skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 93428 Find in a Library
Title: Note on Differences Between Learning-Disabled and Non-Learning-Disabaled Teenagers in Delinquent Behavior-Addendum to Some Observations and Further Observations Reports
Author(s): N Dunivant
Date Published: 1982
Page Count: 9
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Data from three supposedly conflicting reports support the hypothesis that learning disabilities contribute to delinquent behavior.
Abstract: The three reorts evaluated this hypothesis and came to dramatically different conclusions. 'Some Observations on the Link Between Learning Disabilities and Juvenile Delinquency' by Zimmerman, et al. maintained that there were no significant differences between learning disabled (LD) and non learning-disabled (NLD) teenagers in frequency of ever having engaged in various types of delinquent activities. Broder, et al. concluded in 'Further Observations on the Link Between Learning Disabilities and Juvenile Delinquency' that LD youths had significantly lower mean frequency of general delinquent behavior than their NLD counterparts once differences in age, social status, and other characteristics had been controlled statistically. In 'A Causal Analysis of the Relationship Between Learning Disabilities and Juvenile Delinquency.' Dunivant reached the conclusion that LD youths were significantly more likely to have engaged in delinquent behavior than NLD teenagers. This paper contends that the last conclusion is the correct one. Additional analyses of the data used by Zimmerman, et al. clearly demonstrate that LD boys engaged in significantly more delinquent behavior than their NLD peers. The only reason that the results of Zimmerman, et al. differed from those of Dunivant was that Zimmerman, et al. performed their analyses separately for NLD and LD samples, whereas Dunivant based his analysis on the combined samples. In the second report, Border, et al. made an error in interpreting the output of the regression analyses. When correctly interpreted, the results of Broder, et al. show that LD boys had significantly higher general self-reported delinquency scores than their NLD counterparts. Five references and statistical tables are provided.
Index Term(s): Juvenile delinquency factors; Learning disabilities
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.