Juvenile Delinquency: Analysis of Risk and Protective Factors Using Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

ABSTRACT Several factors are associated to delinquency. It is difficult to change or to reduce risk factors, therefore, the perspective of protective factors promotion appears as an alternative or a complementary approach for the risk behaviour prevention. The present study was developed using mixed methods in order to analyse risk and protective factors in juvenile delinquency. First, a quantitative study, using structural equation modelling with 300 juvenile offenders, was conducted in order to develop an explanatory model of delinquency. Secondly, a qualitative study, using a "focal groups" procedure, was also conducted with 24 juvenile offenders, aiming at knowing their perceptions regarding risk and protective factors for delinquency. Several different risk and protective factors were found. The quantitative study showed that, "substance use" was the most salient risk factor for juvenile delinquency while "positive relations in school context" was the most salient protective factor. The qualitative results confirmed these results. Implications to selective and universal preventive interventions are discussed. KEYWORDS: delinquency, risk and protective factors, preventive intervention. INTRODUCTION Delinquent and disruptive behaviors include different forms of aggression and violence. These behaviors are associated, on one hand, to illicit drug-use and traffic, urban, racial, and xenophobic violence (Delles, 2001; Uniao Europeia, 2001); on the other hand, these behaviors are associated with anxiety and mood disorders, and other behavioral disorders (Frick, Bodin, & Barry, 2000; Hill, 2002; Teplin, Abram, McClelland, Dulcan, & Mericle, 2002). Delinquency is increasing in some countries, and is increasing in females, while the age of juvenile offenders decreases (Loeber, Farrington, & Petechuck, 2003; Uniao Europeia, 2001). Delinquency has also several social adverse outcomes, like disadvantages regarding social integration and economic independency (Fergusson & Horwood, 1999; Moffitt, Caspi, Harrington, & Milne, 2002; Werner & Smith, 2001), and other costs for society related to medical, rehabilitation, and custody costs (DiClemente, Hansen, & Ponton, 1996). Therefore, it becomes important to know the determinants of these behaviors during adolescence, and in different life contexts. Only knowing the factors that place the young people at risk, and the ones that protect them from potential problems, it is possible to draw up preventive interventions. The research developed on this topic shows that these behaviors have several different determinants but also share common determinants There is a diversity of causes or paths that can lead to a certain outcome, but there is also a diversity of effects that a single factor can produce (Thornberry, Ireland, & Smith, 2001). This is valid for risk factors, but also for protective factors. It is difficult to change or to reduce risk factors therefore, the perspective of protective factors promotion appears as an alternative or a complementary approach for the risk behavior prevention (Matos, et al., 2003; Matos & Simoes, 2003). Research in this area found several factors associated with delinquent and disruptive behavior: (1) Individual (stress, genetic vulnerability, physiological, psychological, cognitive, or behavioral) characteristics (Barkauskiene & Bieliauskaite, 2002; Frick, et al., 2000; Hill, 2002; Matos & Simoes, 2003; McBurnett, Naguib, & Brown, 2000; O'Connor, Neiderhiser, Reiss, Hetherington, & Plomin, 1998); (2) Peer relationships, that draw attention to the influence of socializing with peers with similar antisocial behaviors (Hill, 2002; Lahey, Gordon, Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, & Farrington, 1999; Shoemaker, 1996; Tiet & Huizinga, 2002); (3) Social that highlight the influence of socioeconomic and social organization features on antisocial behavior development, and (4) Situational that underline the opportunities to crime practice as the main determinant of delinquency (Cloward & Ohlin, 1960; Farrington, 1998; Hill, 2002; Shoemaker, 1996). …