5 Heavy Metal Music Preference Delinquent Friends, Socia.docx

5
Heavy Metal Music Preference
Delinquent Friends, Social '
Control, and Delinquency
SIMON I. SINGER
MURRAY LEVINE
SUSYAN JOU
COMMENTARY by Simon Singer
I first had the idea to look at the relationship between
delinquency and music
preference after reading a New Yorker article in 1986 about Los
Angeles subur-
ban gangs. Within that excellent article by the journalist
William Barich (1986),
I saw a dearly articulated hypothesis. I didn't need to go much
further than that
to develop a theory about the possible effects of music on
delinquency.
It so happened that the next year I was asked if I wished to do a
"needs as-
sessment" for a large suburban community. There was New
York State agency
money available to conduct a survey for which I was given
discretion as to how

to define the proposed assessment. I wanted not only to meet
the agency's goal
of evaluating the concerns and interests of the town's youth, but
also to assess
the extent to which youth were involved in a variety of
delinquent behaviors.
The idea of linking music preference to self-reported
delinquency through
the survey technique came about when we needed to figure out
an incentive
that would lead to the participation of youth in the survey. We
received a good
deal on music coupons from a major retail record store in the
area. To close the
deal with the record store we asked that the store cashiers
record the actual
'
music that was purchased on the returned incentive coupon. The
survey also
asked music preference, and we felt that along with actual
music purcha e
Sourcr:Journal i?f R~earch i11 Cri111e and Delinquency. Vol.
JO, N . J, Auhl'Jt 1993, PP· JI ]-JlQ
1 1993 · bl . I ·
' · Jgl' Publications, Inc. Reprmted by permtS~on of !:>age Pu 1
at10m, n1;
Thh article ",l Ub~tantial revi~ion of a paper onginally pre
ented at the: I 99U annual mect-
1~ of the American ociety of Criminolot,,,y, Baltimore. We
thank Robert Af,'IlCW,
M1ch.1el F IJ . . 1·, •rsions of this ar-arre , and Lionel Lewi for

their helpful c mments on car 1cr vc ·
tide D f S · I SUNY-Butfalo, Ii · iren rorrc ·pondenl'.t's to imon
J. Singer, Department o Ol'.JO ogy, ·
utfaJo, NY 14260.
109
PART Ill SURVEY RESEARCH
110 -- . sure that would make the articl
btrusive mea
would provide an uno .
onvincing. al . howed that the main effect of heavy
more c . he an ysis s . bl · ifi
The first step 111 t . £'. ther important vana es was sign ca~
olltng ior O l
preference after contr . d . teraction effects based not on y on
what
However, we hypothesize in llent work of Keith Roe (1985).
Roe's stud"
1 n the exce . h . f 1 . ·1
P
roposed but a so O h of multivariate tee mques o ana ys1s to
h d for t e use . d h pointed to t e nee . h' b tween music
preference an attac ments to
out the possible relatto?s ip ere able to do using the techniques
that Aike

d
ts This we we . . . n
school an paren · d d in their book on testing interactions with
n-.,ul
(1991) recommen e h . . •a.11 .. and West d . uite useful to
present t e interaction effects as
. · We foun it q .
uple regression. . how the mean level of delinquency changed at
each
they suggest by showmg
level of interaction. .
1
t ted out with a simple idea, it is important that it b
Althou~h the abrttc de s ar ntext of subcultural theories of
delinquency and e
considered m the roa er co . d d 1
. . d d than J. ust expressed att1tu es an va ues to uncover the
cnme More 1s nee e ·b h' gh
. · b u1 h t are hypothesized to contn ute to 1 rates of delin-
vanous su c tures t a . . h
Th
. d' t · dicators of subcultural affiliation are t e measures that
quency. e m irec m . d . S b
b f, h Unde
rstanding of delinquency an cnme. u cultural the-

can est urt er our . .
fit from looking at the representations of culture m the form ory
can pro more .
of its various artifacts, which include not only music but styles
of dress and
behavior.
We would like to see more research that takes into account what
goes on in
the daily lives of youth. Not only do schools classify youth, but
youth classify
themselves and they seem to do so with regard to music
preference. How
strongly they identify with various forms of music is a critical
part of how they
see themselves. Part of what is heard is heard for its
entertainment value alone,
and would bear little significance except for the fact that it is
associated with
other factors that attract youth to a particular kind of music.
The fact that we
were able to show that the relationship between heavy metal and
delinquency
is not direct would support those who argue that youth should
feel free to hear
any kind of music they want. Music alone is not enough to make
someone
delinquent according to our data .
. More research is needed on the cultural artifacts of our society
and the
delinqu~nt cond~ct of its youth. Such data are not easy to
obtain and require
us to thmk creat~vely about their measurement and analysis. It

is important to
go beyond any simple explanation for delinquent behavior, and
to apply the
advanced methodological tools of criminological research to
understanding the
complex causes of delinquency and crime.
ABSTRACT The auth ·
fi h . ors examined the relationship between a preference
or eavy metal music am la th
(N = 715) d d li ong a rge sample of suburban high school you
an e nquency c lli ·
ables as well as d lin ' ontro ng for parental and school-related
wri-
' e quent associati Th th
esis that heavy metal has an effi ons. . ey found support for th
hypo .-
ect on delinquency when p ntal con l 15
p
CHAPTER 5 HEAVY METAL MUSIC
PREFERENCE AND DELINQUENCY
111
low. However, they found no support for the h . .
tween a preference for heavy metal and d r ypothesized
interaction be-
p
ectations, those students with better sche mlquent peers.
Contrary to ex-

. . oo marks and a p f4 c.
heavy metal music had higher amounts of lf. . re erence 1or
se -reported delinquency.
The sounds of "heavy metal" lay along the fringe of t .
al · d' · . con emporary musical
P
references. Heavy met 1s 1stmgu1shed from lighte c f k
1
. r 1orms o roe and roll by
the extremely loud c ashmg of electrical steel guitars a d b 1 . . .
h . · d" n Y yncs wit an 1m-
age1-v of violence. Accor mg to Grass's (1990) det ·1 d · h . ,
a1 e review, eavy metal
music expresses a culture of power, violence, and fatalism He t
M .. 1 "L. w· " hi h · no es ot ey
Crile 's ~ong ive !re, w c calls women whores, speaks of
smashing
womens faces, and gomg for the jugular. 1 Gross further relates
a Judas Priest's
hit album "Defenders of the Faith," which warns that" 'rising
from the dark-
ness where Hell hath no mercy and the screams of vengeance
echo on forever
only those who keep the faith shall escape the wrath of the
Metallian' ,,;
(p.123). Furthermore, Gr~ss's nonrepresentative sampling of
heavy metal music
also includes the unpublished lyrics " 'Blessed are the wicked,
cursed are the
weak,' "and" 'Your God is dead and now you die, Satan rules at
last' "(p. 124).

Heavy metal, as a cultural artifact, is not just communicated in
lyrical form.
It is also contained in distinct patterns of dress. For instance,
some fans display a
runic lightning bolt, borrowed from the heavy metal group
AC/DC's album
covers, Nazi Schutz Staffel and swastika designs, skeletons and
death heads
(Gross 1990, p. 125). Moreover, some of the behavior of heavy
metal perform-
ers communicates particular norms of conduct. As part of their
performance,
heavy metal stars, at times, will dramatize bizarre forms of
behavior. A widely
publicized example is when Ozzy Osbourne allegedly bit the
head of a bat in
the middle of a concert and then received rabies shots
afterwards (Barich 1986).
Although the act of biting a bat might be purely theatrical, it
can be considered
entertainment only by particular segments of society.
Similarly, there are actual acts of violence reported among
heavy metal fans.
In numerous concert tours, heavy metal means heavy security,
particularly in
the wake of high rates of arrest and physical injuries among
those attending the
concerts (Montgomery 1992). The security precautions that are
required at
heavy metal concerts are surely much greater than those
required at the phil-
harmonic or ballet. It seems obvious that a proportion of youth
present at heavy
metal concerts is different in their personal taste and behavior

from youth at-
tending the symphony. Moreover, parental concern about he.avy
metal has le.d
to attempts to require parental permission to purchase certam
types of music
that are considered offensive (see Arnett 1991).
*"Defenders of the Faith" by G. Tipton/R . Halford/K. Downing.
1984 EMI April
Music lnc./Crewglen Ltd./Ebonytree Ltd./Geargate Ltd. All
Right Controlled ~d
AdministlTed by EMI April Mu ic Inc. All Right Re
ervcd/lnternational Copynght
Secured/Used by Permi ~ion.
erAL AND ITC
EA/Y 111 · ·
H plain about the mu 1c of its Yottth
s to co111 f h , w
eradon seem: b tween popular forms o yout culture
Although each genhe relationship e 1990). There are several
possible Wayand
. 1 about t . (Newman F. h to know htt e f behavior tal on
delinquency. ll'St> t ere are th
~ ru1s o f heavy me d h 0
deviant o 'ble effects o . censorship base on t e argument th
h poss1 of music . .k h . . at
view t c . sonie form d 1. quent behavior. Lt e t e viewing of .

dvocate 1 d to e tn . . v10.. who a I ·s directly re ate . xposure
to heavy metal ts believed to int
h vy n,eta 1 d movies, e hi . f to-ea I ·s1·on shows an 1 es and
behaviors. T s view o heavy rne ... ,1
J nt te ev1 d . ant va u . f d . ct!
e d reinforce evi f h r important deternunants o elinquency
duce an . £fc cts o ot e h h .
. s the possible e e . b Arnett (1991) found t at eavy metal
listene
ignore alysis y . . li I er rs
I deed a recent an h e reckless behavior 1s tt e auected by th . n
' d outh w os . e1r
are already alienate Y (1991 ) further reported that youth
listened to heavy
music preference. Arnett d the music had the effect of making
them le
h were angry, an b h . ( ss metal when t ey . . ted with
delinquent e av1or Agnew 198S)
93) If anger is assoc1a f d lin ' angry (p. · . h ld produce a lower
rate o e quent behavior. In-
tal musics ou
then heavy me d h t contrary to what might be suggested by
those who
d d Ar ett conclu es t a , · ee ' n al usic "it would seem more
appropriate to advocate
ish to ban heavy met m ' h h ·
w . . h metal music for adolescents w o s ow evidence of a
subscnbmg to eavy fc fc h
. c. · n" (1991 p. 94). Thus a pre erence or eavy metal may
propensity LOr aggress10 . ,

even reduce delinquent behav10r. . .
In contrast to viewing the delinquent behavior of youth as either
height-
ened or suppressed by their preference for heavy metal, a more
complex model
would consider the effects of music in interaction with other
indicators of
delinquency. Heavy metal may be related to delinquent behavior
in interaction
with social control and peer group affiliations. The influence of
social control
and culture is emphasized in Barich's analysis of violent
delinquency among
suburban youth. Based on the interviews with Los Angeles
suburban gang
members and gang workers, Barich (1986) suggests that heavy
metal lyrics in-
crease the likelihood of delinquent behavior among naive youth
and youth low
in parental attachment and control.
An intelligent. kid mi~ht be able to react to heavy metal as
theater, but a dull
or confused kid took Its messages seriously. If a kid had no
parental guid-
ance, no filter between hi'm d th . . b"
b
. an e music its anthems however 1zarre,
urned mt h. b · · ' ' 0
is ram with all the power of gospel. (Barich 1986, P· 102)
Thus Barich 's hy th · d .
that cont po esize mteraction between music and delinquency
stre~es

emporary forms of h 1 f b-
urban delinq . b yout cu ture affect the emerging pattern o su
uency, ut only d n-
trol. Those youth h among youth low in parental attachment an
co
l'k W O are weak . · n· · h 1ore 1 ely to take the d f m mte
1gence, according to Banc , are 11 .
wor s o heavy 1 . . h · delin-
quent behavior. meta music seriously in justifying t eir
The specific d .
spe . fi . an Interactive effc
h
ci ed m the research li't ects of culture on delinquency
t eory t erature on b I
s resses that dev· su cu tures and delinqu ncy.
tant values and
norms are upport d in th
further
ub ultural
ont of
--~ '"''~u utUNQUENcv
113 --1 ·ent aroups. In Matza's (1964) v· ado est . i:, • iew, the
d .
11ore unportant than the static vision f Ynanuc aspects of a sub

1 are 1 d o subc 1 cu ture
h t are directed towar s explaining low 1 u tures presented in th
. t a w· 1960) er-c ass deli eories
Cl Ward and O m . Rather than r fc nquency (Cohen 1955 o . " e
er to a "d li ;
atedly emphasizes a subculture of d li e nquent subculture,, h
repe e nquenc ,, i hi ' e
ractions lead to the common acceptance of d 1 · y n w ch peer
group in-
te Matza (1964), delinquency becomes "publ" e _mh~uent
behavior. According
to . ,, (p IC Wit m the nfi
I Provincial groupmgs . 33) . co nes of more or ess . .
This group onentat1on to subcultures of d li .
rk of Schwendinger and Schwendinger (1 ;85n)quTehncy is
extended in the
wo ,, · ey relate d
,, 0115 umption patterns to contemporary adoles b mo ern-day c
. cent su cultur F
they identify White street-corner youth as "pu k ,, d .. es. or
example,
d h n ers an heavy tal ,, Groups of punkers an eavy metalers
develop coll t· 1 . . me ers. . . d ec ive re ationships th t £
cilitate group decisions an acceptable forms of delin b h . a a-
di quent e avior (Schwen clinger and Schwen nger 1985, p.
304). -
Similarly, Willis's (1978) ethnographic study of British yo th . .
. . . u views music as
a means of mtegratmg adolesce?ts mto a c~mmon culture.

Within this general
youth culture, subg,roups are umt~d ~y their taste for particular
forms of music
(Willis 1990). Roes (1985) longitudinal survey data also show
that music is a
vehicle for the expres~ion of adoles_cent group values and
identity (p. 361). Ac-
cording to Roe, allegiance to particular youth groups is defined
by clothing,
hair styles, attitudes, models of behavior, and musical
preferences.
Thus a subcultural perspective leads us to suggest that patterns
of delinquent
peer group involvement vary by heavy metal preference. Heavy
metal music
should have no effect on the delinquent behavior of youth who
are isolated from
other delinquent youth. In the words of Sutherland's theory of
differential asso-
ciation, "the principal part of the learning of criminal behavior
occurs within
intimate personal groups" (Shoemaker 1990, p. 152). Therefore,
heavy metal
music should increase delinquent peer identification and
delinquent behavior.
HYPOTHESES
. . h I tionship between heavy We can summarize the above
d1scuss10n on t e re a
metal and delinquency in terms of the following hypotheses:
h . h f delinquency among 1. A preference for heavy n1etal
leads to 1g er rates O
1

. b h vi·or
. d' f de mquent e a · youth, independent of other important m
1cators 0
. 1 b redicting that heavy metal
This hypothesis reflects the direct-effects mode Y P f d 1· uent
peers,
· . · d dent o e mg
increases the likelihood of delmquency m epen . t d by those
who
· h h h ·s that ts suppor e
parental, and school controls. It 1s t e ypot e~I . labels to heavy
metal
favor censoring or restricting access by attachmg war~ng(
1991
) suggestion that
n · d 1 ·y to Arnett s d . 1us1c. The direct-effects mo e 1s
contrar .d. outlet for re ucmg
h · b prov1 mg an eavy metal actually reduces delmquency Y
adolescent frustration and anger.
, ,,.
METHOD
The Sample
In prino 19 7, w collected data on the deli~quent conduct of 705
suburban
hio-h chool y uth. The community from which we drew our

sample is largely
affluent.2 Of the population, 95% was classified as White. It
should also be
tre ed that the vast majority of heavy n1etal fans are White and
that they are not
onfined to particular urban or suburban parts of the United
States (Gross 1990).
We sampled 1,475 youth in public and ri te high chool from
school
board lists. After receiving the con ent of th mpled uth and their
parents, we
were able to complete interview with 7 5 uth durina n
ninstructional school
time. The youth were admini ter d th un f ab ut 30 tudents.
Based on the demographic bar. t ri ti b th chool di trictS
and Bureau of Census, we are confid nt th t th , ainple i repre
entative
of the town's senior high chool popul ti n. Th i tril: uti 11 f
grade and a,
~ our sample is within 2% of th di tributi n in th t tal high 'hool
popula-
ti~n. The percentage of boys and girl in th urv · i , •ithin 1 tX)
of th town-
ship population.
CHAPTER 5 HEAVY METAL MUS IC PR
EFERENCE AND DELINQUENCY
115 --hts and feelings with your (mother) (father);>" Th
woug t scale is .65. . e alpha for the p
hJ11en arenta}

attaC I performance was measured accord. schoo f h · mg to
self-rep d
our measure o t e importance of sch 1 . orte marks (A :::: 5
f :::: O) . onses to three questions: "How impooot to ~o~th was
based on com,
. d resp . h r ant IS it to -
blfle 1 (b) to have h1g grades, and (c) to co 1 hi you (a) to do
well . schoO' . ) Th I h c mp ete gh sch }?"
111 1 == not important . e a p a tor the school . oo . (5 :::: im-
portant, importance scale is .69.
Delinquent Peers and Heavy Metal P f
re erence
asured delinquent associatio ns by respon h
We me . bl ,, R ses to t e state "
. d rarely get m to tro u e. esp onses were cod d . ment: My
.fr1en s . ) e on a 5-pomt scale (5 ::::
1 == disagree .
agre~ur meas ure of pre feren ce for heavy metal music w b d
estion: " Who is you r favo rite m usical gro up?" Thas ase on
responses to
the qu . b d . ese groups were classi
fi d into categories ase o n a consensus among several k I d . . -
e . . f d d now e geable md1-
'duals cons1stmg o a gra uate stu ent, the vice president f 1 h .
v1 , d I f h ' 3 o a arge c am of
tail record stores, an severa o is staff. Music preference d t re . .
a a were coded
soon aft er the survey was admm1stered.

Nearly half of all youth (48%) said they preferred musical gro
c_ 11· . . . ups tai mg mto
the rock-pop category (e.g., Bonjov1, Genesis, U2, Phil
Collins). An add. .
1 " . I . k" 1t10na
19% preferred v1~tage. or c ass1c roe (e.g., The Who, Rush,
The Grateful
Dead). Less than 1 % said they preferred classical music. About
7% preferred
heavy metal groups. The heavy metal category included such
groups as Iron
Maiden, Motley Criie, Metallica, and AC/DC. 4
Stated music preference predicted the type of music youth
purchased. As an
incentive for completing the survey, each youth was provided
with a coupon re-
deemable for a tape or a record in a local chain of stores. 5
When the youth pur-
chased the record, the cashier coded the album or tape cassette
the youth
selected into specific music categories and placed these on the
coupons, which
were returned to us. Among the youth who said they preferred
heavy metal,
about half actually purchased a heavy metal album. If
preferences were ran-
domly related to purchases, we would expect only 7% to have
purchased a
heavy metal album. We use musical pref ere nee because we
have more complete
data than if we relied on actual purchases. We assume that
preference is related
to actual behavior, although it is quite possible that our heavy

metal measure
does not tap the extent to which youth actually listen to heavy
metal mus~c .
. In the following analysis, youth who listed a heavy metal
group as their fa-
vorite were coded into a heavy metal preference category (1 =
heavy metal
preference, 0 = others).
Delinquency
Our d db k ' youth to indicate
. ependent variable, delinquency, was measure Y as mg
if du · h ll · ffenses · stolen any-
h. ring t e past year they had committed the fo owing O · d $SO
over
;S~~ by shoplifting or other ways (worth Jess than $5, b:twe;;
::i:g to them;
' purposely damaged or destroyed property that did n
116 --- . dentally) or beaten someone up. W.
. d (not acc1 .d h . h e asked
. lly inJure Li he or she d1 eac act 111 t e past year Cl..,
phys1ca h w o1ten . . on a 4 'll
h to estimate
O f er. once or twice, 3 to 11 times, and 12 or ... ~ -
yout . · g o r,.ev , . lllor ~ vll!t
I (
0-3), cons1st1n h e five items provided the measureme e tith._

sea e . ts on t es nt of ·,1,
The sum of potn fficient is .68. de~~
quency.
The alpha coe
ANALYSIS
6
d heavy metal reported significantly more delinqu
Youth who pre erre th preferring heavy metal music, x = 2.5,
SD:::: .4~ncy:han
other youth (f~r Y?u non-heavy metal music, x = 1.3, SD == .07
'~ ... 46;
£ outh pre1ernng ' n - 659
or Y Ol) Among those who preferred heavy metal, 83% report d
,
F == 2 4 p < . . . . h' h 1 e that
· 'tt d an act of delmquency wit m t e ast year comp d
they had conum e . . ' are to
f h W
ho preferred other kmds of music.
58% o t ose . d h . .
To test for interactions, we standa~~ize t e contmuous predictor
variables
(Aik
d West 1991; Jaccard, Turnsi, and Wan 1990). By standardizing
th
en an l . n· . . . e
predictor variables, the problem of mu tico meanty ~ testmg

interactions ~
substantially reduced. for example, the high:st correlat~on
coefficient between
the standardized variables (including interaction terms) is .39,
which is substan-
tially less than the correlations for unstandardized interaction
terms. We checked
the pattern of interactions by regressing delinquency on the raw
scores sepa-
rately for youth preferring heavy metal and non-heavy metal
music. The pattern
and size of coefficients produced virtually identical estimates,
so we feel confi-
dent in presenting the unstandardized coefficients based on
standardized values.
Also, we examined the pattern of interactions in separate
analyses, control-
ling for gender and age and type of offense, and found that the
results do not
differ significantly. Higher order interactions are not presented
here to simplify
the analysis, but they are available upon request. Furthermore,
our hypothesized
relationships are not specific to gender or age characteristics.
Table 1 presents the unstandardized regression coefficients and
their corre-
sponding significant levels for regression models with and
without interactions.
In .the main effects model without interactions, the significant
predictors of
delinquency are school marks, school importance, delinquent
friends, and heavy
metal preference. Once these variables are entered into the
equation, the impor:

tance of ~ar~ntal attachment and parental supervision is reduced
to below the ·~'
level of s1gnifica Th d' . ·ted di-. nee. e 1rection of the
estimated effects is in the expe<.; .
rection · that is · th da 1 . . · are di-l ' 'm ese ta ow social
control and delinquent associations .
:~gnct ;fi relat~d tho delinquency. Although the effect of heavy
metal prefe~ncen~
cant m t e expect d d" . . . f dehnque
friends d h . e rrection, tt 1s not as strong as the effects o --1, a
an sc ool 1mpo ta Yc h . ble I~es
unique and · . fi r nee. et t e heavy metal preference var1a .
1r11. s1gru cant contr'b . d d }inque1 "'r
N . i ution to the variance in self-reporte e -
ext we consider in T: bl 1 . Wh interac
tion effects are enter;d th: e . , mam effects with interactions.
end school
marks on delin ' mam effects of heavy metal preference an rwo--
quency are above the .05 level of significance . .AIJ1ong the
CHAPTER 5 HEAVY METAL Music
PREFERENCE AND DELINQUENCY
'T'able 1. Delinquency Regressed on Social C
•
1 d H ontrol
Delinquent Peer, an eavy Metal Prefere '
variables, With and Without Interaction T;:s

variable
Parental Attachment
Parental Supervision
school Marks
School Importance
Delinquent Friends
Heavy Metal Preference
Parental Attachment X Metal
Parental Supervision X Metal
School Marks X Metal
School Importance X Metal
Delinquent Friends X Metal
Adjusted R2
Note: Standardized effects are shown.
•p < .01; **p < .OS.
Main Effects
-.03
- .10
-.15*
-.25**
.57**

.13*
.19
With Interactions
-.08
- .06
-.14
- .27**
.55**
.16
.07
- .23**
.22**
.05
.07
.22
117
way interactions with heavy metal preference, only parental
supervision and
school marks are significant in their effects on delinquency. The
two-way inter-
action for heavy metal preference and parental supervision is in

the expected di-
rection. But the interactive effect of school marks with heavy
metal on
delinquency is opposite from what was hypothesized. Moreover,
contrary to ex-
pectations, the interaction between delinquent friends and heavy
metal is not sig-
nificant. This suggests that the effects of delinquent peers on
delinquency are the
same for those youth who prefer heavy metal and youth
preferring other kinds
of music.
Table 2 displays the standardized effects of heavy metal
preference on delin-
quency for one standard deviation above and below the mean. In
interpreting
the coefficients in Table 1, recall that all variables are
standardized, with a mean
of zero and a standard deviation of one. The coefficients for the
"main effect "
efer to the effect of each variable on delinquency when all other
variables are
et at zero or their mean value. When all other variables are set
at their mean,
eavy metal preference has a standardized effect of .16 on
delinquency. Th co-
fficient for the interaction between heavy metal and parental
supervision is
.23. This means that for every standard deviation increase in
parental supervi-
ion, the effect of heavy metal preference on delinquency
decrease by -.2~.
en parental supervision and all other independent variables are
at the~r

iean, the effect of heavy metal on delinquency is .16. When
parental upervt-
ion is one standard deviation above it mean, the effect of heavy
metal pr fer-
nee on delinquency decreases to -.07 (.16 + -.23). Conversely,
when parental
ontrol is one standard deviation below its mean, the effect of
heavy metal on
elinquency increases to .39 (.16 + .23).
118 --
t of HeaVY Effec
Table 2. Jinquency ..
Metal on Detal superv1s1on
When paren ks Are set
Schoof Mar
and . Levels
at various
Parental sup ervision
Mean-one SD
Mean
Mean+ one SD
School marks
Mean-one SD
Mean

Mean+ one SD
.39
.16
-.07
-.06
.16
.38
t'~!' ... .
of effects for the interaction between parental h h the above
pattern . . . . .
Alt oug 1 preference is m the expected drrect1on, this is not . .
d heavy meta
superv1S1on an 1 k When the variable school marks is one
standard de~ h e for schoo mar s. 1· .
t e cas . the effect of heavy metal on de mquency mcreases to .
t'on above its mean, . 11·
via
1
h h refer heavy metal, it is not the less mte 1gent ones who 38
Among yout w o p
· · · h t delinquent acts. Rather, youth who prefer heavy metal
are reportmg t e mos . . I b
and have higher rates of delinquency appear to achieve relanve
y etter grades

in school.
SUMMARY
The results of this analysis provide mixed support for the
hypothesized interac-
tive effects of heavy metal preference. We found support for the
main effects of
heavy metal preference on delinquency controlling for other
important indica-
tors. In partial support of Barich's observation on the
relationship between
heavy metal _and delinquency, we found support for that part of
our hypothe~s
that dealt with parental supervision. Youth who preferred heavy
metal music
an_d were low m parental supervision had higher rates of
delinquency. However,
t~ was not the case for parental attachment Moreover contrary
to Barich's
point about intelr · ' . among
h . igence, our data suggest that the rate of delmquency yout
preferrmg h I k
Wc I eavy meta was not inversely related to school mar s.
e a so found littl fc . . h the effects Of d I. e support or our
subcultural hypothesis m t at c. e mquent pe · e,er-
ence The ecr erfs Were not significantly different for youth by
music phr vy
· uect o deli . . fc · g ea
metal music .,.....ay c 11 . nquent peers Is significant and youth
pre ernn . hed
. •u 1.a Into a d Ji b d. t' ngu1s

with these data fr h e nquent subculture, but it cannot e 1 i ·"act
om ot er sub 1 h l ra1 artt1, and delinquent b h . cu tures t at
revolve around the cu tu
e av1or of friends.
tt f'l l H
At O O Llr QU NCY
119
N U ION
-- with that of others which has considered h
. sistent . h . . t .
earch 1s con
1
. ;ng behavior. T e more mteract1ve and d 1tn
Our res · exp a1n~.. h · Ylla11 ·
f culture 111 b examined throug a variety of analytic 1 11c
rtance o d to e . nl a te h
P0 f culture nee t research considered o y the quantity of d c ,
spects o h presen u1 eJ·
a . Although t e b ultural literature wo d suggest considerin In,
111ques. h f the su c 1. Th g Youth t acts 01uc o f types of de
mquent acts. e effects of h quen ' ntext o e
b u] tures in the co b eater for drug offenses rather than the c

avy SU C y e gr . . 0111In
etal preference ma ured in this article. In either case, culture
and 0n
m 1· ency meas d d h sub
forms of de inqu . d in attempts to un erstan t e more dyna . '
ld not be ignore . nuc as,
culture shou h . delinquent behav10r.
f th and t eir · al f pects o you . hasize the correlation nature o
our data and th h
. ll e wish to emp . h. at t e
Fina Y, w d t support music censors 1p as a means of preve .
. nnot be use o . d d . ntuig
findmgs ca . d ' al research designs are nee e to examme futthe h
. Long1tu m . r t e
delinquency. . delinquency. Moreover, our data is confined to =
.
a1 ffc cts of musIC on . u1US1c caus e e nable to estimate the
possible effects of actually listerun·
reference so we were u h fi d' d g
P al · n delinquency. However, t e n mgs o stress the impo
to heavy met musIC o . . r,
f I ki t h
ow aspects of culture may mtluence delinquent behavior
tance o oo ng a ·
NOTES

1. Originally we had quoted directly from t~e Mode~ Criie
s~ng. But at the time of publi-
cation permission was denied by representatives of Motley
Crue. Thus we paraphrase the
song that Gross quotes. However, this illustrates part of the
difficulty in publishing research
on popular forms of culture.
2. Parents of youth surveyed were asked to indicate their
occupational class. Fathers are
largely in occupational positions of employers or managers
(73%). The remaining propor-
tion are equally divided among employee and self-employed
occupational positions. The
proportion of unemployed fathers in the survey is 6%.
3. The following music groups were classified as "heavy metal":
AC/DC, Black Sabbath,
Deep Purple, Dokken, Iron Maiden,Judas Priest, Mahles,
Metallica, Motley Criie, Primitive
Urges, Scorpions.
4· We realize tha~ there is some debate as to classification of
heavy metal groups. Such
ghroups can be delineated further into lighter forms of heavy
metal (e.g. BonJovi) and
eavy heavy metal (e g M lli ) 'vr ' · h b
·d · ·• eta ca · vve prefer to confine our analysis to what rrug t e
cons1 ered as heavy hea l Als
Megadeath Nuclear vy meta.·. 0 , current popular heavy metal
groups, such as
ular at th '. f Assault, Smc1dal Tendencies and Motorhead may
not have been pop-
e time o the s h' h '

5
R urvey, w IC was conducted in 1987.
· ecall the survey was I . .
comp eted m 1987, before the popularity of compact discs.
REFERENCES
Agnew, Robert. 1985 "A .
Theory of D Ii . Revised Strain
e nquen "s · 64:151-66. cy. oaal Forces
Aiken, Leona S d
1991. Mulrip~ R!tep~en G. ~est.
~res:s,on: Testmg and
Park,
lnterpretin~ Jntemdion.s. Newbur
CA: Sage.
Arnett,Jeffrey. 1991. "A dole cents a~ouclis
Heavy Metal Music: from ~e' rJ·7lr'9~.
of Metalheads." Yout/1 & 5o<1ct} ·
CHAPTER 5 HEAVY METAL Mus
Barich, William. 1986 .L"ifcA ~Tieporter at
Large: The Crazy e. ,e New
Yorker, November 3, pp. 97-130.
Cloward, Richard and Lloyd E. Ohlin.
1960. Deli11quwcy t1nd Opportunity: A

11,eory of Delinque,u Gangs. New York:
free Press.
Cohen, Albert K. 1955. Delinquent Boys.
New York: Free Press.
fine, Gary A. and Sheryl Kleinman. 1979.
"Rethinking Subculture: An Interac-
tionist Analysis." Amerirnn Journal of
Sociology 85: 1-20.
Gross, Robert L. 1990. "Heavy Metal
Music: A New Subculture in Ameri-
can Society."jounu,/ of Popular Culture
24:119-30.
Hagan. John. 1991. "Des tiny and Drift:
Subcultural Preferences, Status Attain-
ments, and the Risks and Rewards of
Youth." American. Sociological R eview
56:567-82.
Jaccard,James, Robert Turrisi, and Choi E.
Wan. 1990. Interactive Effects in. Multiple
Regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Matza, David. 1964. Delinquency and Drift.
New York: Wiley.
Messner, Stephen E 1983. "Regional and
Racial Effects on the Urban Homicide
Rate: The Subculture of Violence
IC PREFERENCE AND DELINQUENCY
121

Revisited." American Joumal or S . l
88:997-1007. 'J oc,o ogy
Montgomery, David 199? "I . .
. · - · nJunes, Ar-
rests .':'1e with Music at Heavy-Metal
Fest. 77,e Buffalo News, July 26
sec. Cl , C4. '
Newman, Grae~e _R. 1990. "Popular Cul-
ture and Cruru.nal Justice· A p r .
nary A l . " . re uru-
. na ysis. Journal of Criminal
Justice 18:261-74.
Roe, Kei_th. 1985. "Swedish Youth and
~us1~.: Listening Patterns and Motiva-
tIOns. Communication. Research
12:353-62.
Schwendinger, Herman and Julia S.
Schwendinger. 1985. Adolesccut Sub-
cu ltures and Delinquency. New York :
Praeger.
Shoemaker, D. J. 1990. 11,eories ef Delhi-
quency: An Examination ef Explanations
ef Delinquent Behavior. 2nd ed . New
York: Oxford.
Stack, Steven and Jim Gundlach. 1992.
" The Effects of Country Music on
Suicide." Social Forces 71:211 -18.

Willis, Paul. 1978. Profane Culture. London:
Routledge.
--. 1990. Common Culture. England:
Open University.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. What was the purpose of the
study? What was the primary
question that the authors wished
to address in the study?
As discussed by the authors, why
might one suspect that preference
r certain forms of music might
e related to delinquency?
3. Describe the data collection pro-
cess. How were the data that were
analyzed in the study collected?
4. According to the authors, ~oes lis-
tening to heavy metal m~s1c lead
to, or cause, delinquency. Why or
why not?
Elements of Research Design 103
the program (treatment) are unknown, the control group
offenders are

not being deprived. Once the effectiveness of the program is
deter-
mined, control group offenders can be admitted.19
Second, the classical experiment has the potential to encroach
upon
the decision-making authority of criminal justice agents. The
clear
solution here, as the Provo Experiment indicated, is to use
random
assignment after a decision is made. Surely, experimenters
cannot ex-
pect to randomly sentence people to prison or probation.
Modifica-
tions can be adopted which do not restrict the power of the
classical
experimental design while protecting the rights of individuals.
Third, there is the major issue of the feasibility of carrying out
an
experiment in the field.
The random assignment process must be structured to meet both
the demands of the classical experiment and the operations of
the
criminal justice system — in these two examples, sentencing by
judges
and arrest and other sanctions by police. It requires very close
coop-
eration between the operational agencies and the researchers.
Imple-
menting random assignment and maintaining it throughout the
pro-
cess can be problematic. Also, to repeat, the subjects selected
for study
must be eligible for treatment and the experimental and control

groups must be kept separate so that the integrity of the
treatment is
maintained.20 After all, exposure to the treatment should be the
only
difference between the two groups.
The Quasi-Experimental Design
The classical experiment is not the only form of research
design.
However, it serves as the point of departure for other designs
which
attempt to approximate its key features. The quasi-experimental
de-
sign is the mirror image of the classical experiment with one
key dif-
ference: the absence of random assignment. As previously
mentioned,
it is not always possible to implement the classical experiment.
Yet, it
is vital that a group is constructed to compare findings
generated by
the experimental group. Thus, a comparison group is selected
using
a method other than random assignment to insure that it is
compara-
ble to the experimental group.
Our example here is the evaluation of a prison-based treatment
pro-
gram for drug/alcohol abusing inmates.21 We need to find a
group of
inmates in the same prison who have the same problem, but who
were
Co

py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl
es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r
ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.
Ma
y
no
t
be
r
ep

ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or
m
wi
th
ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro
m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,
e
xc
ep
t
fa
ir
u

se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de
r
U.
S.
o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed
on 1/15/2020 10:52 PM via PURDUE UNIVERSITY GLOBAL
AN: 446194 ; Vito, Genn, Tewksbury, Richard, Kunselman,
Julie.; Introduction to Criminal Justice Research Methods : An
Applied Approach
Account: ns019078

104 Introduction to Criminal Justice Research Methods
never involved in the program in any way. After all, if we
select-
ed inmates who were excluded from the program, we would
commit
the error of selection bias. Similarly, if we chose inmates who
dropped
out of the program, the data would be contaminated because the
com-
parison group would have been exposed to the treatment. What
is left?
Adams’ suggests screening inmates who were considered for,
but for
reasons of their own, decided not to take part in the program —
a
self-drop group.22 Before such a group can be considered
however,
two important considerations must be checked out. First, the re-
searcher must be certain that such inmates were not thrown out
of the
program by project administrators (Beware of selection bias!).
Second,
you must be certain that these inmates were never enrolled in or
ex-
posed to the treatment (contamination of data problem). It
would also
be possible to check for eligible inmates who were simply
unaware of
the program. It is also possible to use a variation of the
matching tech-
nique (again the missing element is random assignment). Here,
the
experimenter would construct a comparison group which was
identi-

cal to the experimental group on a number of known variables
(i.e.,
age, race, prior record, present offense, education, marital
status, etc.).
In any event, since randomization was not utilized, it is
necessary to
record relevant personal and socio-demographic information on
such
inmates and compares them directly to the experimental group.
If dif-
ferences do exist, it would be necessary to control for them
statistical-
ly. Remember that the crucial issue here is that the experimental
and
comparison groups must be similar. The problem is that, even if
you
determine that the two groups are comparable, they may still
differ on
some important attribute which was beyond your means to
measure.
This is not a problem when random assignment is used, hence
the
power of the classical experimental design.
However, since it is not always possible to use random
assignment,
the quasi-experiment gives you another possibility to conduct
accurate
research. Quite simply, it may not be possible for you to do
anything
else and it is especially valuable when performing evaluation
research
(see Chapter Eleven).
Other Types of Research Designs

Pre-Experimental Designs. Pre-experimental designs take a
vari-
ety of forms which emphasize description but typically fail to
make a
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl
es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r
ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.

Ma
y
no
t
be
r
ep
ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or
m
wi
th
ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro
m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,

e
xc
ep
t
fa
ir
u
se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de
r
U.
S.
o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.

Applied Approach
Account: ns019078
comparison between the experimental group and another group
of
subjects. Typically, they are undertaken out of necessity
because they,
like the quasi-experimental design, offer a feasible alternative
to re-
search when the classical experiment is impossible to conduct.
The
chief problem is that the researcher is then unable to protect the
integrity of the research results and clearly state that they
reflect the
effect of the treatment and not some other force. They are not as
reli-
able as the classical experiment.
The first type of pre-experimental design is the one-shot case
study or the one group post test design. Here, measurements are
ob-
tained for one group after the treatment has been administered.
For
example, one could determine if a group of police officers
became
more sensitive to diversity issues after they went through a
diversity
training program. Their score on an examination would
determine if

they had learned the principles of diversity covered in the
training
program.
Probably the most common type of pre-experimental design is
the
before-after study (also known as the “one group pretest-
posttest de-
sign”). This design is simply the first half of the experimental
design.
The performance of the experimental group is recorded before
and
after the treatment is administered. It is the simplest design but,
due to
the absence of comparison, it fails to document the
effectiveness of the
treatment. It is commonly used when it is difficult to construct a
com-
parison or control group. For example, let’s say that we wish to
evalu-
ate the effectiveness of a neighborhood watch program in a
particular
neighborhood. Under a before and after study, we would
measure the
burglary rate (number of reported burglaries) before and then
after the
implementation of the neighborhood watch. Even if the burglary
rate
declined after the establishment of the neighborhood watch
program,
we would not be able to make a comparison to another
neighborhood
that did not have a neighborhood watch. Our only comparison is
to
our selected neighborhood before and then after the
neighborhood

watch began.
One way to attempt to provide this comparison is to use the
static
group comparison design. With this design, the number of
reported
burglaries in a neighborhood that has had a neighborhood watch
pro-
gram would be compared to the number of reported burglaries in
another neighborhood that did not have a neighborhood watch
pro-
gram. Here, the weakness is that, before the research is
conducted,
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl
es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r

ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.
Ma
y
no
t
be
r
ep
ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or
m
wi
th
ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro

m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,
e
xc
ep
t
fa
ir
u
se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de
r
U.
S.
o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co

py
ri
gh
t
la
w.
Applied Approach
Account: ns019078
there is no examination to determine whether the two
neighborhoods
are comparable. The research conclusion is based upon
comparing the
impact upon each group to determine the effect of the treatment
on
one of them.
Cross-Sectional Design. A cross sectional design takes measure-
ments of subjects at a single time in their lives. The case study
is a
form of cross sectional design used in criminal justice research.
The
case can be an individual (a professional criminal), an event (a
police
strike), or a place (Alcatraz). This type of design is capable of
generat-
ing great quantities of descriptive information which can be

used by
policy makers. It is especially valuable in time of rapid change
because
it allows you to respond immediately to an historical event or a
nat-
ural experiment — i.e., the effect of a judicial order on the
operations
of a prison or a change in sentencing policy.23 Follow-up
recidivism
research on the former Kentucky death row inmates is an
example of
a natural experiment because their death sentences were
commuted
by a U.S. Supreme Court decision and they were later released
by the
parole board.24
Longitudinal Design. A longitudinal design is similar to the
cross sectional design with the key exception that measurements
are
taken at more than one point in time. One form of longitudinal
design
is the time series design. The time series design is one in which
the
treatment is introduced during a series of measurements on the
depen-
dent variable. All of the measurements are obtained from the
same
group. For example, a researcher could examine the deterrent
effect of
an execution by measuring the homicide rate in a state in the
months
prior to and following an execution. A sharp change in the trend
of
measurements on the dependent variable (the homicide rate)
immedi-

ately following the treatment (the execution) is assumed to be
attribut-
able to the treatment. Again, the comparison in results is within
the
experimental group only.
Another form of longitudinal design is a cohort study. It
examines
the behavior of a particular group over time. Cohorts are groups
con-
structed by the researcher that share some common experience
(i.e.,
involvement in the same program, graduating from the police
acade-
my in the same year). Their performance over time is then
recorded.
Wolfgang, Figlio, and Sellin (1972) tracked the delinquency
records of
a birth cohort of boys born in 1945 who lived in Philadelphia
from
their tenth to eighteenth birthdays. They discovered that 35
percent of
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl

es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r
ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.
Ma
y
no
t
be
r
ep
ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or
m
wi
th

ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro
m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,
e
xc
ep
t
fa
ir
u
se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de
r
U.
S.

o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.
Applied Approach
Account: ns019078
the boys had some type of contact with the police and that about
50
percent of the juveniles who commit an offense are likely to
commit
another.25
Regardless of the type of design, there are several threats to
validi-
ty that can affect the results of the study.

THREATS TO INTERNAL VALIDITY
Internal validity refers to ways in which the process of experi-
mentation may affect the research results. In other words, the
re-
searcher is then uncertain if the outcomes generated by the
research
are a result of the treatment or the way in which the experiment
was
conducted. In effect, the experiment becomes a treatment in
itself.
Cook and Campbell identified the following sources of internal
validity:26
1. History: events, in addition to the treatment, may occur be-
tween the pre and post tests which are beyond the control of the
experimenter. For example, Vito, Longmire, and Kenney (1984)
reported that, during their evaluation of a police burglary sup-
pression program, the state of California passed legislation re-
quiring a mandatory prison sentence for burglary.26 As a result,
the researchers were uncertain if the number of reported bur-
glaries recorded during the project were affected by the new
methods of police operations or due to the new law. Often, the
only thing which researchers can do when an historical event
occurs in the middle of their experiment is report that it oc-
curred and let the findings be interpreted accordingly.
2. Maturation refers to the processes operating within research
subjects as a function of the passage of time, including growing
older, growing hungrier or becoming more tired. Boredom
could also be a problem which could affect the behavior of the
research subjects. For example, Vito and Wilson (1988) con-
ducted a long term follow up of former death row inmates in
Kentucky whose sentence had been commuted to life in prison

as a result of the Furman v. Georgia (1972) decision. Was their
on
parole behavior due to the commutation of their death sentence
or due to aging?28
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl
es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r
ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.
Ma

y
no
t
be
r
ep
ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or
m
wi
th
ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro
m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,
e

xc
ep
t
fa
ir
u
se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de
r
U.
S.
o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.

Applied Approach
Account: ns019078
3. Testing concerns the effect of taking a test upon the scores of
a
second testing. If the same instrument is used for the pre and
post test, the subjects in the control group may be able to tease
out what the instrument is designed to measure (i.e., fear of
crime) and try to answer “the right way” rather than express
their own true feelings.
4. Instrumentation. If, upon repeated use, an instrument yields
the same results, it is considered to be reliable. But what would
happen if your instrument was altered somehow between the pre
and post tests? If there is some alteration in your instrument,
the
research results would be affected.
5. Statistical Regression is especially problematic when
research
subjects have been selected on the basis of their extreme scores
or attributes. “Regression toward the Mean” is a statistical phe-
nomenon which operates in nature. Any extreme attribute tends
to be balanced out over time. The problem, therefore, is that
extreme subjects tend to improve over time regardless of the
treatment. Their behavior or performance goes to the average
level for the group of subjects under study. For example, in his
book, The Future of Imprisonment, Morris (1974) proposed a
new
prison model which he would like to test using the “toughest

group of inmates.” Morris encouraged the use of a classical
experimental design to assign such inmates to his model institu-
tion. Clearly, statistical regression could be a threat to his pro-
posed experiment. If these inmates are so “bad” to begin with,
their behavior may simply regress toward the mean. If they did
improve, it would be difficult to say that the benefits were due
to
the new prison design.29
6. Experimental Mortality has to do with the loss of subjects
from your experimental and control groups. If large numbers of
subjects “drop out” for whatever reason, the groups may change
so much that they are no longer comparable. Thus, the major
strength of randomization is violated. Researchers conducting
recidivism studies have particular problems with mortality since
parolees are often mobile and do not leave forwarding address-
es and they often literally die while on supervision.30
7. Selection Biases: Remember, the groups must be comparable
to begin with. If techniques other than random assignment are
used, selection biases may affect the research results. Put
simply,
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl

o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.
Applied Approach
Account: ns019078
you do not wish to compare apples to oranges. Researchers or
program officials should not put all the “best risks” in the
exper-
imental group and then compare them to a group of poor risks.
8. Interactions of the Above Problems. To make matters worse,
it is possible that your research can be affected by combinations
of the problems just mentioned. The design proposed by Morris
(1974) could not only be subject to problems due to statistical

re-
gression, but also due to maturation. And what would happen to
the research results if a riot or escape occurred during the study
(History)?
9. Causal Time Order. If somehow the time order between the
treatment and the measure of the dependent variable (post-test)
is fouled up, it is obvious that the causal relationship between
variables is no longer being tested.
10. Diffusion or Imitation of Treatment. If the respondents in
the
control group can communicate with the members of the exper-
imental group, they each may discover information intended for
the other group. Put simply, the physical closeness of the two
groups may render them equal by exposing them both to the
treatment. The Provo Experiment was plagued by this problem
since both the experimental and control (probation) groups were
supervised by the same probation office.
11. Compensatory Equalization of Treatments. When the exper-
imental treatment provides goods or services generally believed
to be desirable, the experimenter (or administrators in charge of
a project) may be sympathetic toward the control group and pro-
vide them with some compensatory benefit, such as special
attention. Of course, this special attention would thus become
another form of treatment and the original design would suffer.
12. Compensatory Rivalry by Respondents Receiving Less De-
sirable Treatments. When the assignment of persons to exper-
imental or control groups is made public (as is frequently re-
quired by ethical and legal considerations), competition may be
generated. In particular, the control group (the natural under-
dog) may be motivated to perform at the highest possible level.
13. Resentful Demoralization of Respondents Receiving Less

Desirable Treatments. This potential response is very much
related to rivalry. The control group may become demoralized
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C
ha
rl
es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r
ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.
Ma
y
no

t
be
r
ep
ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or
m
wi
th
ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro
m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,
e
xc
ep

t
fa
ir
u
se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de
r
U.
S.
o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.

Applied Approach
Account: ns019078
about the conditions of the research and thus perform more
poorly than the experimental group or get angry and revolt.
Other internal validity questions of special interest to criminal
jus-
tice researchers have been identified by Adams:31
14. Masking. Experimental treatments may have opposite
effects
upon different kinds of subjects. Vito (1982) has suggested that
it
is simply illogical to assume that all members of the experimen-
tal group were amenable to or served equally by a correctional
treatment program. Unless some measure of the effectiveness of
the treatment among the experimental subjects is included in the
study, masking could cloud the findings by failing to make such
differentiations in the experimental group.32
15. Contamination of Data. If the subjects in the control group
be-
come exposed to the treatment, their post-program performance
may be affected. This may have been one of the problems re-
garding the controversial Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experi-
ment.33 The treatment in this experiment was proactive police
patrolling — a test of deterrence theory. The experimental
neigh-
borhoods received proactive patrolling, the reactive (control)
areas underwent traditional patrolling (police responding to in-
coming calls for service and patrolling only the perimeter of the

beat or an adjacent proactive beat), while officers in the control
sections were to patrol as they normally would. The problem
was that the 15 neighborhoods in the study were adjacent to one
another. Was the treatment clearly isolated or did the neighbor-
hoods, in effect, all receive the same type of patrol?
16. “Erosion” of the Treatment Effect. The gradual or abrupt
dis-
appearance of performance superiority shown by the experi-
mental group in the early months after treatment may decrease
or simply wear off. This problem could be especially pro-
nounced if the researcher is following the performance of the
experimental subjects over a long period of time.
These problems are not insurmountable. They have been
presented
because the researcher must be aware of them in order to
combat
them. Some can be dealt with through the use of randomization
and
the classical experimental design (i.e., selection bias and
statistical
regression). Others can be handled by careful monitoring of the
con-
duct of the research. It is vital that the experimental and control
Co
py
ri
gh
t
©
2
00
8.
C

ha
rl
es
C
T
ho
ma
s.
A
ll
r
ig
ht
s
re
se
rv
ed
.
Ma
y
no
t
be
r
ep
ro
du
ce
d
in
a
ny
f
or

m
wi
th
ou
t
pe
rm
is
si
on
f
ro
m
th
e
pu
bl
is
he
r,
e
xc
ep
t
fa
ir
u
se
s
pe
rm
it
te
d
un
de

r
U.
S.
o
r
ap
pl
ic
ab
le
co
py
ri
gh
t
la
w.
Applied Approach
Account: ns019078

5 Heavy Metal Music Preference Delinquent Friends, Socia.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from blondellchancy

More from blondellchancy (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

5 Heavy Metal Music Preference Delinquent Friends, Socia.docx