The study found that, at least under some circumstances, there was general support for the strain-crime relationship, and suggested that some forms of strain might be more criminogenic than others. The data also suggests that a minimum likelihood exists that negative emotion mediates the relationship between strain and crime. Additionally, social support did not seem to serve as an intervening mediator, as was the case with criminal peer association. Results were generally consistent with previous studies focusing on youth. Three of four measures of strain (General Scale; Unpleasant Experiences; Losing Valuable Stimuli; Not Achieving Goals) were found to predict the crime measures. However, that relationship was not mediated by negative emotion and the measures of social support and criminal peers do not act as contingencies or mediators. Analyses examined three issues: whether strain predicted self-projected criminal behavior; controlling for past self-reported crime; whether negative emotions mediated the relationship between strain and projected crime; and whether social support and criminal peers served as contingencies or mediators for strain in predicting criminality. Hypotheses from General Strain Theory were addressed using data from a random sample of adults in Raleigh, NC. The sample was obtained via telephone interviews conducted in a 2-month period for telephone numbers in 2 different census tracts in that city, providing 202 and 204 respondents, respectively. Tables, references