U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Development of the DDI (Depth of Delinquency Index) - A Seriousness Scale for Delinquency

NCJ Number
81010
Journal
Evaluation Review Volume: 5 Issue: 6 Dated: (December 1981) Pages: 788-809
Author(s)
J P Deschner; M D Plain; G K Terhune; C Williamson
Date Published
1981
Length
22 pages
Annotation
Methodologies and results are presented from four studies that contributed to the development of a Depth of Delinquency Index (DDI), which measures degrees of delinquency.
Abstract
The first study, conducted in 1975, examined the adequacy of legal offense categories in indicating offense seriousness values and attempted to develop a comprehensive index based on ratings made on a 5-point scale as an alternative to offense categories. The second study, performed in 1976, focused on offender status offenses of truancy, running away, uncontrollable behavior, and alcohol violations. The third study, done in 1977, tested for the long-term stability of the cultural consensus approach for determining offense seriousness by replicating Sellin and Wolfgang's magnitude estimate method for their 21 standard offenses and drug offenses. The fourth study, conducted in 1979, incorporated the findings of the earlier studies and attempted to create a single depth of delinquency measure, using a comprehensive list of juvenile offenses. In the final study, seriousness values were expressed in standard score units ranging from 2 to 99, obtained by transforming the relative magnitude ratings made by over 500 subjects. Consistency of offense rankings across the four studies, as well as earlier studies, substantiated the theory of a cultural consensus about offense seriousnes, thus providing a stable basis for the DDI scores. The DDI is suitable for trial use in program evaluations and research related to groups of juvenile delinquents, but it is not appropriate for individual diagnosis. Tabular data and 22 references are provided.