Developmental trajectories of nonsocial reinforcement and offending in adolescence and young adulthood: An exploratory study of an understudied part of social learning theory

Abstract

Purpose

Within social learning theory, nonsocial reinforcement has been hypothesized to have a link with offending. The purpose of the present study was to address two questions: (1) Does nonsocial reinforcement change or remain stable over time? And (2) does nonsocial reinforcement have a reciprocal link with offending, as Wood et al. (1997) would expect?

Methods

We used a subsample (N = 413) of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) data and semi-parametric group-based modeling (SPGM).

Results and Conclusions

The SPGM suggested three distinct groups of nonsocial reinforcement (one trajectory group appeared to have a low but stable rate of nonsocial reinforcement, one trajectory appeared to be higher but stable, another trajectory higher but also stable). A cross-tabulation of the nonsocial reinforcement trajectories and offending trajectories indicated that offending increased as nonsocial reinforcement became greater. Study limitations and implications are also discussed.

Introduction

Lately, criminologists have focused on the intrinsic pleasure and rewards (i.e., nonsocial reinforcement) of juvenile delinquency. Researchers have shown that participation in drug use and delinquency is associated with positive sensations that include risk-taking (Agnew, 1990, Arnett, 1995; Brezina and Piquero, 2003, Higgins et al., 2009, Katz, 1988, May, 2003, Wood et al., 1994, Wood et al., 1995, Wood et al., 1997). With this evidence, nonsocial reinforcement may be used to enrich a number of criminological theories (Akers, 1998, Katz, 1988, Wood et al., 1995, Wood et al., 1997).

One theory in particular is social learning theory. Wood et al., 1995, Wood et al., 1997 argued that the development of nonsocial reinforcement within the social learning theory context would provide a theoretical advancement. According to Akers (1998), nonsocial reinforcement is included in the theory, but he argued that the focus should remain on the social portions of reinforcement rather than on nonsocial reinforcement. In contrast, Wood et al., 1995, Wood et al., 1997 argued that nonsocial reinforcement might provide a stronger impetus for delinquency and drug use than social reinforcement. The prevailing evidence points toward the idea that nonsocial reinforcement is important for the development of social learning theory.

Another theory or set of theories that nonsocial reinforcement may enrich are the developmental theories (i.e., Moffitt, 1993, Moffitt, 2003). Briefly, Moffitt (1993) argued that two types of offenders are observable. One offender type would begin committing crime early and continue committing crime throughout life (i.e., life course persistent), and the other offender type would commit crime early and end their criminal behavior during adolescence (i.e., adolescent limited). Moffitt (2003) argued that a third group that consistently committed small amounts of crime was also possible (i.e., low-level chronics). Comparatively, Wood et al. (1995) suggested that individuals might vary in the amount that they are susceptible to nonsocial reinforcement for drug use and delinquency. Thus, it is possible that life course persistent offenders are high nonsocial reinforcers, while adolescent limited offenders and low-level chronics are not high nonsocial reinforcers. Supporting this view also provides evidence of a reciprocal link between nonsocial reinforcement and delinquency.

While enriching these theories is important, it is equally important to understand the biological etiology of nonsocial reinforcement. The biological assumptions and evidence of nonsocial reinforcement come from the sensation-seeking literature. To clarify, one of the main parts of nonsocial reinforcement is risk-taking. In criminology, risk-taking is part of the larger low self-control individual propensity for criminal behavior (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). However, in psychology, risk-taking is part of the larger sensation-seeking concept (Zuckerman, 2002).

Given these discussions, we further consider the role of nonsocial reinforcement in social learning theory (Akers, 1998) and Moffitt, 1993, Moffitt, 2003 taxonomy. This study has several purposes. First, the present study is to provide an understanding of the reciprocal nature of the relationship between nonsocial reinforcement and delinquency. Second, the present study provides some understanding of the role of nonsocial reinforcement in Moffitt's taxonomy. Third, this study highlights the biological underpinnings of nonsocial reinforcement. This study is important because it is the first to assess the reciprocal nature of nonsocial reinforcement using a nationally representative longitudinal dataset. The study is also important because it provides researchers with more information about the etiology of nonsocial reinforcement and its developmental contributions.

To achieve these purposes, we first begin by reviewing nonsocial reinforcement from the Wood et al., 1995, Wood et al., 1997 perspectives. Second, we provide an understanding of the biological etiology of nonsocial reinforcement. This is followed by Akers’ (1998) arguments about nonsocial reinforcement. Next, we present Moffitt, 1993, Moffitt, 2003 developmental taxonomy where nonsocial reinforcement is highlighted. This is followed by the methods, analysis plan, results, and discussion.