perhaps require a more nuanced approach in measurement in the
latter. In fact, variables related to social relationships, such as those within the family,
and those within society at large, have been reworked into personality traits in one of
the more widely used scales for assessing personality across cultures, the Cross-
Cultural (Chinese) Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI; F. M. Cheung, Leung,
Fan, Song, & Zhang, 1996). In this measure, personality constructs for the normal
personality scales were selected specifically in consideration of Chinese culture,
leading to the construction of CPAI personality scales not necessarily available in
other personality scales, and a combined emic and etic approach to personality assess-
ment. Factor analytic work yielded four personality factors, Dependability,
Interpersonal Relatedness (IR), Social Potency, and Individualism, in addition to two
clinical factors (F. M. Cheung & Leung, 2005). In a joint factor analytic study between
the CPAI and the NEO-Personality Inventory–Revised (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the
IR factor was unique to the CPAI, failing to load on any of the Five-Factor Model
facets (F. M. Cheung et al., 2001). Similarly, correlations between Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 (MMPI-2) scales and the IR factor were practi-
cally non-existent in one report (F. M. Cheung, Cheung, & Zhang, 2004). The IR
factor consists of scales purposely derived for Chinese culture, such as Harmony,
Face, and Ren Qing (Relationship Orientation). According to Cheung, these scales
add predictive value beyond those contributed by the Five-Factor Model in explain-
ing a variety of Chinese social behaviors, including filial piety, trust, persuasion tac-
tics, and group communication styles (F. M. Cheung et al., 2001). Thus, not only are
these variables purported to reflect “traditional” values, but an orientation toward
instrumental relationships in a collectivistic culture. High IR factor scores, when
interpreted in conjunction with other CPAI scales, have been shown to explain vari-
ance on the CPAI clinical Antisocial Behavior Scales (S. F. Cheung, Gan, & Lo,
2003).
538 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

Can culture-specific personality variables contribute to the understanding of juve-

nile delinquency? One way of examining the role of such personality variables is to
investigate their connection with delinquency in youth who may be predisposed to
delinquent behavior, that is, those considered “at-risk.” This may be particularly fruit-
ful in a Chinese society, in which the prevalence and severity of offending is lower
than what is commonly observed elsewhere. In the current report, one risk factor for
juvenile delinquency was examined, a tendency toward addictive behaviors. Addictive
behavior tendencies are clearly risk factors for juvenile delinquency (Wanner, Vitaro,
Carbonneau, & Tremblay, 2009), although their inclusion in the current report was
guided by culture-specific concerns relating to the way such behaviors are manifested.
That is, the percentage of individuals of Asian descent who refrain from consumption
of alcohol and drug use is often higher than the percentages observed in samples of
Whites (Sakai, Ho, Shore, Risk, & Price, 2005). However, there is evidence that in
those individuals of Asian descent who are exposed to alcohol and illicit drugs, the
risks for abuse and dependence may be comparable (Sakai et al., 2005), while of
greater significance is the fact that there is some evidence suggesting that among Asian
Americans who abuse substances, abuse is more frequent and intense compared with
American Whites (G. M. Barnes & Welte, 1986). Pathological gambling represents
another potential behavioral manifestation of addictive behavior tendencies, one with
particular relevance for Macao. The region is the sole legal gaming destination in Asia,
and is also uniquely situated in a region in which the majority of the population (i.e.,
individuals of Chinese ethnicity) attaches less stigma to this behavior than is observed
elsewhere (Loo, Raylu, & Oei, 2008). However, it is becoming clear that pathological
gambling is problematic in Chinese adolescents, perhaps even more so than in adults
when comparisons of the cognitive biases associated with pathological gambling are
measured (Tang & Wu, 2012). Of even greater concern is that juvenile delinquency is
more frequent not only in adolescents who engage in pathological gambling but also
in those who are at risk for pathological gambling, and even in those who simply hold
strongly permissive attitudes toward gambling (N. W. Cheung, 2014). Thus, the use of
this specific at-risk group can further illuminate the strength of the relationship
between Chinese culture-specific personality variables, and juvenile delinquency, in a
community sample, and in adolescents in the community who may be at risk for
offending behavior.
Thus, personality variables, and potentially, culture-specific personality variables,
can contribute significantly to the understanding of criminal behavior. To examine the
relationship between personality variables and delinquency, these variables were mea-
sured in conjunction with a construct oft utilized in studies of juvenile delinquency
cross-culturally, and one with relevance in Chinese cultures: family. Family variables
indisputably contribute to the likelihood of delinquent behavior. Across cultures, family
support, and the support of parents in particular, aid psychological adjustment and social
behavior (Branje, Hale, & Meeus, 2008; Jessor et al., 2003). A perception of family sup-
port is associated with lower delinquency and also predicts less delinquency over time
(G. M. Barnes, Hoffman, Welte, Farrell, & Dintcheff, 2006). On the other hand, a weak-
ening of a major societal institution such as the family is thought to create a natural path
toward juvenile delinquency (Hirschi, 1969; Reckless, 1970). In Hong Kong and China,
Tong et al. 539

low family support and conflict between children and parents may contribute to the
development of delinquency (Wei & Yang, 2011; Zhang & Messner, 1995). Family fac-
tors may additionally represent a viable area of research when measured in conjunction
with personality factors given that their influence may wax and wane across the life span
(Compas & Phares, 1991), whereas personality is thought to be more stable.
The goal of the current report was to measure the correlation between culture-spe-
cific personality variables and juvenile delinquency, and determine whether this cor-
relation held any explanatory power once non-culture-specific family variables were
controlled. Thus, the current study followed Jessor’s (2008) call for greater attention
to explaining, and not just describing, the factors behind adolescent development, par-
ticularly the etiology of behaviors, both adaptive and maladaptive, in research con-
ducted in different cultures. In the current report, it was hypothesized that
culture-specific personality variables and non-culture-specific family variables would
be negatively correlated with self-reported delinquency. The association between
addictive behavior tendencies and delinquency was also measured, and it was pre-
dicted that higher levels of addictive behavior tendencies would be associated with
higher levels of self-reported delinquency. The correlations between age, gender, and
school year, and self-reported delinquency, was assessed, because rates of delinquency
are often higher in males relative to females (Cohn & Modecki, 2007), and it was thus
expected that males would report significantly higher rates of delinquency than
females. Last, to test whether there are culture-specific personality traits and non-cul-
ture-specific family factors that are associated with delinquency, this association was
measured in participants having high and low levels of addictive behavior tendencies.
This latter investigation was considered exploratory and no hypotheses were put forth.

Method
Participants
The sample consisted of a total of 402 adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 (Mage
= 15.13, SD = 1.41; 135 girls). All participants were of Chinese ethnicity and had been
residing in Macao for at least 7 years. At the time of the current report, all participants
were attending secondary school (junior high school or a high school equivalent in the
United States). None of the participants reported suffering from a medical or psychiat-
ric disorder. Participants completed all study protocols between December 2011 and
March 2012.
An additional 14 participants were recruited from a residential facility for youthful
criminal offenders (Mage = 15.86, SD = 1.17; 8 girls). These participants were not
included in the final analyses, but were utilized for the purposes of providing external
validity data for the dependent variable measure administered in the current report.

Procedures
Informed consent was obtained from all participants, from the principals of the partici-
pating academic institutions, and from the director of the facility for youthful criminal
540 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

offenders. Principals of participating schools informed parents, and participants them-

selves were notified on the consent form of the purpose of the study, as well as their
rights to anonymity, confidentiality, and withdrawal. Parental informed consent was
not obtained as the research involved only anonymous questionnaires, which were
completed during regular class time, although parents were notified of the intended
research project and permitted to refuse or withdraw. In this study, no identifying
information was contained on any self-report form. An interdepartmental review pro-
cesses approved the study procedures.

Measures
Culture-specific personality traits.  Two personality traits—Family Orientation and Har-
mony—were measured, using the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory–Adoles-
cent version (CPAI-A; F. M. Cheung & Leung, 2005). The CPAI-A is an indigenous
personality assessment measure developed and standardized among adolescents of
Chinese ethnicity residing in Hong Kong. The Family Orientation subscale (12 items)
measures the importance and value an individual places on family relationships. In
traditional Chinese cultures, family, and parents in particular, are valued as an impor-
tant part of an individual’s life, and efforts must be made to obey parents and maintain
the harmony of the family (Sun, 2008). This subscale can be said to measure the sense
of family solidarity, that, according to F. M. Cheung et al. (1996, p. 187), forms the
“inner core of interpersonal relationships.” Broadly speaking, items may query an
individual’s feelings regarding their family, and more specifically, some items query
perspectives regarding the content and methods of parental control, even when paren-
tal control is viewed as somewhat harsh. On the CPAI-A, Harmony represents the
“interdependent relational orientation that is emphasized in traditional Chinese rela-
tionships” (F. M. Cheung et al., 2004, p. 101) and was found to be a personality char-
acteristic specific to Chinese culture (F. M. Cheung et al., 2004). Under the considerable
influence of Confucianism, social harmony is strongly emphasized in any kind of
social situation (Sun, 2008), and non-confrontational communication is necessary to
preserve harmony and prevent others from losing face. Thus, some items query an
individual’s attempts to avoid offending others in a social interaction. On the CPAI-A,
items are summed, or reverse scored where appropriate, so that higher scores indicate
higher levels of indicated personality traits. In the current report, Cronbach’s α was .72
and .69, on the Family Orientation and Harmony subscales, respectively.

Perception of family functioning. The General Function (GF) subscale of the Family

Assessment Device (FAD; Ryan, Epstein, Keiter, Miller, & Bishop, 2005) consists of
12 items, which, when summed, measure global perceptions of family functioning.
Respondents indicate their agreement to statements such as “in times of crisis we can
turn to each other for support,” on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree)
to 4 (strongly disagree). Higher scores represent more positive perceptions of family
functioning. In the current report, the Chinese version of the FAD was utilized. This
version was translated by Shek (2002a), and has been shown to possess good
Tong et al. 541

test–retest reliability and external validity (Shek, 2002b). It correlates well with the
FAD, and resulted in good internal consistency when used with Hong Kong Chinese
adolescents (Shek, 2001). In the present study, Cronbach’s α was .83.

Addictive behavior tendency.  Pathological Dependence (PAT) is a clinical subscale of

the CPAI-A used to assess addictive behavior tendencies. This 18-item scale was origi-
nally developed to measure addictive behaviors common in Chinese societies, such as
gambling, and alcohol and drug use (F. M. Cheung et al., 2004). As in the personality
subscales, the PAT clinical scale uses a “yes (coded 1)/no (coded 0)” format. Sample
items query excitement experienced from gambling, and impulses to gamble and use
substances. Higher scores indicate higher levels of addictive behavior tendencies.
Cronbach’s α was .76 in the current sample.

Self-reported delinquent behavior.  A 31-item questionnaire was used to assess levels of

delinquency (Kim & Kim, 2000). This scale consists of a three-factor structure,
described in a report detailing the scale’s construction (Kim & Kim, 2000). The scale
has been shown to possess adequate psychometric properties (Kim & Kim, 2008) and
was utilized in the current report in an attempt to measure delinquent behaviors that
might be observed in a sample of Asian adolescent respondents. Participants answered
“true” (coded 1) or “false” (coded 0) to statements such as “I ran away from my home
for over 2 days before I was 15 years old,” and “I was suspended or expelled from
school when I was a middle-or high school student.” The original items of this scale
are in Korean. The items were translated by a professional Korean translator into Eng-
lish, and then edited for accuracy by one of the authors, a native English speaker. The
items were subsequently translated into traditional Chinese characters by the first
author, a native speaker of Chinese. Items were then back-translated into English by a
bilingual research assistant. Discrepancies between the Korean-to-English translation
and the Chinese-to-English back-translation were evident in grammatical style only,
and not reflected in item content. Thus, the Chinese translation was unchanged. Cron-
bach’s α was .86 in the present study.
To provide further evidence of the validity of the delinquent behavior scale used in
the current report, a comparison group, consisting of 14 residents of a facility for juve-
nile offenders, was recruited. Their score was compared with the mean score of a
subsample of the overall sample at large: approximately 3% of the overall sample was
randomly selected, resulting in 14 cases for comparison. The mean age of the sub-
sample selected (Mage = 15.43, SD = 1.17) was comparable with that of the group of
offenders (Mage = 15.86, SD = 1.17). Using independent-samples t tests, a significant
difference in self-reported delinquent behaviors was found between the subsample (M
= 6.07, SD = 6.21) and the group of offenders (M = 19.29; SD = 6.04); t(26) = −5.71,
p < .01.

Results
Table 1 summarizes the means (SD) of, and inter-correlations among, the main variables
Harmony, Family Orientation, Family Functioning, PAT tendency, and self-reported
542 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

Table 1.  Intercorrelations Between Variables.

Correlations

  n M (SD) 4 5 6 7 8
1. Age 402 15.13 (1.41) .08 .05 .05 .05 .04
2. Gender .00 −.01 −.05 .02 −.03
  Males (coded 0) 135  
  Females (coded 1) 267  
3. School year −.02 −.00 .13* −.08 −.08
  Year 7 65  
  Year 8 60  
  Year 9 79  
  Year 10 142  
  Year 11 44  
  Year 12 10  
 Missing 2  
4. Delinquency 4.29 (4.46) −.20*** −.32*** −.40*** .42***
5. Family functioning 2.23 (0.49) .35*** .64*** −.08
6. Harmony 10.30 (2.69) .47*** −.32***
7. Family orientation 7.31 (2.83) −.18***
8. Pathological dependency 1.44 (2.12)  

*p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.

delinquent behaviors, and the demographic variables of age, gender, and school year.
Delinquency was negatively correlated with the two personality traits, Harmony and
Family Orientation, rs = −.32 and −.40, both ps < .001, and Family Functioning, r =
−.20, p < .001. None of the demographic variables correlated with delinquency at the
bivariate level. A multiple regression showed that the two personality traits and family
functioning were significant predictors of delinquency. After entering age, gender, and
school year in Step 1, Harmony, Family Orientation, and Family Functioning were
added to the regression model in Step 2. The final model was highly significant, F(5,
357) = 15.43, p < .001, accounting for 20.6% of the variance in delinquency. Age (β =
.15, p = .04), school year (β = −.15, p = .05), Harmony (β = −.17, p = .02), Family
Orientation (β = −.41, p < .001), and Family Functioning (β = −.14, p = .03) were all
significant predictors of delinquency (Table 2).
As hypothesized, the tendency toward pathological dependency was related to ado-
lescent delinquency, r = .42, p < .001, with participants with higher levels of patho-
logical dependency being more likely to report engagement in delinquent behaviors.
To further explore the effect of addictive behavior tendencies on delinquency, partici-
pants were divided into two groups by their scores on the Pathological Dependency
scale. Two hundred and seventeen participants (54%) scored zero on this scale, and
were therefore classified as having no addictive behavior tendencies (non-PAT group).
The remaining 185 reported at least one instance of addictive behavior (e.g., drug
Tong et al. 543

Table 2.  Multiple Regression of Effects of Family Functioning and Personality Traits on
Adolescent Delinquency.

Whole sample Non-PAT group PAT group

  B SE β B SE β B SE β
Step 1
 Gender 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.19 0.46 0.03 −0.13 0.91 −0.01
 Age 0.68 0.26 0.21 0.42 0.25 0.19 0.62 0.46 0.16
  School year −0.58 0.27 −0.17* −0.19 0.28 −0.08 −0.60 0.47 −0.15
Step 2
 Gender −0.15 0.45 −0.02 0.19 0.40 0.03 −0.43 0.86 −0.04
 Age 0.49 0.23 0.15* 0.50 0.22 0.23* 0.32 0.43 0.08
  School year −0.49 0.25 −0.15* −0.30 0.24 −0.13 −0.46 0.45 −0.11
  Family functioning −1.20 0.55 −0.14* −0.80 0.50 −0.14 −1.56 1.03 −0.14
 Harmony −0.32 0.09 −0.17** −0.37 0.08 −0.32*** −1.56 1.03 −0.11
  Family orientation −0.64 0.10 −0.41*** −0.38 0.09 −0.36*** −0.87 0.19 −0.44***

Note. For the whole sample, R2 = .019 for Step 1; ΔR2 = .187 for Step 2, p < .001. For the non-PAT
group, R2 = .019 for Step 1; ΔR2 = .256 for Step 2, p < .001. For the PAT group, R2 = .013 for Step 1; ΔR2
= .150 for Step 2, p < .001. PAT = Pathological Dependence; 1 = males; 2 = females.
*p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

abuse, alcoholism, and/or gambling; range = 1-15, M = 2.52, SD = 2.18, median = 2).
These participants were classified as showing some addictive behavior tendencies
(PAT group). The two groups differed significantly on self-reported delinquent behav-
iors, t(254.89, equal variance not assumed) = −4.75, p < .001, with the non-PAT group
(M = 3.29, SD = 2.97) reporting a significantly lower level of delinquency than the
PAT group (M = 5.50, SD = 5.54). A multiple regression showed that, for the non-PAT
group, at Step 2, significant predictors of delinquency were age (β = .23, p = .02),
Harmony (β = −.32, p < .001), and Family Orientation (β = −.36, p < .001). Together,
the model is able to explain 27.5% of the variance in delinquency, F(6, 192) = 12.14,
p < .001. For the PAT group, however, only Family Orientation (β = −.44, p < .001)
significantly predicted delinquency, explaining 16.3% of the variance of delinquency,
F(6, 158) = 5.14, p < .001 (Table 2).
To further evaluate the moderation effects of pathological dependency on delin-
quency, a series of two-group path analysis models were tested with the non-PAT and
PAT groups. In Model 1, Harmony, Family Orientation, and Family Functioning were
modeled as predictors of delinquency, and demographic variables (age, gender, and
school year) as control variables. The error residuals of the three predictors, and the
ones between age and school year, were allowed to covary. Fit indices showed that the
model fit the data well, χ2(22) = 43.770, p = .004, comparative fit index (CFI) = .968,
standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = .064, root mean square error
approximation (RMSEA) = .052 (95% CI = [.029, .075]), and the patterns of parame-
ters replicated the results of the multiple regression analyses reported above. Family
544 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

School
Gender Age
Family Year
Orientaon -.35***; -.44***
-.04; .03 .06; 23** -.09; -.13

-.32***; -.06 Delinquent

Harmony Behaviors

R2= .17; .27

Family -.13; -.14

Funconing

Figure 1.  A two-group path model of delinquency, Chinese personality traits, and family
functioning.
Note. The values in Roman represent non-PAT group and values in italics represent PAT group. The
error variances of Family Orientation, Harmony, and Family Functioning are significantly correlated with
each other in both groups (rs range from .25 to .67, all ps < .001). Age and School Year are correlated,
rs = .79 and .73, both ps < .001, for the non-PAT and the PAT group, respectively.
indicates significant group difference. PAT = Pathological Dependence.
**p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

Orientation was a significant and negative predictor of delinquent behaviors in both

groups (βs = −.35 and −.44, both ps < .001, for the non-PAT and the PAT groups
respectively). Harmony and age were only significant among the non-PAT group (βs =
−.32 and .23, both ps < .01), and perceived family functioning was not significant in
either group (Figure 1). To test for moderation effects, the parameters from the three
predictors were constrained to delinquency to be equal one by one (Models 2-4). The
added constraints between Harmony and delinquency, and between perceived family
functioning and delinquency, did not change the model fit significantly. However,
when the path from Family Orientation to delinquency was set to be equal (Model 4),
the model fit deteriorated, Δχ2(1) = 5.723, p = .02, demonstrating a significant modera-
tion effect of PAT tendency on the relationship between Family Orientation and
delinquency.

Discussion
The current results show that personality factors associated with a culture-specific
interpersonal style, along with positive perceptions of family functioning, which are
not culture-specific in nature, are associated with lower levels of self-reported juvenile
delinquency. That there is a relationship between perceived levels of family function-
ing and juvenile delinquency is not surprising. Family factors are correlated with
Tong et al. 545

levels of juvenile delinquency in all cultures measured, and Chinese culture is no

exception (Zhang & Messner, 1995). Less commonly reported is the manner in which
a more traditional Chinese personality style concerned with family relations and high
in concern for maintaining social hierarchies correlates with a lack of delinquent
behaviors. These results confirm the results of prior research using the CPAI (S. F.
Cheung et al., 2003), and also confirm the results of reports finding that adherence to
Chinese culture, and in particular, the practice of Chinese customs, lowers the risk of
minor offending in adolescents (Wong, 1997). In Macao, traditional Chinese cultural
and family values are still strongly held (e.g., surveys show that nearly 90% of adoles-
cents in Macao believe it is the eventual responsibility of children to support their
families; Education and Youth Affairs Bureau, 2009). These results might be consid-
ered in the context of, and contrasted with, work on the seemingly opposite effect of
other cultures. That is, in the United States, much work has been done to show that
first-generation, foreign-born immigrants are less likely to offend than subsequent
generations (Bersani, Loughran, & Piquero, 2014), who tend to become more accul-
turated and assimilated. Furthermore, even when similar risk factors for offending are
found in identical ethnic groups residing in two separate cultures, higher levels of
offending are found in the group residing in the United States (Jennings et al., 2010;
Maldonado-Molina, Piquero, Jennings, Bird, & Canino, 2009). Interestingly, within
the United States, the interaction of acculturation and immigrant generation status, and
the subsequent influence on offending, was not observed in a group of immigrants
from Asia in one report (Powell, Perreira, & Harris, 2010), perhaps hinting at the
strength of some cultures over others in protecting against delinquency.
The current results also show that in a group of children at risk for juvenile delin-
quency, owing to addictive behavior tendencies, only one of the culture-specific per-
sonality variables predicts delinquency. In this high-risk group, non-culture-specific
family variables are no longer significant. Typically, in children specifically at risk for
juvenile delinquency, there is an association between families who place a great
emphasis on supportive and caring relationships, and children who are more resilient
(Werner, 1993). The current results are unique in showing that resiliency may be tied
to adherence to traditional Chinese family values reflected in personality styles, and
not just the perception of family functioning. Thus, adolescents who adhere to tradi-
tional Chinese family values, even when some of these values could potentially be
viewed as somewhat more extreme in other cultures (e.g., strict parental control and
discipline), are less likely to engage in juvenile delinquency, even when at risk for
doing so. Interestingly, an emphasis on traditional family values but not a focus on
interpersonal harmony correlated with lower levels of juvenile delinquency in the at-
risk group. This is consistent with how family orientation is operationalized as being a
core component of all interpersonal relationships (F. M. Cheung et al., 1996).
That adherence to traditional Chinese family values is associated with lower levels
of juvenile delinquency, even in the face of specific risks for delinquency, is a finding
that has implications for research in this area. One of the most well replicated findings
in juvenile delinquency concerns the significant increase in deviant behaviors in mid-
adolescence, and subsequent decline in early adulthood (Nagin & Land, 1993).
546 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy (Moffitt, 1993) is one that has received the most
support in the conceptualization of this trend. Accordingly, two potential types of
offending are delineated, a pattern of antisocial behaviors predating adolescence, sug-
gesting a lifelong course and a neurocognitive basis, and a pattern of offending limited
to adolescence, consisting of less serious delinquent behaviors. In this respect, Moffitt
and others have proposed that adolescent-limited offending is almost normative in its
prevalence (J. C. Barnes & Beaver, 2010; Moffitt, 1993), and it has been suggested
that minor transgressions in this developmental stage are not only common, but likely
(Hasking, Scheier, & Abdallah, 2011). However, much less attention has been paid to
another group of adolescents described by Moffitt, one who refrain entirely from
either age normative or chronic forms of antisocial behavior (Boutwell & Beaver,
2008). According to Moffitt, these abstainers do not take part in such behaviors owing
to the presence of certain personality traits that would by their very nature preclude
antisocial behavior, including variables related to constraint and shyness. What if any
relationships these personality traits have in common with the culture-specific person-
ality traits measured in the current report cannot be ascertained. Nonetheless, Moffitt’s
description of abstainers would appear relevant to the study of adolescents in some
Asian cultures, such as in China. In the current report, adolescents whose personality
style favored a focus on maintaining social balance in interpersonal interactions
reported lower levels of delinquency, and even in those adolescents with addictive
behavior tendencies, a traditional family orientation was still associated with lower
levels of delinquency.
The work on culture-specific personality factors, specifically those factors unique
to Asian cultures, and Chinese culture in particular, and the relationship of these fac-
tors to delinquency are, in their nascent stages. Work in this area was, until recently,
generally exploratory in nature and lacking theoretical grounding. However, several
recent reports have confirmed the utility of theories derived from criminology, most
notably, social bond theory, or its variants, in youth from Chinese societies. Social
bond theory, broadly defined, focuses on the bonds one makes and how these predict
the likelihood of criminal behavior. These bonds consist of attachment (e.g., one’s
interest in others), commitment (e.g., commitment to mores and laws), involvement
(e.g., participation in positive activities), and beliefs. Zhang and Messner (1995) found
support for the relationship between family deviance and delinquency using social
control theory with delinquent and non-delinquent youth in China. S. Deng and Roosa
(2007) similarly found good fit for a model based on an offshoot of social bond theory,
Social Development Theory (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996), in predicting delinquency
in a non-offending sample of children in China. The culture-specific personality fac-
tors measured in the current report assess in part, an adherence to a traditional family
value system. Thus, the action of adherence may specifically reflect an aspect of self-
regulation, which potentially overlaps with aspects of social control theory, perhaps
most specifically and notably in the interest one expresses in others and their subse-
quent commitment to mores and social laws. However, the Chinese culture-specific
personality constructs measured in this report, Harmony and Family Orientation, con-
tain additional elements that appear, at least on the surface, at least somewhat distinct
Tong et al. 547

from social control. These constructs do focus on attachment, but perhaps more impor-
tantly emphasize avoidance of conflict and maintenance of equilibrium. This avoid-
ance of conflict is manifested in contentment and peace of mind. That is, individual
items from the personality assessment measure explicitly focus on the sustenance of a
peaceful state of mind and the dominant role that concern over offending others takes
in interpersonal interactions. Thus, in any interpersonal interaction, tolerance, above
all else, is given precedence. Empirical research demonstrates the relevance of these
constructs. For instance, for individuals of Chinese ethnicity, establishment and main-
tenance of relationship harmony actually supersedes self-esteem in the prediction of
life satisfaction (Kwan, Bond, & Singelis, 1997). Thus, based on the extant literature,
it can perhaps be said that there is some overlap in content between the theoretical
personality constructs measured in the current report and those from some of the most
well-validated theoretical approaches from criminology. Most importantly, both are
able to predict outcomes in delinquency. Clearly more work is needed in this area.
The current report does raise some questions. One unexpected finding was the lack
of a difference between self-reported levels of delinquency across gender. Across cul-
tures, gender is consistently found to be a risk factor for delinquent behaviors (C. K.
Cheung, Ngai, & Ngai, 2007; Cohn & Modecki, 2007). Males are generally more
likely than females to develop delinquency (Cohn & Modecki, 2007; Fagan, Van
Horn, Hawkins, & Arthur, 2007; Kim & Kim, 2008). It is not clear why this trend was
not found in the current report. The number of cases of adolescent delinquency in
females has increased, in areas such as the United States (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006).
One explanation put forth for such an increase has been the greater exposure to risk
factors for delinquency now occurring in females (e.g., substance abuse; Fagan et al.,
2007). However, in a Chinese society such as Macao, in which crime is low, there may
be less exposure to risk factors across both genders. In addition, given the Chinese
cultural emphasis on restraint, an emphasis not limited to girls and women, but also
apparent in boys and men, there may be less pressure for the latter to engage in stereo-
typically male behaviors. Thus, not only are rates of juvenile crime lower in Chinese
societies than in their Western counterparts (Education and Youth Affairs Bureau,
2013; Puzzanchera & Kang, 2013), but in some research reports, the prevalence of
some specific behaviors associated with juvenile delinquency are low enough that
their exclusion from investigative analyses is warranted (N. W. Cheung, 2014).
Nonetheless, this is an area needing further exploration as there is little research about
gender differences in adolescent delinquency in China.
There are several limitations evident in the current report. The variables utilized
were rather narrow in scope. The intention of the current study was to compare a cir-
cumscribed set of variables in a manner allowing comparison of culture-specific per-
sonality traits and non-culture specific family factors in self-reported delinquency.
Thus, other commonly reported risk factors for juvenile delinquency, such as peer
associations (Henry, Tolan, Gorman-Smith, & Schoeny, 2012), were omitted. While
peer effects have perhaps been overestimated, owing to the preponderance of cross-
sectional designs and projection from adolescents (Kandel, 1996), and in some reports
are either predicted by family factors (Goebert et al., 2012) or limited in their influence
548 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

to specific developmental periods (Compas & Phares, 1991), they are nonetheless
generally believed to provide context for delinquency (G. M. Barnes, Welte, Hoffman,
& Dintcheff, 2005). More of a concern in the current report is that the socializing influ-
ences which were not measured, specifically parental monitoring, and affiliation with
offending peers, are thought to interact bi-directionally with personality traits, in a
manner that could influence offending behavior (G. M. Barnes et al., 2005). Similarly,
the current report did not incorporate other risks for criminal behavior, risks that have
been well replicated, such as socioeconomic status and childhood trauma. Thus, even
though our sample was relatively homogeneous in ethnicity and, presumably socio-
economic variables, there is little information on how culture-specific personality
variables may interact with (or potentially be overwhelmed by) extreme variations in
socioeconomic status or variables associated with trauma in childhood/adolescence to
predict the likelihood of delinquency. This issue has been raised by others, who argue
that risk factors will vary depending on the sample under study, the sampling tech-
nique utilized, and the specific characteristics of the respondents within individual
reports (Asscher, Wissink, Dekovic, Prinzie, & Stams, 2013; Cummings, Davies, &
Campbell, 2000), and the current report is in no way immune to such concerns. Thus,
the generalizability of the current results is questionable.
Of note, in the past, criticisms have been levied at research utilizing personality
traits in studies of delinquency owing to assessment measure item overlap between
predictors and criteria (Tennenbaum, 1977). However, more recent work has found
that such relationships exist even after controlling for overlapping item content
between measures of personality and measures of deviance (Krueger et al., 1994). In
addition, there is data consistently showing that specific essential traits are associated
with deviant behavior (Cale, 2006; Miller & Lynam, 2001), and also associated with
many other psychological and behavioral outcomes, when separated or combined with
other personality traits (Bogg & Roberts, 2004; Krueger, 2000; Ozer & Benet-
Martinez, 2006). These results would appear to suggest that personality traits are not
necessarily simply measuring delinquency itself. This interpretation is further strength-
ened by the fact that although there is a general correlation between personality traits
and behavior, the correlation is modest enough in strength to argue that these con-
structs are separate, if related, entities (Nisbett, 1980). More of a concern in the current
report is the overlap between culture-specific personality variables and non-culture-
specific familial variables. In the current report, non-culture-specific perceptions of
family functioning lose explanatory power once culture-specific personality variables
are considered. Item response theory may be needed to further delineate what is, and
what is not culture-specific in a predictive capacity.
Regardless, the current results have practical relevance. The identification of per-
sonality traits in high-risk children that are associated with lower levels of juvenile
delinquency not only lead to greater understanding of developmental processes but are
also crucial in helping to design prevention and intervention approaches. Future
research will need to investigate further such factors and how they might vary across
regions of China (Ngai, Cheung, & Ngai, 2007). Regardless, juvenile delinquency is a
social problem on the rise in China (Curran & Cook, 1993; Xiang, 1999), and
Tong et al. 549

additional research is needed to determine the factors that contribute to, or help pre-
vent, the onset of delinquent behaviors, and how these factors vary across cultures.

Acknowledgment
We thank Professor Fanny Cheung and her colleagues for granting permission to use the
CPAI-A.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article: The current research was supported by funding from a
University of Macau Grant: MYRG106(Y1-L2)-FSH11-CMZ.

References
Asscher, J. J., Wissink, I. B., Dekovic, M., Prinzie, P., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2013). Delinquent
behavior, poor relationship quality with parents, and involvement with deviant peers in
delinquent and nondelinquent adolescents: Different processes, informant bias, or both?
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58, 1001-1019.
Barnes, G. M., Hoffman, J. H., Welte, J. H., Farrell, M. P., & Dintcheff, B. A. (2006). Effects
of parental monitoring and peer deviance on substance use and delinquency. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 68, 1084-1104.
Barnes, G. M., Welte, J., Hoffman, J. H., & Dintcheff, B. A. (2005). Shared predictors of youth-
ful gambling, substance use and delinquency. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19,
165-174.
Barnes, G. M., & Welte, J. W. (1986). Patterns and predictors of alcohol use among 7-12th
grade students in New York State. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47, 53-62.
Barnes, J. C., & Beaver, K. M. (2010). An empirical examination of adolescence-limited
offending: A direct test of Moffitt’s maturity gap thesis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38,
1176-1185.
Bersani, B. E., Loughran, T. A., & Piquero, A. R. (2014). Comparing patterns and predic-
tors of immigrant offending among a sample of adjudicated youth. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 43, 1914-1933.
Blonigen, D. M. (2010). Explaining the relationship between age and crime: Contributions from
the developmental literature on personality. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 89-100.
Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: A meta-
analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130,
887-919.
Boutwell, B. B., & Beaver, K. M. (2008). A biosocial explanation of delinquency abstention.
Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 18, 59-74.
Branje, S. J. T., Hale, W. W., III, & Meeus, W. H. J. (2008). Reciprocal development of parent-
adolescent support and adolescent problem behaviors. In M. Kerr, H. Stattin, & R. C. M. E.
Engels (Eds.), What can parents do?: New insights into the role of parents in adolescent
problem behavior (pp. 135-162). Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
550 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

Cale, E. M. (2006). A quantitative review of the relations between the “Big 3” higher order
personality dimensions and antisocial behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 40,
250-284.
Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Krueger, R. F., & Schmutte, P.
S. (1994). Are some people crime-prone? Replications of the personality-crime relationship
across countries, genders, races, and methods. Criminology, 32, 163-195.
Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (1996). The Social Development Model: A theory of antiso-
cial behavior. In J. D. Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current theories (pp. 149-
197). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, X. (2010). Socio-emotional development in Chinese children. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The
Oxford handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 37-52). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Cheung, C. K., Ngai, N. P., & Ngai, S. Y. (2007). Family strain and adolescent delinquency in
two Chinese cities. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16, 626-641.
Cheung, F. M., Cheung, S. F., & Zhang, J. (2004). Convergent validity of the Chinese Personality
Assessment Inventory and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Preliminary
findings with a normative sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 92-103.
Cheung, F. M., Gan, Y. Q., & Lo, P. M. (2003). Personality and psychopathology: Insights from
Chinese studies. In W. S. Teng (Ed.), Asian culture and psychotherapy: Implications for
East and West (pp. 21-39). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Cheung, F. M., & Leung, K. (2005). The Cross-Cultural (Chinese) Personality Assessment
Inventory-Adolescent version (CPAI-A). Hong Kong, China: F. M. Cheung, Department of
Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Fan, R. M., Song, W., & Zhang, J. (1996). Development of the
Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27,
181-199.
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J. X., Sun, H. F., Gan, Y. Q., Song, W. Z., & Xie, D. (2001).
Indigenous Chinese personality constructs: Is the Five-Factor Model complete? Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407-433.
Cheung, N. W. (2014). Low self-control and co-occurrence of gambling with substance use and
delinquency among Chinese adolescents. Journal of Gambling Studies, 30, 105-124.
Cloninger, C. R. (1987). A systematic method for clinical description and classifications of
personality variants. Archives of General Psychiatry, 44, 573-588.
Cohn, E. S., & Modecki, K. L. (2007). Gender differences in predicting delinquent behavior: Do
individual differences matter? Social Behavior and Personality, 35, 359-374.
Compas, B. E., & Phares, V. (1991). Stress during childhood and adolescence: Source of risk
and vulnerability. In E. M. Cummings, A. L. Greene, & K. H. Karraker (Eds.), Life-span
developmental psychology: Perspectives on stress and coping (pp. 111-130). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and
NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. Y., & Campbell, S. B. (2000). Developmental psychopathology
and family process: Theory, research, and clinical applications. New York, NY: Guilford
Press.
Curran, D. J., & Cook, S. (1993). Growing fears, rising crime: Juveniles and China’s justice
system. Crime & Delinquency, 39, 296-315.
Deng, S., & Roosa, M. W. (2007). Family influences on adolescent delinquent behaviors:
Applying the Social Development Model to a Chinese sample. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 40, 333-344.
Tong et al. 551

Deng, Y., Dou, G., & Zhang, F. (2000). A study of the basic personality traits of juvenile crimi-
nals and related factors. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 8, 160-162.
Ebstein, R. P., Novick, O., Umansky, R., Priel, B., Osher, Y., Blaine, D., . . .Belmaker, R. H.
(1996). Dopamine D4 receptor (D4DR) exon III polymorphism associated with the human
personality trait of novelty seeking. Nature Genetics, 12, 78-80.
Education and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2009). Youth Indicators of Macau 2008, Macau, Youth
Indicators of Macao, 2009.
Education and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2013). Juvenile crime and delinquency. Retrieved from
http://www.dsej.gov.mo/ijm/stat/pdf/yim_07.pdf.
Eysenck, H. J. (1977). Crime and personality. London, England: Routledge.
Fagan, A. A., Van Horn, M. L., Hawkins, J. D., & Arthur, M. W. (2007). Gender similarities and
differences in the association between risk and protective factors and self-reported serious
delinquency. Prevention Science, 8, 115-124.
Finkel, D., & McGue, M. (1997). Sex differences and nonadditivity in heritability of the
Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire scales. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 72, 929-938.
Funder, D. C. (2013). The personality puzzle (6th ed.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Goebert, D., Chang, J. Y., Chung-Do, J., Else, R., Hamagami, F., Helm, S., . . .Sugimoto-
Matsuda, J. J. (2012). Social ecological determinants of youth violence among ethnically
diverse Asian and Pacific Islander students. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 16,
188-196.
Hasking, P. A., Scheier, L. M., & Abdallah, A. B. (2011). The three latent classes of adolescent
delinquency and the risk factors for membership in each class. Aggressive Behavior, 37,
19-35.
Henry, D. B., Tolan, P. H., Gorman-Smith, D., & Schoeny, M. E. (2012). Risk and direct
protective factors for youth violence: Results from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention’s Multisite Violence Prevention Project. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 43(Suppl.), S67-S75.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jennings, W. G., Maldonado-Molina, M. M., Piquero, A. R., Odgers, C. L., Bird, H., & Canino,
G. (2010). Sex differences in trajectories of offending among Puerto Rican youth. Crime &
Delinquency, 56, 327-357.
Jessor, R. (2008). Description versus explanation in cross-national research on adolescence. The
Journal of Adolescent Health, 43, 527-528.
Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., Costa, F. M., Dong, Q., Zhang, H., & Wang, Z. (2003). Adolescent
problem behavior in China and the United States: A cross-national study of psychosocial
protective factors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13, 329-360.
Kandel, D. B. (1996). The parental and peer contexts of adolescent deviance: An algebra of
interpersonal influences. Journal of Drug Issues, 26, 289-315.
Kim, H. S., & Kim, H. S. (2000). Development of a scale for measuring delinquent behavior.
Korean Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 11, 79-90.
Kim, H. S., & Kim, H. S. (2008). The impact of family violence, family functioning, and
parental partner dynamics on Korean juvenile delinquency. Child Psychiatry & Human
Development, 39, 439-453.
Krueger, R. F. (2000). Personality traits in late adolescence predict mental disorders in early
adulthood: A prospective-epidemiological study. Journal of Personality, 67, 39-65.
Krueger, R. F., Schmutte, P. S., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Campbell, K., & Silva, P. A. (1994).
Personality traits are linked to crime among men and women: Evidence from a birth cohort.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 328-338.
552 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life sat-
isfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 1938-1951.
Lau, S., & Leung, K. (1992). Relations with parents and school and Chinese adolescents’ self-
concept, delinquency, and academic performance. The British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 62, 193-202.
Loehlin, J. C., McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., & John, O. P. (1998). Heritabilities of common and
measure-specific components of the Big-Five personality factors. Journal of Research in
Personality, 32, 431-453.
Loo, J. M., Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. (2008). Gambling among the Chinese: A comprehensive
review. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1152-1166.
Lynam, D. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Wikström, P. O., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. (2000). The
interaction between impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: The effects of
impulsivity are stronger in poorer neighborhoods. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109,
563-574.
Ma, H. K., Shek, D. T. L., Cheung, P. C., & Lee, R. Y. P. (1996). The relation of prosocial and
antisocial behavior to personality and peer relationships in Hong Kong Chinese adoles-
cents. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 157, 255-266.
Maldonado-Molina, M. M., Piquero, A. R., Jennings, W. G., Bird, H., & Canino, G. (2009).
Trajectories of delinquency among Puerto Rican children and adolescents at two sites.
Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 46, 144-181.
McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observ-
er’s perspective: Data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88,
547-561.
Meehl, P. E. (1986). Trait language and behaviorese. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.),
Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 315-334). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to anti-
social behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39, 765-793.
Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A
developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674-701.
Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Silva, P. A., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1995). Individual differences
in personality and intelligence are linked to crime: Cross context evidence from nations,
neighborhoods, genders, races, and age-cohorts. In J. Hagan (Ed.), Current perspectives on
aging and the life cycle (pp. 1-34). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Nagin, D. S., & Land, K. C. (1993). Age, criminal careers, and population heterogeneity:
Specification and estimation of a nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology, 31,
327-362.
Ngai, N. P., Cheung, C. K., & Ngai, S. S. (2007). Cognitive and social influences on gang
involvement among delinquents in three Chinese cities. Adolescence, 42, 381-403.
Nisbett, R. E. (1980). The trait construct in lay and professional psychology. In L. Festinger
(Ed.), Retrospections on social psychology (pp. 109-130). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential out-
comes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401-421.
Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 524-539.
Tong et al. 553

Powell, D., Perreira, K. M., & Harris, K. M. (2010). Trajectories of delinquency from adoles-
cence to adulthood. Youth & Society, 41, 475-502.
Puzzanchera, C., & Kang, W. (2013). Easy access to FBI arrest statistics 1994-2010. Retreived
from http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezaucr/.
Raine, A., Reynolds, C., Venables, P. H., Mednick, S. A., & Farrington, D. P. (1998).
Fearlessness, stimulation-seeking, and large body size at age 3 years as early predisposi-
tions to childhood aggression at age 11 years. Archives of General Psychiatry, 55, 745-751.
Reckless, W. C. (1970). Containment theory. In M. Wolfgang, L. Savitz, & N. Johnson (Eds.),
The sociology of crime and delinquency (pp. 287-300). New York, NY: John Wiley.
Reynolds, S. K., & Clark, L. A. (2001). Predicting dimensions of personality disorder from
domains and facets of the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 69, 199-222.
Ryan, C. E., Epstein, N. B., Keiter, G. I., Miller, I. W., & Bishop, D. S. (2005). Evaluating and
treating families: The McMaster approach. New York, NY: Routledge.
Sakai, J. T., Ho, P. M., Shore, J. H., Risk, N. K., & Price, R. K. (2005). Asians in the United
States: Substance dependence and use of substance-dependence treatment. Journal of
Substance Abuse Treatment, 29, 75-84.
Shek, D. T. (2001). Reliability and factor structure of the Chinese version of the Self-Report
Family Inventory in Chinese adolescents. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 375-385.
Shek, D. T. (2002a). Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Family Awareness
Scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 61-72.
Shek, D. T. (2002b). Chinese adolescents’ perceptions of family functioning: Personal, school-
related, and family correlates. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 128,
358-380.
Snyder, H. N. (2002). Juvenile arrests 2000 (OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin). Washington,
DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 National report
(NCJ178257). Washington, DC: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Sun, T. L. (2008). Themes in Chinese psychology. Singapore: Cengage Learning Asia.
Tang, C. S. K., & Wu, A. M. S. (2012). Gambling-related cognitive biases and pathological
gambling among youths, young adults, and mature adults in Chinese societies. Journal of
Gambling Studies, 28, 139-154.
Tellegen, A. (1991). Personality traits: Issues of definition, evidence, and assessment. In W. M.
Grove & D. Cicchetti (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology (pp. 10-35). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Tellegen, A., Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, T. J. Jr., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N. L., & Rich, S. (1988).
Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54, 1031-1039.
Tennenbaum, D. J. (1977). Personality and criminality: A summary and implications of the
literature. Journal of Criminal Justice, 5, 225-235.
Wanner, B., Vitaro, F., Carbonneau, R., & Tremblay, R. E. (2009). Cross-lagged links
among gambling, substance use, and delinquency from midadolescence to young adult-
hood: Additive and moderating effects of common risk factors. Psychology of Addictive
Behaviors, 23, 91-104.
Wei, H., & Yang, F. (2011). Social psychological factors contributing to male juvenile delin-
quency. Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics, 13, 904-907.
Werner, E. E. (1993). Risk, resilience, and recovery—Perspectives from the Kauai longitudinal-
study. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 503-515.
554 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(5)

Wong, S. K. (1997). Delinquency of Chinese-Canadian youth: A test of opportunity, control,

and intergeneration conflict theories. Youth & Society, 29, 112-133.
Xiang, G. (1999). Delinquency and its prevention in China. International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43, 61-70.
Yang, K. S., & Bond, M. H. (1990). Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or
imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58,
1087-1095.
Zhang, L., & Messner, S. F. (1995). Family deviance and delinquency in China. Criminology,
33, 359-387.
Zuckerman, M. (1989). Personality in the third dimension: A psychobiological approach.
Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 391-418.