7

Socialization and Personality

WalterC.Recklessn/an/an/an/a, Simonn/aDinitzn/an/an/an/a, and Ellenn/aMurrayn/an/an/an/a

Self Concept as an Insulator Against Delinquency¹

This study is concerned with sixth-grade boys in the highest delinquency areas in Columbus, Ohio, who have not become delinquent and who are not expected to become delinquent. What insulates an early teen-age boy against delinquency? Is it possible to identify certain components that enable young adolescent boys to develop or maintain non-delinquent habits and patterns of behavior in the growing up process?

METHODOLOGY

In order to study the non-delinquent boy, all 30 sixth grade teachers in schools located in the highest white delinquency areas in Columbus were asked to nominate those white boys who would not, in their opinion, ever experience police or juvenile court contact. Treating each nominee separately, the teachers were then requested to indicate their reasons for the selection of a particular boy. Of the eligible students, 192, or just over half, were selected and evaluated by their teachers as being "insulated" against delinquency. A check of police and juvenile court records revealed that 16 (8.3 per cent) of those nominated had some type of law enforcement record, and these boys were eliminated from further consideration. Repeated neighborhood visits failed to locate 51 others. In the remaining cases both the boy and his mother were interviewed.

The 125 "good" boys comprising the final sample were given a series of four self-administered scales to complete. These included, in somewhat modified form, (1) the delinquency proneness and (2) social responsibility scales of the Gough California Personality Inventory, (3) an occupational preference instrument, (4) and one measuring the boy’s conception of self, his family and other interpersonal relations. At the same time, though not in the presence of the nominee, the mother or mother-surrogate was interviewed with an open-ended schedule to determine the boy’s developmental history, his patterns of association, and the family situation.…

FINDINGS

An analysis of the scores made by these 125 nominees on the delinquency vulnerability (De) and social responsibility (Re) scales seemed to justify their selection as "good" boys. Out of a possible total (De) score of 54 scores ranged from a low of 4 to a high of 34 with a mean of 14.57 and a standard deviation of 6.4. This mean score was significantly lower than that of school behavior problem boys, young delinquents or reformatory inmates investigated in other studies. In fact, the De score of the sample subjects was below that obtained in all but one previous study using the same scale.

For a twelve year old group, the nominees scored remarkably high on the social responsibility scale. The mean Re score for the group was 28.86 with a standard deviation of 3.60 and a range of 12 to 40 out of possible 42 points. This mean score was appreciably higher than that achieved by school disciplinary cases, delinquents, and prisoners tested in other studies. The correlation between the two sets of scores was —.605, indicating a significant and negative relationship between delinquency vulnerability and social responsibility as measured by these instruments.

In response to self-evaluation items, the 125 boys portrayed themselves as law-abiding and obedient. Specifically, the vast majority defined themselves as being stricter about right and wrong than most people, indicated that they tried to conform to the expectations of their parents, teachers and others.² The nominees did not conceive of themselves as prospects for juvenile court action or detention,³ and they stated that their participation in such activities as stealing had been minimal and that their friends were either entirely or almost completely free of police and juvenile court contact. As part of their conformity pattern, the respondents rarely played "hookey" from school and almost without exception indicated a liking for school. Finally, the "good" boys visualized themselves as being about average in ability, activity level, and aggressiveness. When asked "What do you think keeps boys out of trouble?" the respondents listed parental direction (a good home), non-deviant companions, and work, as well as other conventional answers. It would therefore appear that the internalization of these non-deviant attitudes played a significant role in the "insulation" of these boys.

Nominee perceptions of family interaction also appeared to be highly favorable.… The 125 families were stable maritally, residentially, and economically. There appeared to be close parental supervision of the boys’ activities and associates, an intense parental interest in the welfare of the children, and a desire to indoctrinate them with non-deviant attitudes and patterns. This parental supervision and interest seemed to be the outstanding characteristic of the family profiles. It extended over the entire range of their sons’ activities—from friendship patterns, leisure activities, and after school employment to movie attendance and the performance of well-defined duties at home. Thus, as regards companions, for example, the mothers almost without exception stated that they knew the boys’ friends, that these friends were good boys and that, in fact, the boys couldn’t have chosen better companions. The mothers also knew the whereabouts of their sons at almost all times and many insisted on this knowledge.

Despite this intensive supervision, the boys did not feel themselves to be unduly restricted. In general, the nominees appeared satisfied with the amount of parental affection and attention and with the quality of discipline and punishment given them. They viewed their home life as pleasant and their parents as understanding.

Low and high scores on the delinquency proneness scale and their respective mothers did not differ significantly in their evaluation of these various aspects of family interaction. Of the 22 home background variables tested—ranging from the percentage of boys from broken homes to parental favoritism—none was found to be significantly related to the delinquency proneness scores. This finding was hardly surprising in view of the non-representative character of the sample group and the relatively small amount of variation in the family settings. It may also well be that in defining his interpersonal and family relationships favorably, the "good" boy, regardless of the degree of his "goodness" as measured by various scales, is in fact expressing the positive attitudes and perceptions that are important components in his "goodness."

While there was no appreciable variation in aspects of family interaction between the low and high scorers, the boys as a group and their mothers as a group did differ significantly in some of their evaluations. These differences were largely centered around the activity level of the boys, the definitions of fairness and severity of parental punishment, and the amount of bickering in the home. Mothers thought their sons to be more active, punishment to be less frequent and severe, and parental tranquility to be more pervasive than did the nominees. Most significantly, perhaps, the mothers expressed less satisfaction with the role played by the boys’ fathers than did the boys. Briefly, the mother pictured their husbands as being relatively aloof and rigid in the affectional relationships with their sons. The nominees, however, could not differentiate between their parents in this regard.

These divergences in perceptions may largely reflect age, sex, and role differences in expectations of what constitutes satisfaction with family relationships. Consequently, predictive tables based on the parents’ conception of the boy and his relationships would necessarily be different in many particulars from those based on the boys’ conceptions.

CONCLUSION

"Insulation" against delinquency on the part of these boys may be viewed as an ongoing process reflecting an internalization of non-delinquent values and conformity to the expectations of significant others. Whether the subjects, now largely unreceptive to delinquent norms of conduct, will continue to remain "good" in the future remains problematic. The answer to this question, it is felt, will depend on their ability to maintain their present self-images in the face of mounting situational pressures.

While this pilot study points to the presence of a socially acceptable concept of self as the insulator against delinquency, the research does not indicate how the boy in the high delinquency area acquired his self image. It may have been acquired by social definition of role from significant figures in his milieu, such as a mother, a relative, a priest, a settlement house worker, a teacher, etc. It might have been a by-product of effective socialization of the child, which had the good fortune of not misfiring. On the other hand, it may have been an outgrowth of discovery in social experience that playing the part of the good boy and remaining a good boy bring maximum satisfactions (of acceptance) to the boy himself. Finally, there is a strong suspicion that a well-developed concept of self as a "good boy" is the component which keeps middle- and upper-class boys, who live in the better neighborhoods, out of delinquency. The point is that this component seems to be strong enough to "insulate" the adolescent against the delinquency in the unfavorable neighborhoods.

¹ From , 1956, 21:744–746. By permission.

² Nearly 60 per cent of the boys thought they were stricter about right and wrong than most people; 85 per cent tried to escape trouble at all costs; 81 per cent stressed their obedience to their parents wishes, and 81 per cent were concerned with the reaction of friends and others to their behavior. These and other data were based on response to items in one or more of the four instruments used.

³ For example, 70 per cent of the boys in answering the questions on the Morlock scale seemed certain that they would never be brought before the Juvenile court; only one respondent believed he would have future contact with the court. Two-thirds indicated certainty about never being taken to jail. Some 57 per cent did not rule out the possibility of becoming policemen.