Criminologists are often frustrated by the disconnect between sound empirical research and public policy initiatives. Recently, there have been several attempts to better connect research evidence and public policy. While these new strategies may well bear fruit, I believe the challenge is largely an intellectual one. Ideas and research evidence must guide public policy and practice. In this article, I present highlights from my tenure as the Director of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the research, development, and evaluation agency in the Department of Justice. One of the ideas that I emphasized at NIJ was “Translational Criminology.” I believe translational criminology acknowledges NIJ’s unique mission to facilitate rigorous research that is relevant to the practice and policy. I also discuss the challenges I faced in bringing research to bear on public policy and practice. I end with a call for my colleagues in criminology and criminal justice to become more involved in government.

The publication of Travis Hirschi's Causes of Delinquency in 1969 was a watershed moment in criminology. There are many reasons for the work's lasting influence. Hirschi carefully examined the underlying assumptions of extant theories of crime in light of what was known about the individual-level correlates of offending. He then developed critical tests of hypotheses derived from social control theory and competing perspectives and empirically assessed them using original self-report delinquency data. Many of his key findings, such as the negative correlation between attachment to parents and delinquency, are now established facts that any explanation of crime must consider. Causes of Delinquency is still cited hundreds of times per year, and it continues to spark new research and theoretical development in the field. Perhaps the most lasting legacy is the volume of criticism it has attracted and fended off, leading to its enduring contribution to the study of crime and delinquency.

This review synthesizes the historical literature on the criminalization and incarceration of black Americans for an interdisciplinary audience. Drawing on key insights from new histories in the field of American carceral studies, we trace the ...Read More

The interplay among data, analytic tools, and theory has been a defining feature of life-course and developmental criminology. In this paper, we briefly consider the intellectual history of each component before focusing on the prospects for future advancement. What are the most promising data sources and methodological tools that will advance life-course inquiry in criminology? Above all, what are the key questions and theoretical ideas for moving the field forward? Our argument is that by integrating new directions in data, tools, and ideas—especially (1) testing an augmented theory of turning points, (2) examining cohort differences in aging and crime that arise from macro level changes, and (3) designing criminal justice interventions that are both developmentally appropriate and socially supportive while not compromising public safety—the future of life-course and developmental criminology will be as bright, if not brighter, than the rich legacy of its past.

This chapter turns to the age-graded theory of informal social control. This theory posits that crime is more likely to occur when an individual's bond to conventional society is weakened. This chapter briefly considers Sampson and Laub’s Crime in the Making before providing a summary of the revised version of the theory in Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives. It then provides an updated theoretical and empirical assessment of the core principles of the theory, namely a review of current research on turning points and human agency. The chapter next details current challenges to the importance of turning points in adulthood and reviews contemporary barriers to mechanisms of desistance. The chapter concludes with some commentary and final thoughts on the theory.

Although often lumped together, longitudinal and developmental approaches to crime are not the same. Longitudinal research invokes a methodological stance--collecting and analyzing data on persons (or macrosocial units) over time. Ironically, however, one of the objections to existing longitudinal research has been that it often looks like, or produces results equivalent to, cross-sectional research (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1987). Critics of longitudinal research have a valid point-many studies simply investigate between-individual relationships using a static, invariant conception of human development. For example, showing an "effect" of social class at time one on crime at time two requires a longitudinal design, but substantively such an effect says nothing about withinindividual change, dynamic or sequential processes, or whether in fact "time" really matters. Hence longitudinal studies often borrow the tools of cross-sectional analysis but do not inform about how individuals progress through the life course. Perhaps most important, until recently longitudinal research has labored under the trinity of dominant crirnino-

This chapter explores the linkage between childhood misbehavior and later adult behavior in a variety of life domains. In any event, regardless of which measure of delinquent/antisocial behavior in childhood is used, childhood misbehavior has a substantively powerful relationship with adult crime and deviance. The chapter argues that adult behavior outcomes occurs independent of traditional sociological variables such as social class and race/ethnicity. It aims to establish the importance of studying crime and deviance over the full life course. Drawing on Avshalom Caspi and Lee Robins, the chapter suggests that antisocial behavior in children is linked to later adult behavior across a variety of domains of life including behavior in the military, general deviance and criminality, economic dependency, educational attainment, employment history, and marital experiences. Regardless of the particular measure of childhood misbehavior used, the continuity of childhood misbehavior to adulthood emerges even while under military service.

Reducing Justice System Inequality:Introducing the Issue John H. Laub (bio) The topic of inequality in the United States has become virtually impossible to ignore, and the justice system is an important part of the discussion. Witness the recent National Research Council report on the causes and consequences of the countrys high rates of incarceration, especially for minority offenders.1 We've also heard heated debates about the stop, question, and frisk policies followed by police in New York City and elsewhere.2 More broadly, legal scholar Michelle Alexander has referred to mass incarceration and other justice system policies as "the New Jim Crow" in America.3 When considering the known facts about crime, offenders, victims, and the justice system response, important complexities arise that both reflect and contribute to inequality in the wider society. The fundamental fact is that criminal offending and criminal victimization for common law crimes (which include murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and larceny) aren't randomly distributed across persons and places. Inequalities are present in the patterns of serious criminal offending and serious criminal victimization even before any contact with the justice system. Chronic offending is also related to gender, race, and social class.4 We can think of these known facts as input to the justice system. At the same time, the justice systems responses exacerbate inequality among young people in America. We can think of these responses as output from the justice system that reinforces and deepens inequalities; researchers have increasingly examined the collateral consequences of justice system involvement. The distinction between input and output suggests that while crime and justice system involvement are typically considered to be outcomes, crime and justice system involvement may also drive inequality. Setting the Stage Though its vitally important to focus on fundamental inequities that occur before people become involved with justice system, this issue of Future of Children examines how the justice system reinforces and exacerbates inequities among children, adolescents, and young adults, and how alternative policies, programs, and practices might mitigate those effects. The issue has four distinctive features. First, it covers the [End Page 3] entire justice system, starting with stop, question, and frisk by police on the street and continuing through each stage of the process—policing (arrest, booking, lockup), courts (arraignment, trial, conviction), and corrections (probation, jail, prison, and parole). Second, it devotes special attention to schools, in particular school suspensions and the role of the police—school resource officers—in schools. Third, it examines three domains that contribute to the reproduction of inequality but have received little attention from researchers and policy makers—foster care, probation, and jails. Fourth, and most important, it assesses policies, programs, and practices to reduce justice system inequality. What strategies have worked? What strategies should be tried? What strategies should be avoided? The articles in this issue should be viewed from a life-course perspective that puts persons in context. Such a perspective acknowledges that individuals are embedded in broader structures, and that individual behavior is the product of interaction between personal development and social context—family, school, neighborhood, and the like. The justice system directly and indirectly impinges on these intersecting domains. These direct and indirect effects are often cumulative and can compound over time. Along with my colleague Robert Sampson, I have articulated a theory that cumulative disadvantage over the life course has a snowball effect. Specifically, early misconduct in childhood, as well as adolescent delinquency and its negative consequences (such as arrest, official labeling, and incarceration), increasingly jeopardize a child's future development.5 If we can better understand the mechanisms that exacerbate inequality at the individual, family, school, and neighborhood levels, and see how they interact and overlap, we can help identify promising interventions. Given recent bipartisan support for criminal justice reform, now is a particularly good time to take stock of the policies, programs, and practices that may reduce justice system inequality. Each article in this issue assesses such policies, programs, and practices in detail. Thus, this issue offers a much-needed evidence-based voice in discussions of how to reform the justice system. Summary of the Articles Cutting Off the Pipeline The first two articles look at...

This chapter presents a short biography of Hirschi, including his family and educational background and his occupational path. It discusses Hirschi's classic works, especially Causes of Delinquency and A General Theory of Crime, co-authored with Michael Gottfredson. The chapter tackles the difficult issue of Hirschi's legacy in the field of criminology and offers some concluding remarks on the life and work of Travis Hirschi. Hirschi was an undergraduate student at the University of Utah where he majored in sociology and history. For Hirschi, perhaps more than any other criminologist in the twentieth century, ideas were always tied to the mode of investigation and the mode of investigation was always tied to substantive concerns. Hirschi perhaps more than any other delinquency theorist also brought the family, especially family relations, back into the picture. The trademark of Hirschi's body of work is profound theoretical insights coupled with rigorous research methods.

Social behavior occurs in particular times and particular places, in concert with particular social actors. For several years, the authors have been working with a longitudinal study of crime causation originated by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck. This chapter argues that precisely because these data are "old" they provide an unusual opportunity to assess whether and in what ways the causes of juvenile delinquency and adult crime are specific to a historical period. A wealth of information on social, psychological, and biological characteristics, family life, school performance, work experiences, and other life events was collected on the delinquents and nondelinquent controls from 1939 to 1948. Eleanor Glueck's early research focused on the sociology of education, especially the relation between schools and the community, and evaluation research methods in social work. In fact, during the 1930s in Boston the offense of drunkenness constituted a relatively large number of the overall arrests and prosecutions.

Criminologists have long complained that public policies on crime and justice are often not consistent with empirical research. In this paper, I address this issue by arguing that in part the problem is that public policy is not placed in a larger conceptual framework and I argue that a life course perspective could go a long way in enriching public policies on crime and justice. In my paper, I draw on results from a long-term research project examining the life course of crime from childhood to old age. This research is then placed in the context of my recent experience directing the National Institute of Justice in the Department of Justice. Embracing what I call "translational criminology," I conclude by highlighting several examples of how life course research can shape policies on crime and justice moving forward.

In 1986, the National Research Council published a two-volume report, Criminal Careers and “ Career Criminals.” This work generated fierce debates central to the field of criminology and pitted some of the biggest names in the business against one another. In this paper, we consider the last 30 years and ask whether the report was an intellectual turning point. Our answer is that while the report did change the methodological direction of criminology, it lacked a theoretical explanation of the dynamics of crime. After the report was published, several efforts attempted to fill this breach. We reflect on the role that the Criminal Careers report played in our own work, from the time of the report’s release to the development and assessment of what is now known as the age-graded theory of informal social control and the broader field of “life-course criminology.”

One of the most important changes in juvenile justice systems over the last twenty years has been the introduction and expansion of the role of prosecutors in the juvenile court process. This paper reports the results of a study investigating the role of the prosecutor in the juvenile court process in Middlesex County, Massachusetts. This jurisdiction has recently implemented changes increasing prosecutor presence in juvenile court, yet still retains a number of juvenile court sessions utilizing police prosecutors. Preliminary assessments are offered regarding the effects of an increased prosecutorial role in juvenile justice matters. In particular, it is argued that the present organizational structure and the singular emphasis on rehabilita tion in the juvenile court provide obstacles to prosecutorial efforts in this area. Implications for changing juvenile justice policy are discussed.

AbstractThis article reviews the current state of knowledge and perspectives on desistance from juvenile offending. It begins by locating juvenile delinquency and desistance within the context of adolescent development and then describes the conceptual and methodological challenges of studying desistance from juvenile offending. There is a small but growing body of research focusing on desistance during adolescence. The review of literature reflects that rather than pathological or abnormal behavior, delinquency is a normative aspect of adolescent development. Finally, the article highlights some of the gaps in both theory and research on desistance during adolescence, and offers suggestions for how juvenile justice policy might benefit from desistance research. What is required is to think of ways to restructure people's response to juvenile delinquency, especially by the formal system of justice, in order to allow for the possibility of desistance from crime and other behavioral change to take effect.