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

Juveniles as Delinquents: Frequency of Offences, Understanding of Crime, and Phases of Shoplifting (From Research Report Summaries 1997, P 11-17, 1998, Terttu Belgasem, ed.)

NCJ Number
176162
Author(s)
J Kivivuori
Date Published
1998
Length
17 pages
Annotation
A survey of 4,204 ninth grade students in 45 municipally operated and financed schools in Finland was conducted to develop a standardized indicator system for the study of self-reported juvenile delinquency.
Abstract
The survey questionnaire included traditional self-report items on 18 offense types, plus additional questions to measure crime-related attitudes. Factor analysis based on incidence figures (number of offenses committed during the previous 12 months) involved such offenses as school-related offenses, driving violations and violent behavior, and substance abuse. An effort was made to understand juvenile crime in moral and causal contexts, with emphasis on shoplifting. Results showed occasional delinquent behavior was fairly prevalent. In particular, juvenile stealing often occurred in phases, and 23 percent of respondents had gone through a stealing phase. Stealing phases were more prevalent in urban settings than in semiurban or rural settings. The typical stealing phase began at 13 years of age and ended at 14 years of age. Of all respondents, 16 percent had a single stealing phase and 5 percent experienced two stealing phases. Wide experience in various offense types increased the probability of a stealing phase, while close relationships with parents reduced the risk of a stealing phase. Reasons for stealing included lack of money and the excitement of stealing. Respondents who engaged in stealing rarely came in contact with the police as juvenile offenders. Lifetime variety of offending was the best predictor of police contact. 4 tables