Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T04:43:10.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crossroads in juvenile justice: The impact of initial processing decision on youth 5 years after first arrest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2021

Elizabeth Cauffman Open the ORCID record for Elizabeth Cauffman [Opens in a new window] ,
Jordan Beardslee ,
Adam Fine ,
Paul J. Frick  and
Laurence Steinberg
Elizabeth Cauffman*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
Jordan Beardslee
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
Adam Fine
Affiliation:
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Paul J. Frick
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, Australia
Laurence Steinberg
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
*
Author for Correspondence: Elizabeth Cauffman, Department of Psychological Science, 4308 Social & Behavioral Sciences Gateway, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92617, USA; E-mail: cauffman@uci.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The current study advances past research by studying the impact of juvenile justice decision making with a geographically and ethnically diverse sample (N = 1,216) of adolescent boys (ages 13–17 years) for the 5 years following their first arrest. Importantly, all youth in the study were arrested for an eligible offense of moderate severity (e.g., assault, theft) to evaluate whether the initial decision to formally (i.e., sentenced before a judge) or informally (i.e., diverted to community service) process the youth led to differences in outcomes. The current study also advanced past research by using a statistical approach that controlled for a host of potential preexisting vulnerabilities that could influence both the processing decision and the youth's outcomes. Our findings indicated that youth who were formally processed during adolescence were more likely to be re-arrested, more likely to be incarcerated, engaged in more violence, reported a greater affiliation with delinquent peers, reported lower school enrollment, were less likely to graduate high school within 5 years, reported less ability to suppress aggression, and had lower perceptions of opportunities than informally processed youth. Importantly, these findings were not moderated by the age of the youth at his first arrest or his race and ethnicity. These results have important implications for juvenile justice policy by indicating that formally processing youth not only is costly, but it can reduce public safety and reduce the adolescent's later potential contributions to society.

Keywords

adolescencediversioninverse probability weightingjuvenile justice policyprocessing decisionrecidivismrisk-takingsocial policy
Type
Special Issue Article
Information
Development and Psychopathology , Volume 33 , Special Issue 2: Honoring the Legacy of Ed Zigler's Lifetime Contributions to Science, Society, and Child Wellbeing , May 2021 , pp. 700 - 713
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Austin, P. C., & Stuart, E. A. (2015). Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Statistics in Medicine, 34, 3661–3679.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beardslee, J., Miltimore, S., Fine, A., Frick, P. J., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2019). Under the radar or under arrest: How is adolescent boys’ first contact with the juvenile justice system related to future offending and arrests? Law and Human Behavior, 43, 342–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beaudry-Cyr, M., Leiber, M., Brubaker, S. J., & Jaynes, C. (2020). The liberation hypothesis perspective and juvenile court outcomes: Implications for an understanding of the interplay between offender and offense characteristics. Crime & Delinquency, 66, 806–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernburg, J. G., & Krohn, M. D. (2003). Labeling, life chances, and adult crime: The direct and indirect effects of official intervention in adolescence on crime in early adulthood. Criminology, 41, 1287–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgeland, J. M., DiIulio, J. J. Jr, & Morison, K. B. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Civic Enterprises, 1–35.Google Scholar
Cauffman, E. (2008). Understanding the female offender. Future of Children, 18, 119–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cauffman, E., Fine, A., Mahler, A., & Simmons, C. (2018). How developmental science influences juvenile justice reform. UC Irvine Law Review, 8, 21–40.Google Scholar
Cauffman, E., & Woolard, J. (1999). The future outlook inventory. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Chorpita, B. F., Yim, L., Moffitt, C., Umemoto, L. A., & Francis, S. E. (2000). Assessment of symptoms of DSM-IV anxiety and depression in children: A revised child anxiety and depression scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38, 835–855.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (1996). Equifinality and multifinality in developmental psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 597–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dishion, T. J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When interventions harm. Peer groups and problem behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 755–764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dishion, T. J., Poulin, F., & Burraston, B. (2001). Peer group dynamics associated with iatrogenic effect in group interventions with high-risk young adolescents. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 91, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dmitrieva, J., Monahan, K. C., Cauffman, E., & Steinberg, L. (2012). Arrested development: The effects of incarceration on the development of psychosocial maturity. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 1073–1090.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donovan, S., & Watts, H. (1990). What can child care do for human capital? Population Research and Policy Review, 9, 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drawbridge, D. C., Todorovic, K., Winters, G. M., & Vincent, G. M. (2019). Implementation of risk-need-responsivity principles into probation case planning. Law and Human Behavior, 43, 455–467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eccles, J., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In Damon, W., & Eisenberg, N. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 1017–1095). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Espinosa, E. M., Sorensen, J. R., & Walfield, S. (2020). Youth pathways: Evaluating the influence of gender, involvement with the public mental health system, perceived mental health need, and traumatic experiences on juvenile justice system processing. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 18, 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esthappan, S., Lacoe, J., Zweig, J. M., & Young, D. W. (2020). Transforming practice through culture change: Probation staff perspectives on juvenile justice reform. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 18, 274–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrington, D. P. (2019). The duration of criminal careers: How many offenders do not desist up to age 61? Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 5, 4–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, A., Donley, S., Cavanagh, C., Miltimore, S., Steinberg, L., Frick, P. J., & Cauffman, E. (2017). And justice for all: Determinants and effects of probation officers’ processing decisions regarding first-time juvenile offenders. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23, 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, A. D., Fountain, E., & Vidal, S. (2019). Juveniles’ beliefs about and perceptions of probation predict technical violations and delinquency. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 25, 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatti, U., Tremblay, R. E., & Vitaro, F. (2009). Iatrogenic effect of juvenile justice. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 991–998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldman, M., & Rodriguez, N. (2020). The State as the “Ultimate Parent”: The implications of family for racial and ethnic disparities in the juvenile justice system. Race and Justice. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2153368720924769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grisso, T. (2017). Policy brief: Assuring the future of developmental reform in juvenile justice: Recommendations of the fourth wave forecasting project. Retrieved from http://www.modelsforchange.net/publications/856Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. F., & Kempf-Leonard, K. (2010). Our children, their children: Confronting racial and ethnic differences in American juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Huizinga, D., Esbensen, F. A., & Weiher, A. W. (1991). Are there multiple paths to delinquency? Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 82, 83–118.Google Scholar
Hyla, E. (2016). The long-term economic impact of juvenile criminal activity. The Park Place Economist, 24, 74–79.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. C., & Raphael, S. (2009). The effects of male incarceration dynamics on acquired immune deficiency syndrome infection rates among African American women and men. The Journal of Law and Economics, 52, 251–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, T. (2019). The transition to adulthood of contemporary delinquent adolescents. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 5, 176–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kienzl, G., & Kena, G. (2006). Economic outcomes of high school completers and noncompleters 8 years later. Issue Brief. NCES 2007-019. Jessep, MD: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
Kimonis, E. R., Frick, P. J., Skeem, J. L., Marsee, M. A., Cruise, K., Munoz, L. C., … Morris, A. S. (2008). Assessing callous-unemotional traits in adolescent offenders: Validation of the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits. Int J Law Psychiatry, 31, 241–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirk, D. S., & Sampson, R. J. (2013). Juvenile arrest and collateral educational damage in the transition to adulthood. Sociology of Education, 86, 36–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurlychek, M. C., & Johnson, B. D. (2019). Cumulative disadvantage in the American criminal justice system. Annual Review of Criminology, 2, 291–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labrecque, R. M., Schweitzer, M., & Mattick, K. L. (2018). A quasi-experimental evaluation of a juvenile justice reinvestment initiative. Journal of Crime and Justice, 41, 49–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, K. S., Rosenman, M. B., Wiehe, S. E., Tu, W., & Aalsma, M. C. (2018). Race/ethnicity, and behavioral health status: First arrest and outcomes in a large sample of juvenile offenders. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 45, 237–251.Google Scholar
Leiber, M. J., & Beaudry-Cyr, M. (2017). The intersection of race/ethnicity, gender and the treatment of probation violators in juvenile justice proceedings. Race, Ethnicity and Law, 22, 269–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leiber, M. J., Beaudry-Cyr, M., Peck, J. H., & Mack, K. Y. (2018). Sentencing recommendations by probation officers and judges: An examination of adult offenders across gender. Women & Criminal Justice, 28, 100–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, A. M., Kirk, D. S., & Kim, K. (2014). Labeling effects of first juvenile arrests: Secondary deviance and secondary sanctioning. Criminology, 52, 345–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsey, M. W. (2006). Improving the evaluation of anticrime programs: There's work to be done. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2, 517–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lopes, G., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Schmidt, N. M., Vasquez, B. E., & Bernburg, J. G. (2012). Labeling and cumulative disadvantage: The impact of formal police intervention on life chances and crime during emerging adulthood. Crime & Delinquency, 58, 456–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loughran, T. A., Mulvey, E. P., Schubert, C. A., Fagan, J., Piquero, A. R., & Losoya, S. H. (2009). Estimating a dose-response relationship between length of stay and future recidivism in serious juvenile offenders. Criminology, 47, 699–740.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loughran, T., Piquero, A. R., Fagan, J., & Mulvey, E. P. (2011). Deterring serious and chronic offenders: Research findings and policy thoughts from the pathways to desistance study. In Dowd, N. E. (Ed.), Justice for kids: Keeping kids out of the juvenile justice system (pp. 201–218). New York and London: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mack, J. (1909). The juvenile court. Harvard Law Review, 23, 104–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsee, M. A., Barry, C. T., Childs, K. K., Frick, P. J., Kimonis, E. R., Munoz, L. C., … Lau, K. S. (2011). Assessing the forms and functions of aggression using self-report: factor structure and invariance of the Peer Conflict Scale in youths. Psychological Assessment, 23, 792–804.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Massoglia, M., & Pridemore, W. A. (2015). Incarceration and health. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 291–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J., & Palmer, K. (2020). Juvenile probation officer decision-making in a reforming state: Assessing the application of evidence-based principles. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47, 1136–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monahan, K. C., & Piquero, A. R. (2009). Investigating the longitudinal relation between offending frequency and offending variety. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 653–673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Mulvey, E. (2009). Trajectories of antisocial behavior and psychosocial maturity from adolescence to young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1654–1668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Mulvey, E. (2013). Psychosocial (im)maturity from adolescence to early adulthood: Distinguishing between adolescence-limited and persisting antisocial behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 1093–1105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morash, M. (2016). The nature of co-occurring exposure to violence and of court responses to girls in the juvenile justice system. Violence Against Women, 22, 923–942.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., Fagan, J., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R., Chassin, L., … Losoya, S. H. (2004). Theory and research on desistance from antisocial activity among serious adolescent offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 213–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., Piquero, A. R., Besana, M., Fagan, J., Schubert, C., & Cauffman, E. (2010). Trajectories of desistance and continuity in antisocial behavior following court adjudication among serious adolescent offenders. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 971–971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, R. J., & Vincent, G. M. (2018). Matching services to criminogenic needs following comprehensive risk assessment implementation in juvenile probation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45, 1136–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nemoyer, A., Gale-Bentz, E., Durham, K., Wagage, S., & Goldstein, N. E. (2020). Adverse juvenile probation supervision outcomes: Noncompliance, revocation, and failure to appear at review hearings. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47, 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osgood, D. W., McMorris, B. J., & Potenza, M. T. (2002). Analyzing multiple-item measures of crime and deviance I: Item response theory scaling. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrish, D. E. (2020). Achieving justice for girls in the juvenile justice system. Social Work, 65, 149–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersilia, J. (1981). Juvenile record use in adult court proceedings: A survey of prosecutors. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 72, 1746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petitclerc, A., Gatti, U., Vitaro, F., & Tremblay, R. E. (2013). Effects of juvenile court exposure on crime in young adulthood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54, 291–297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petrosino, A., Turpin-Petrosino, C., & Guckenburg, S. (2010). Formal system processing of juveniles: Effects on delinquency. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 6, 1–88.Google Scholar
Petteruti, A., Walsh, N., Velazquez, T., & Walsh, N. (2009). The costs of confinement: Why good juvenile justice policies make good fiscal sense. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute.Google Scholar
Porter, L. C. (2014). Incarceration and post-release health behavior. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 55, 234–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radice, J. (2017). The Juvenile Record Myth. Georgetown Law Journal, 106, 365–446.Google Scholar
Robertson, E. L., Frick, P. J., Walker, T. M., Kemp, E. C., Ray, J. V., Thornton, L. C., … Cauffman, E. (2020). Callous-unemotional traits and risk of gun carrying and use during crime. American Journal of Psychiatry. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.19080861CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schnittker, J., Massoglia, M., & Uggen, C. (2012). Out and down: Incarceration and psychiatric disorders. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 53, 448–464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schubert, C. A., Mulvey, E. P., Cauffman, E., Steiberg, L., Hecker, T., Losoya, S. H., … Knight, G. (2004). Operational lessons from the pathways to desistance project. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 237–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwalbe, C. S., & Koetzle, D. (2020). Condition comprehension predicts compliance for adolescents under probation supervision. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 26, 286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, R. G. (2018). A 21st century developmentally appropriate juvenile probation approach. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 69, 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selner-O'Hagan, M. B., Kindlon, D. J., Buka, S. L., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. J. (1998). Assessing exposure to violence in urban youth. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 39, 215–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
StataCorp, L. (2016). Stata statistical software (version release 15). College Station, TX: Author.Google Scholar
Steinberg, L. (2017). Adolescent brain science and juvenile justice policymaking. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23, 410–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinberg, L., Albert, D., Cauffman, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., & Woolard, J. (2008). Age differences in sensation seeking and impulsivity as indexed by behavior and self-report: Evidence for a dual systems model. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1764–1778.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sweeten, G. (2006). Who will graduate? Disruption of high school education by arrest and court involvement. Justice Quarterly, 23, 462–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Farnworth, M., & Jang, S. J. (1994). Delinquent peers, beliefs, and delinquent behavior: A longitudinal test of interactional theory. Criminology, 32, 47–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turney, K., Wildeman, C., & Schnittker, J. (2012). As fathers and felons: Explaining the effects of current and recent incarceration on major depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 53, 465–481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verbruggen, J., van der Geest, V. R., & Blokland, A. A. (2016). Adult life adjustment of vulnerable youths. The relationship between criminal history, employment history and adult life outcomes. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 2, 466–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberger, D. A., & Schwartz, G. E. (1990). Distress and restraint as superordinate dimensions of self-reported adjustment: A typological perspective. Journal of Personality, 58, 381–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zigler, E. (1998). A place of value for applied and policy studies. Child Development, 69, 532–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zigler, E., & Finn-Stevenson, M. (1992). Applied developmental psychology. In Bornstein, M. H. & Lamb, M. E. (Eds.), Developmental psychology: An advanced textbook (3rd ed., pp. 677–729). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., Eysenck, S. B., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Sensation seeking in England and America: Cross-cultural, age, and sex comparisons. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 139–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Cauffman et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S3

Download Cauffman et al. supplementary material(File)
File 29.8 KB