See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/15279735

Self-report study of impulsive and delinquent behavior in college students

Article  in  Journal of Adolescent Health · July 1994

DOI: 10.1016/1054-139X(94)90602-5 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS
70 1,843

2 authors:

Betty Pfefferbaum Peter B. Wood

University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Eastern Michigan University
311 PUBLICATIONS   19,125 CITATIONS    48 PUBLICATIONS   2,028 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Military Social Work View project

Research after Disasters View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Peter B. Wood on 24 August 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH 1994;15:295-302

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

BETTY PFEFFERBAUM, M.D., J.D., AND PETER 8. WOOD, Ph.D.

Ptrryose: This self-report study of college students KEY WORDS:

sought to examine the relationship between risk-taking Delinquency
and delinquent behavior, to develop reliable measures Impulsiveness
of impulsiveness and attraction to thrill-seeking and Risk-taking
risk-taking, and to measure the relationships among Thrill-seeking
conventional correlates of delinquent behavior, person-
ality factors, and delinquent behavior itself.
Mctkods: A sample of 296 undergraduate college stu-
Delinquency poses a serious threat to society and is
dents completed questionnaires pertaining to detln-
a growing problem for which has &en found mini-
quent behavior and other activities, identification with
educational goals and behavior, and attraction to thrill- mal effective prevention or treatment. The cost of
seeking and risk-taking behavior, as well as items from delinquent behavior, both to the individual and to
the Self-Control arnd Socialization scales of the Catifor- society, is great. Detained and incarcerated youth
nia Personality InvPntorf. are at high risk for physical and emotional disorders
Rrsdts: Males who measured high in thrill-seeking (1) and experience more emergency room visits,
behavior and low in self-control reported significantly hospitalizations, accidents, and injuries than their
more property delinquency. Interpersonal delinquency nondelinquent counterparts of similar socio-
was most influenced by a lack of self-control. There was economic status (2).
a negative correlation hctween substance abuse and so- Delinquency encompasses many behavioral con-
cialization. The reasons most often given for property
stellations and goes by various names. The Di~gr~os-
and substance delinquency were “fun/thrills” while
tic cr& Sfnfisficnl Mmld III-R (3) categorizes diag-
those most often given for interpersonal delinquency
involved “anger/revenge.” noses related to delinquency under the Disruptive
Conclr~sion: Variables representing conventional so- Behavior Disorders (including Conduct Disorders)
ciological theories have often been treated as the imme- and Oppositional Defiant Disorder. The conduc\-
diate causal factors in juvenile delinquency, but their disorders are characterized by “a persistent pattern
impact may be mediated through factors such as impul- of conduct in which the basic rights of others and
siveness and an attraction to thrill-seeking and risk- major age-appropriate societal norms or rules are
taking. violated” [p. 531. About 9%, of males and 2’2 of
females below the age of 18 years have conduct
disorders. Mental health professionals who SEC
youth in treatment settings find that delinquency is
established early, may be predictive of later crimi-
nality, and is often recalcitrant.
Impulsiveness represents spontaneous, uninhib-
ited reactions and behavior and is often a compo-
nent of delinquent behavior. It is commonly present

295
Cl Society lor Adolescent Mcd~cme, IYY4
‘I 054-l 39x/94/57.u0
296 PFEFFERRAUM AND WOOD JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH Vol. 15, No. 4

in at least four other major public health problems correlates of delinquent behavior, personality fac-
affecting youth: substance abuse, sexually transmit- tors, and delinquent behavior itself.
ted disease, pregnancy, and suicide. Impulsiveness
may result from a physiologic event that discharges
an impulse, or it may represent escape from the
Mefhods
control of an inhibitory mechanism. Various degrees Sample
of conscious awareness and self-control accompany
We were interested in assessing delinquent behav-
impulsive behavior. In some, this behavior may cd-
iors rather than the syndrome of delinquency and in
minate in feelings of excitement or thrill which may
examining a range of behaviors rather than focusing
be psychologically or physiologically reinforced. A
on any one. Therefore, we chose a population of
number of authorities have discussed the role of
youth without identified pathology who were nei-
endogenous intrinsic rewards in delinquency (4-71.
ther incarcerated nor in treatment. The sample was
According to Matza and Sykes (8, delinquent
nonrandom and consisted of students enrolled in a
youth seek excitement and adventure which are
state-supported university in the midwest United
valued for the stimulation they provide. Risk-taking
States. Use of college student populations for this
is one dimension of the drive for thrills and excite-
sort of research has a long and well-established
ment, This search for excitement and adventure is
history in the literature (10-13). Whereas a college
not inherently deviant and may involve many be-
sample selects people of a higher socioeconomic and
haviors accepted by most of society. Deviance arises
educational status, the sample provided an oppor-
when the search is pursued in a disapproved fash-
tunity to assess subjects who, we hoped, would be
ion outside the sanctioned venues of sports, recre-
reflective and who therefore might provide more
ation, and holidays (8). Although taking a car for a
accurate information regarding their teenage experi-
joyride, breaking into a house or building, vandaliz-
ences.
ing or setting fire to property, and fighting provide
Four hundred student surveys were distributed
little economic incentive, they are imbued with a
and a total of 296 undergraduate students com-
risk of detection and punishment and may be rein-
pleted questionnaires, with a response rate of about
forced by biologic and social factors.
74% which compares very favorably with studies
While delinquent thrill-seeking and risk-taking
using similar data collection techniques. Over half
appear intrinsically rewarding for some individuals,
of the subjects were freshmen. Surveys were admin-
other forms of thrill-seeking and risk-taking also
istered in several large classes (X20-150 students) in
provide sensory or psychological rewards. Persons
Introduction to Sociology classes. These students
who voluntarily participate in rock climbing, rap-
represent the total range of colleges and majors in
pelling, scuba diving, white water rafting, canoeing,
the university. Student participation was completely
skydiving, motorcycle riding, and hang gliding may
voluntary and respondents participated anony-
experience the same sensory rewards as persons
mously. There was no financial compensation for
whose thrill-seeking behavior is associated with de-
completion of the survey and there was no follow-
linquency (7,9).
up to determine reasons for non-participation or to
Some individuals choose delinquent thrill-seek-
enhance the response rate.
ing rather than more culturally approved forms of
sensory stimulation. If one assumes that all individ-
uals entertain a demand for sensory stimulation, Questionnaire
that some demand more than others and that there The anonymous, self-report survey was approved
is differential access to culturally approved forms of by the institutional review board. The instrument
thrill-seeking, it follows that a combination of both included demographics, self-reported delinquent
high demand and limited access to culturally ap- behavior, other self-reported activities, identification
proved forms of thrill-seeking would make an indi- with educational goals and behavior, and attraction
vidual or group more like!y tc engage in delinquent to thrill-seeking and risk-taking behavior. In addi-
behavior. In addition, it is likely that some make no tion, items from two scales of the California Person-
conscious choice at all, but simply fail to curtail ality Inventory (CPI), the Self-Control and Socializa-
impulsive behavior. This study examines impulsive- tion scales, were included (14).
~SS and delinquent behavior in college students by Demographic information included gender, fam-
measuring the relationships among conventional ily size, parents’ education, and religiosity. Family
June 1994 IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR IN COLLEGE STUDENTS 297

Table 1. Delinquency Items Four scales represented characteristics thought to

Interpersonal delinquency (how many times in the past year) be predictive of delinquent behavior. These in-
Hit an instructor or supervisor cluded 6 items related to school (Schoolf, 6 items
Had serious fight at work or school related to thrill-seeking behavior (Thrillseek), 38
Participated in a gang fight
Hurt someone badly enough to need medical attention
true/false items from the CPI Self-Control scale
Used a gun, knife, or other weapon to get something from (Self-Control), and 46 true/false items from the CPI
someone else Socialization scaie (Socialization). Self-Control was
Property delinquency: the measure of impulsiveness and Socialization
Theft (how many times in the past year) measured adherence to social norms. The Socializa-
Stolen something from someone else worth less than $50
Stolen something firm someone else worth more than $50
tion and Self-Control scales are effective in distin-
Shoplifted something from a store guishing between labeled (clinically identified) de-
Taken a car for a joyride (illegally) linquents and nondelinquents (15). We used these
Stolen something from out of car scales to determine if delinquent behavior could be
Vandalism (how many times in the past year) predicted in a normative gopulatlDn which to our
Damaged a car on purpose
knowledge has not been previously attempted. The
Broken into a house or building illegally
Set fire to someone else’s property School and Thrillseek scales were constructed by the
Damaged school property on purpose authors and consisted of Likert-type items. School
Damaged property at work on purpose reflected the degree to which the respondent identi-
Substance delinquency (how many times in the past four weeks) fied with educational goals and behaviors. Thrill-
Smoked cigarettes or used tobacco products
seek measured the respondent’s attraction to thrill-
Drunk beer, wine, or liquor
Gotten drunk on beer, wine, or liquor seeking and risk-taking behavior.
Used marijuana, pot, or hash
Used harder drugs like cocaine, crack, speed downers, heroin,
LSD, or angel dust W’CP)
Results
All scales produced an alpha reliability exceeding
size identified the number of family members in the 0.75, and all genet-ated single-factor solutions with
respondent’s home. Parents’ education reflected the Eigenvalues exceeding 1.0. Table 2 presents the
combined levels of education achieved by both par- zero-order correlation matrix for all variables,
ents rather than the specific number of years of Gender produced a consistently sfrong effect
education because many suLjects knew the educa- with females significantly less invnlvtia in delin-
tional level their parents had achieved but did n’ot quent behavior than males. Females also registered
know the actual number ‘of years completed. Reli- lower attraction to thrill-seeking and higher degrees
giosity measured the importance of religion to the of both self-control and socialization. The more re-
respondent on a Likert-type scale from 1 to 4. ligious the respondent, the less likely he/she en-
Table 1 lists the items related to delinquent gaged in any delinquent behavior, especially Prop-
behavior including ten items identified as Inter- erty Delinquency. Sports correlated positively, and
personal Delinquency, five items identified as Prop- Reading correlated negatively, with Interpersonal
erty Delinquency, and five items identified as Sub- Delinquency. Riding and Parents’ Education were
stance Delinquency. With the inclusion of a question positively associated with Substance Delinquency.
regarding involvement with the police, these 21 Each of the four predictive scales (School, Thrill-
items constituted the Total Delmquency score. seek, Self-Control, and Socialization) operated in the
Three variables: Sports, R&ding, and Reading, expected direction and in a strong, statistically sig-
were included to represent behaviors thought to be nificant, fashion. Respondents who registered
associated with delinquent behavior. The Sports strong identification with education, low levels of
scale reflected athletic involvement; Riding repre- thrill-seeking and high degrees of self-control and
sented joyriding for fun, in a car or truck; and socialization reported less delinquent behavior. Of
Reading identified a\:ademic interests and pursuits. the three personality scales (Thrillseek, Self-Control,
It was hypothesized ‘that those teens who engaged and Socialization), Thrillseek was most strongly
in joyriding would be more likely to exhibit delin- correlated with Property Delinquency, Self-Control
querit behavior while those who had greater aca- with Interpersonal Delinquency, and Socialization
demic interest would be less likely to do so. Predic- with Substance Delinquency. Each of the three per-
tions about athletic involvement were less obvious. sonality scales correlated with the Total Delin-
298 PFEFFERBAUM AND WOOD JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH Vol. 15, No. 4

Table 2. Zero-Order Correlation Matrix: All Variables (n = 296)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (‘0 (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

(1) Property
Delinquency 1.000
(2)Interpersonal
Delinquency 0.640" 1.000
(3)Substance
Delinquency 0.256" 0.279'. 1.000
(4)Total
Delinquency o.P45* 0.779" 0.681" 1.000
(5)Gender -0.206*'-0.252" -0.199**-0.275'* 1.000
1 = male
2 = female
(4)School -0.173" -0.223" -0.195" -0249** 0.033 1.000
(7)Thrillseek 0.393" 0.313** 0.334" 0:461'*-0.259**-0.112" 1.000
(8)SelfControl -O-332**-0XP -0.320" -0.432" 0.149' 0.191"*-0.552** 1.000
-0.247. -0.337" -0.435" -0.426'* 0.193" 0.220" -0.423*' 0.549"
(9)Socialization 1.000
(10)FamilySize -0.046 -0.036 -0.086 -0.084 0.126' -0.098 -0.024 0.069 0.161' 1.000
(11)Parents'
Education 0.056 0.032 0.152' 0.106 0.058 0.009 0.135' -0.109 -0.043 0.027 l.'W
(12)Sports 0.111 0.203" -0.065 0.087 -0.133' -0.109 0.133* -0.090 -0.005 0.054 0.074 1.000
(13)Reading -0.088 -0.145**-0.070 -0.120 -0.089 0.107 -0.107 0.111 0.116 -0.136'0.035 0.065 1.000
(14)Car-Riding 0.050 0.048 0.201" 0.135' -0.029 -0.022 0.245*'-0264.' -0.170" 0.050 O.lW* -0.028 -0.021 1.000
(15)Religiosity -0.123 -0.038 -0.114 -0.130' 0.105 0.149' -0.095 0:042 0.105 0.003 0.045 0.063 0.065 -0.016 1.000

*Significant at p < 0.05

**Significant at p < 0.01

quency measure in the predicted (direction and ex- The three activity variables (Sports, Riding, and
ceeding 0.4. Reading) were correlates of delinquency rather than
Self-Control, the measure of impulsiveness, was predictors, but were also in(:luded in the analysis.
treated as the primary intervening variable. Table 3 Respondents who engaged in frequent joyriding
presents results of the regression analysis, treating registered significantly lower self-control than
Self-Control as the dependent variable. Both full others (beta = -0.10, p c 0.05). Sports and Reading
and reduced models (stepwise regression) are had no significant eftect. dy far the most influential
presented using standardized coefficients. The four factors were Thrillseek and Socialization with betas
demographic variables (Gender, Family Size, Par- of -0.35 and 0.37 (p < O.Ol), respectively. Persons
ents’ Education, and Religiosity) as well as School with !ligh attraction to thrill-seeking and low de-
behaved in the expected directions but had statisti- grees of socialization registered low levels of self-
cally insignificant influences on Self-Control. control. The reduced model saved only three pre-
dictors (Riding, Thrillseek, and Socialization) but
accounted for 45% of the variance in Self-Control.
Table 3. Self-Control as a Dependent Variable, Ordinary
Least Squares (OLS)Regression, Standardized Coefficients Table 4 illustrates the impact of our predictors
Ot = 241) (including Self-Control) on the four categories of
Predictors
delinquency. Gender, which was saved in all the
Full Reduced
reduced models, had a strong effect on all four
Gender (Female) -0.04 -
Family Size -0.04 -
categories of delinquency, with females registering
Number of Parents at Home 0.09 - significantly less delinquency than males. Regarding
Parents’ Education -0.07 _- Property Delinquency, each variable operated in the
Religiosity -0.06 _- expected direction in the full model, but only
Sports -0.05 -- Gender, Thrillseek, and Self-Control were saved in
Riding -0.10’ -0.11* the reduced equation. Apparently males with a
Reading 0.06 -_
School 0.07 -_ strong appetite for thrill-seeking and low self-con-
Thrillseek -0.35” -0.36** trol are significantly more engaged in Property De-
Socialization 0 37*+ 0.40** linquency than are others.
R2 0.47 0.45 With respect to Interpersonal Delinquency,
--
‘Significant at p < 0.05. Sports was influential in the full model with those
“Significant at p < 0.01. more involved in sports registering higher levels of
June 1994 IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR IN COLLEGE STUDENTS 299

Table 4. Self-Control as a Predictor of Delinquency, OLS Regression, Standardized Coefficients

Property Interpersonal Substance Total
Delinquency Delinquency Delinquency Delinquency
(12= 216) 01 = 215) (11= 217) 01 = 2121
Predictors Full Reduced Full Reduced Full Reduced Full Reduced
Gender (Female) -0.11’ -0.13** -0.15 -0.20*** -0.15** -0.16** -0.1s*** -0.1s***
Family Size -0.01 - -0.03 - -0.06 - -0.05 -
Number of Parents at Home -0.01 - 0.01 - -0.02 - 0.00 -
Parents’ Education 0.03 - -0.00 - 0.13** 0.14** 0.07 -
Religiosity -0.08 - -0.00 - -0.06 - 0.07 -
Sports 0.09 - 0.14** - -0.13** - 0.04 -
Riding -0.05 - -0.02 - 0.08 - -0.00 -
Reading -0.06 - -0.11 - 0.01 - -0.07 -
School -0.10 - -0.14** -0.17*** -0.09 - -0.14** -0.14**
Thrillseek 0.21** 0.22*** 0.09 - 0.04 - 0.17** 0.19***
Self-Control -0.1s** -0.20*** -O.lS** -0.31*** -0.10 - -0.19** -0.20***
Socialization -0.01 - -0.11 - -0.27*** -0.39*** -0.15** -0.16**
Rr 0.20 0.17 0.25 0.20 0.27 0.23 0.34 0.33
“Significant at p < 0.10.
‘“Significant at y < 0.05.
‘“*Significant at p < 0.01.

Interpersonal Delinquency (beta = 0.14, p < 0.05). its effect on Interpersonal Delinquency since School
This suggests that those more attracted to physical was not a significant predictor of either Property or
kinds of diversion may be more prone to Interper- Substance Delinquency. All three of the personality
sonal Delinquency. Whether Sports is predictive or measures, (ThrillseeL, Self-Control, and Socializa-
simply a concomitant is unclear, though respon- tion) operated in strong, statistically significant
dents who described themselves as more physical in fashion. The reduced model accounted for 33% of
their pursuits also saw themselves as more aggres- the variance in Total Delinquency.
sive. Sports had no significant effect on Property Table 5 identifies reasons given by respondents
Delinquency, however, and a negative effect on for their delinquent behaviors. When respondents
Substance Delinquency. Both School and Self-Con- admitted specific delinquent acts, they were asked
trol were significantly and negatively correlated to provide the one main reason for the behavior.
with Interpersonal Delinquency while Thrillseek Table 5 demonstrates the usefulness of examining
was not a significant factor in predicting lnterper- the different categories of delinquent behavior sepa-
sonal Delinquency. rately. The reason most often given for Property
Males were more involved in substance use than Delinquency was “fun/ thrills” (38%) followed by
females (beta = -0.15, p c 0.05). The higher the
combined parental education, the more likely the Table 5. Reasons Given for Various Delinquent
respondent was to use controlled substances, a vari- Behaviors” (n = 241)
able saved in the reduced equation (beta = 0.13, p < Inter-
0.05). Sports was negatively related to substance use Reason given Property personal Substance Total
(beta = -0.13, p < 0.05). Socialization was a signifi- “Fun/thrills” 38 (108) 11 (17) 45 (246) 38 (371)
cant predictor (beta = -0.27, p < O.Ol), but Thrillseek “Getting away
and Self-Control had no significant effect on sub- witi, it” 21 (601 2 (31 3 (17) 8 (SO)
“Feels good” - (1) - (Oj 3? (117) 18 (178)
stance use.
“Anger/revenge“ 15 (421 48 (74) - (0) 12 (116)
The last two columns in Table 4 illustrate the 13 (36) 17 (2Y) 14 (75) 14 (138)
“Friends doing too”
effect of the predictors on the measure of Total Miscellaneous
Delinquency. As expected, gender was important, other 13 (3Slb 22 (35) 6 (32) 11 (105)
with males far more involved in delinquent behav- Total 100 (285) 100 (156) 100 (547) 100 (988)
ior overall (female beta = -0.18, p < 0.01). None of Values are given in percentages; values in parentheses are
the activity variables (Sports, Riding, and Reading), numbers of responses.
“Percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole num-
was significant in predicting Total Delinquency. The
ber.
School variable, representing attachment to school, b22 of the 38 reasons given for property delinquency were
was saved in the reduced model, probably reflecting based on need.
300 PFEFFERBAUM AND WOOD JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH Vol. 15, No. 4

“getting away with it” (21%), both of which suggest recidivism through positive endogenous reinforce-
the presence of intrinsic rewards. Of all reasons ment (4-6).
given for Interpersonal Delinquency, 48% involved With respect to a psychological reward, Lyng (9)
“anger/revenge” and usually occurred in a situation noted that “beating the odds” may create a sense of
in which the respondent reported having responded accomplishment at performing a difficult task when
in an impulsive, aggressive fashion to some provo- some risk is involved, and thereby increase self-es-
cation. Of those admitting to Substance Delin- teem. Others have also found a link between self-es-
quency, 45% said they did it for “fun/thrills” teem and delinquency (18,19). For some, skillful and
while 32% said they did it because it “feels good.” successful risk-taking might be the only way to
Finally, the last column in Table 5 indicates that experience a sense of accomplishment and self-
“fun/thrills” was the reason cited far more often worth: it couples feelings of having accomplished a
than any other for delinquent behavior, in general, difficult task well and having gotten away with it.
(38%), while “feels good” was the second most com- This may be true for both delinquent and nondelin-
monly cited reason (18%). quent risk-taking behavior.
The categorization of delinquent behavior into
the three types (Property, Interpersonal, and Sub-
stance) was not intended to reflect clinical catego-
Discmsiort ries. Rather, it represented the selection of a few
A causal relationship between impulsiveness and typical items drawn from scales used in previous
delinquent behaviors has been postulated (6,9,16). self-report studies (20,211. Even though the catego-
External stimuli in the form of social relationships ries were defined on the basis of relatively few
and structure are channeled through the individual; items, our results indicate that they may reflect dif-
the individual’s behavioral response is then in- ferent personality characteristics. Failure to analyze
fluenced by internal factors such as biological and such factors may mask real differences in causation
personality characteristics. It is possible that impul- at the individual level.
sive behavior is endc,genously or exogenously rein- Property Delinquency was most influenced by
forced or that a reinforced behavior bc?gins to occur thrill-seeking and self-control. Those engaging in
spontaneously or impulsively. Property Delinquency may have added reinforce-
Gottfredson and Hirschi (6) have suggested that ment in instances of theft by securing a desired or
self-control has several separate dimensions, one of needed item. Twenty-two out of 38 reasons given
which is impulsiveness. They speculate that possible for Property Delinquency in the miscellaneous cate-
sources of variation in self-control may be gender, gory were based on need (See Table 5). Interper-
age, family size, parents’ education 3nd attachment sonal Delinquency was most influenced by a lack of
to school (6). In addition to these factors, we suggest self-control. The predictive effect of Socialization on
that the attraction to thrill-seeking and risk-taking Substance Delinquency was not surprising. Some
behavior and the intrinsic physiological and psycho- youth who use alcohol and drugs undoubtedly are
logical rewards that such behavior provides, as well undersocialized. For others, alcohol and drug use
as low socialization to conventional norms and be- may occur in the context of a “youth subculture” in
liefs, combine to produce impulsiveness in individ- which members portray themselves as antisocial. It
uals as well as in certain groups (males, younger is curious, however, that subjects whose parents
persons, and perhaps different racial/ethnic were more highly educated reported greater sub-
groups). stance use. It may be that parents with higher edu-
Theoretically, the Thrillseek measure represents cation were more permissive in child rearing or role
physiuio@cally and psychologically reinforced risk- modeling, or perhaps these youth had more avail-
taking behavior. That persons may engage in risk- able money to spend on alcohol or drugs.
taking behaviors because such behaviors generate Prosocial and antisocial disposition have typically
phq Jiological and psychological rewards has re- been measured by frequency of specific behaviors
ceived much recent attention (4,7,9,16,17). The phys- rather than by evaluating motivating factors (22).
iological approach focuses on neurochemical Subjects in this study were asked to indicate reasons
changes in the central nervous system. The search for their behaviors. Of the motivations given, sev-
for this physiological stimulation (either consciously eral categories conceivably relate to an intrinsic
or unconsciously) may become the primary motiva- physiological reward. “Fun/ thrills” and “getting
tion for the risk-taking behavior and may encourage away with it” are the most obvious, but “feels good”
June 1994 IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR IN COLLEGE STUDENTS 301

and “anger/revenge” may also represent labels and nondelinquent youth represented young people
justifications attributed to such behavior after the who were IHOWself-controlled, less impulsive, and
fact. mot-e socialized into core culture values and beliefs
The reason most often given for Property Delin- than most 17- to 21-year-olds in the United States.
quency was “fun/thrills” (38%) followed by “get- Given this likelihood, the strength and significance
ting away with it” (21%), both of which we inter- of our findings were quite surprising. A younger,
preted as providing intrinsic benefits. Such more representative group of American youth
behaviors not only include a risk of detection and might yield even stronger support for the theory.
potential legal sanctions, but their successful execu- This study, then, represents a relatively conservative
tion rewards the actor with excitement and a sense and stringent test of the theory.
of accomplishment, a feeling of exhilaration at hav- Some might criticize the use of self-report mea-
ing beaten the odds. This is consistent with the sures because of problems with small sample sizes,
finding that those who scored high on Thrillseek high nonresponse rates and the bias of nonre-
and low on Self-Control were more likely to be sponders, but self-report measures do show good
engaged in Property Delinquency. reliability and validity (23). Our instrument sur-
Self-Control, the measure of impulsiveness, was veyed mostly relatively minor delinquent behaviors
correlated with Interpersonal Delinquency. Of all because we sought to study impulsiveness and
reasons given for Interpersonal Delinquency, 48% thrill-seeking in a general, rather than clinical,
reported “anger/revenge,” usually involving a situ- population. Our sample was admittedly small and
ation in which the subject responded to provocation biased. Nevertheless, we believe the results
in an impulsive, aggressive fashion. Our data were presented here provide strong support for an inte-
inconclusive with respect to the role of intrinsic grated theory of delinquency that combines relevant
rewards in Interpersonal Delinquency. “Anger/re- ideas and factors from various disciplines.
venge” may represent the emotions accompanying Many youth engage in delinquent acts though
impulsive responses; it may indicate that the re- most are not considered delinquents. The extent of
spondent thought about his/her feelings before overlap between those involved in isolated delin-
reacting; or, it may provide justification for impul- quent acts and those who are labeled “delinquent”
sive behavior. is unknown. The degree to which the two groups
Of those admitting to Substance Delinquency, reflect similar etiology is also unknown, and it is
45% said they did it for “fun/thr;ll- ” whi!l: 32% unclear to what extent factors associated with iso-
said they did it to “feel good.” This s1 ggests that lated delinquent behaviors are associated with the
substance use may provide both phys; !ogical and diagnostic categories representing delinquency.
psychological rewards although Thrills.ek and Self- There appear, however, to be qualitative as well as
Control had no statisticahy significant effect on Sub- quantitative differences between these groups.
stance Delinquency. The Socialization scale mea- Therefore, the findings of this study might not find
sures acceptance of conventional behavior. The application in clinical samples.
negative correlation between Substance Delin- Biologic and genetic factors may be important in
quency and Socialization is likely due to the sub- determining those who have greater propensity for
jects’ endorsement of deviant group norms. No intrinsic thrill-seeking and may also affect individ-
doubt some of the “fun/thrill” derives from sub- ual social standing and access to various means of
stance use in group settings with peers, hence the achieving these intrinsic rewards. Although vari-
power of the Socialization scale as a predictor. ables representing conventional sociological theories
have routinely been treated as the immediate, causal
factors in juvenile delinquency, our findings suggest
that their impact may be mediated through factors
Limitations such as impulsiveness and an attraction to thrill-
seeking and risk-taking which may be the most
Critics may find our sample too restrictive to test
proximate causes of delinquent behavior.
impulsiveness as a theory of delinquency. We con-
cede that a group of several hundred university
students may not be representative of most Ameri- This research was supported by the Presbyterian Health Founda-
can youth. In fact, it is likely that our sample of tion.
 302 PFEFFERBAUM AND WOOD
American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs.
Health status of detained and incarcerated youths. JAMA
1990;236:987-91.
Ltq& Do, Shanok SS. Medical histories of delinquent and
non-delinquent children: an epidemiological study. Am J
Psychiatry 1977;134~102O-24.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders (Third Edition-Revised). Wash-
ington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association, 1987.
Baldwin JD. Thrill and adventure seeking ami the age distri-
bution of crime: comment on Hirschi and Cottfredson. Am J
Social lYHS;90:1326-30.
Eadington WR. The Gambling Papers: Proceedings elf the
Fifth National Conference on Camhling md Risk-Taking.
University of Nevada Bureau of Business and Economic
licscarcl1
I 1% : .
Cottfredson %l, Hirschi T. Tough talk and long jail terms
have little el:‘cct on adult behavior. Thy Wa&ington Post
National Wctlkly Edition September 108‘);18-X23-2-1.
Gove WK, Wihnoth C. Risk, crime, and i~c~url,pl~ysiolofiic
highs: d consideration of brain pn>ceshes which may rt>inforc~
delinquent and criminal behaviclr. In ElIi+, t-ldfni,;n, rds.
Crime in Biological, Social, .mJ Moral Contclts. New York:
I’raegar I’ress, 1900: 26 I -Y3.
Matza D, Sykes C. Juvenile delinquency and subterranean
Am Social Rev lOh0;25:712-Y.
v.llues.
Lyng S. Edgework: a social psychological analysis of \~)lun-
tarv risk-taking. Am 1 Social 19YO;Y!iz%l-X6.
Berkowitz AD, Perkins HW. I’roblem drinking ,11nong college
students: a review of recent research. ] Am Coil Health
lUS6;35:21-8.
Karlins M, Coff~n~n T, Waiters G. On the tading of social
starcotvpcs: studies of three generation+ of ~ollegc btudents. 1
l’ers sot I’sychol IY6Y;IX I - 16.
View publication stats
JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH Vol. 15, No. 4
12. Perkins HW, Berkowitz AD. Using student alcohol surveys:
notes on clinical and educational program applications. J
Alcohol Drug Educ 1986;31:44-51.
13. Wechsler H, McFadden M. Drinking among college students
in New England: extent, social correlates and consequences
of alcohol use. ] Stud Alcohol 1979;49:969-96.
14. Gougl~ HG. California Psychological Inventory Administra-
tor’s Guide. Palo Alto, Calif: Consulting Psychologists Press,
1987.
15. Hindelang, M]. The relationship of self-reported delinquency
to scales of the CPI and MMPI. J Grim Law Criminol
1972;&3:75-Xl.
16. Gibbons DC. Comment-personality and crime: non-issues,
real issues, and a theory and research agenda. Justice Q
, .\ 1l-23.
I YHY.6.:
Ii’. Andrcws DA, Worm& JS. Personality and crime: knowl-
edge destruction and construction in criminology. Justice Q
1Y8Y;6:289-309.
18. Wells I.E. Theories of deviance and the self-concert. Sot
Psycho1 Q lY78;41:189-204,
Wells LE. Rankin 1. Self-concept as a mediating factor in
dclinqr ~cncy. Sac Psvchol Q 1YX3;46:I l-22.
Bachman JC, Johnston LD, O’Mallev I’M. Monitoring the
Future: A Continuing Study of the ~ifescvlcs and Values of
Youth. Ann Arbor, Mich: Inter-Univcrsiiy Consortium for
I’ulitical and Social Research, 1975-l 986.
Behavioral Research hlstitutc. Ann Arbor, Mich: National
Youth Survey OJnitcd States: Wave II), 1977.
Block J, Gjerdc I’F. Distinguishing between antisocial behav-
iors under control. In Olweus D, Block J, Radke-Yarrow M,
cds. Development of Antisocial and I’rosocial Behavior Re-
starch: Theories and Issues. Orlando, Fla: Academic Press,
I YHh:177-206.
Rutter M, Giller H. Juvenile Delinquency Trends and I’cr-
qlcctivrs. Nebv York: The Guilford I’rcs;, lY8-l.