About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

16 J. Res. Crime & Delinquency 1 (1979)

handle is hein.journals/jrcd16 and id is 1 raw text is: Editor's Comments To one observing trends in crime and delinquency research and writing, a puzzling characteristic of the last decade-a decade which has seen the rate of publication in this field describe an almost geometric progression-has been the relative lack of development of etiological theory. The new crimi- nologists of recent vintage, avowedly concerned with fundamental explana- tions, address issues at a level of analysis which at best is not very helpful in engaging questions of individual- or group-level variations in criminal and de- linquent behavior. A number of possible explanations for the lack of elaboration of causal theo- ry can be offered. One is the relatively small concern that funding agencies, both governmental and private, have shown for such activity within the last decade. Whether this is a function of a mission-oriented mentality (one of the great disservices to the advancement of science may have been our capabili- ty of actually landing someone on the moon!) or the inevitable consequence of a decade concerned with the immediate control of crime and delinquency (war was President Johnson's metaphor), the result has been marginal support for efforts aimed at uncovering fundamental causal relationships. Another explanation has less to do with the availability of resources and more with the periodic nature of advances in fundamental theories. As Kuhn has suggested, it simply takes time to absorb, elaborate, and explore theoretical statements, creating the base of research and data necessary for a next advance. Clearly, the last ten years have seen the growth of methodology and new data bases, and the stage may well be set for a new breakthrough in etiological theory. The lead article in this issue of the Journal does not so much represent a fundamental shift in the direction of theoretical development as it signifies an elaboration. But it is an important attempt grounded in a good deal of em- pirical research. Delbert Elliott and his colleagues suggest an integrating framework for two leading current explanations of delinquent behavior. The persons offering commentaries on this paper must be numbered among the leading theorists in crime and delinquency. James Short, whose seminal work with gangs has shaped much of our understanding of processes by which delin- quent behavior is adopted, and Travis Hirschi, who explicated control theory in one of its most influential forms, both find limitations in the formulations of Elliott et al. But both also find a vigor of argument that tests their analytical powers, all of which makes for exciting and interesting reading. Michael Gottfredson's article, written in a wry style, raises some important questions about whether so-called data which indicate that rehabilitation does not work have been adequately interpreted. Gottfredson makes a number of telling points about the conclusions drawn from data on the use of treatment. This article deserves the close attention of those who are concerned with the issue of the efficacy of rehabilitation. JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN CRIME AND DELINQUENCY, January 1979 I

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most