Content area
Full Text
Some scholars argue for sex-specific explanations of criminal behavior, while others opt for more general theories of crime. In this article, we elaborate on recent explorations of gender differences in general strain theory (GST). Using data obtained from self-report interviews of delinquent youths, we implemented measures of strain, negative emotions, and coping resources to examine sex differences in GST-related processes across both interpersonal and property offending. The results offer some support for Broidy and Agnew's gender/general strain hypotheses and, at the same time, offer modifications and extensions for future research on GST.
Criminological theories have traditionally focused on explaining male delinquency (gender-specific theories of deviance) and have been criticized for failing to provide adequate explanations for female criminality (Daly & Chesney-Lind, 1988; Simpson, 1989; Tibbetts & Herz, 1996; Void, Bernard, & Snipes, 1998). For example, Smith and Paternoster (1987) contend that strain (Cloward & Ohlin, 1960), subcultural (Cohen, 1955; W. B. Miller, 1958), differential association (Sutherland & Cressey, 1978), and social control (Hirschi, 1969; Reckless, Dinitz, & Kay, 1957) theories were all developed with direct and exclusive reference to males. The development of theories with direct and exclusive attention to males has lead some scholars to call for separate gender explanations of criminal behaviors (Chesney-Lind, 1989) and others to favor the development of general theories of crime (Braithwaite, 1989; Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; Smith & Paternoster, 1987; Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985). Agnew's (1992) modification and extension of classic strain theory into a more generalized version of strain theory, general strain theory (GST), is one example of the move toward general theory.
Broidy and Agnew (1997) suggested that GST may be able to provide unique insights into the gender-crime relationship. Rather than explicate either a gender-specific or a general account of criminal behavior, Broidy and Agnew present a middle-ground approach in which they argue that the process that accounts for offending is similar across gender, but its content is distinct. In particular, it is not that males and females experience different levels of the key indicators that are implicated throughout the GST process; rather, it is that males and females experience these indicators in qualitatively distinct ways. It is to this theoretical explanation that we devote our attention in this article.
GST
In 1992, Agnew...