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: 99014 Find in a Library
Title: Predicting Self-Reported and Official Delinquency (From Prediction in criminology, P 150-173, 1985, David P Farrington and Roger Tarling, ed. - See NCJ-99006)
Author(s): D P Farrington
Date Published: 1985
Page Count: 24
Sponsoring Agency: State University of New York Press
Albany, NY 12207
Sale Source: State University of New York Press
90 State Street, Suite 700
Albany, NY 12207
United States of America
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: A study was conducted to examine the possibility of predicting offending by juveniles and young adults, compare self-reported and official delinquency, and evaluate five methods of combining prediction variables into a prediction instrument.
Abstract: Subjects were 411 boys who had been followed from age 8 to 25 as part of the Cambridge longitudinal study of delinquent development. Variables were derived from data obtained from records, parents, teachers, peers, and the subjects at age 10. Five methods examined included the Burgess point score, the Blueck method, multiple linear regression, predictive attribute analysis, and logistic regression. Half the study population was used as a construction (C) and half as a validation (V) sample. Of the 25 variables examined, the best single predictor of official juvenile delinquency was troublesomeness in the C sample and daring in the V sample. The best predictor of self-reported delinquency was parental criminality in the C sample only. In the C sample, the best predictor of official adult delinquency was official juvenile delinquency; while in the V sample it was self-reported juvenile delinquency. For adult self-reported delinquency, the best predictor for the C sample was self-reported juvenile delinquency; in the V sample, it was official juvenile delinquency. Overall, it was difficult to identify a group with much more than a 50 percent chance of delinquency or to identify more than 50 percent of the delinquents. The more sophisticated techniques were, if anything, worse than the simpler Burgess and Glueck methods. Possible reasons for the relative inefficiency of delinquency prediction are discussed. Tabular data and 35 references are included.
Index Term(s): Cluster analysis; Correlation analysis; Juvenile delinquency prediction; Juvenile delinquency research; Police role in juvenile justice; Regression analysis; Research methods; Self reported crimes
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.