INTRODUCTION:

According to the studies carried out in the recent years, it has been seen that youth is getting involved in crimes. When a young person is involved in a criminal case, he becomes a juvenile delinquent. He enters the age of criminal responsibility where he is being considered responsible for a crime. When a child is minor and has not reached the age of criminal responsibility, they cannot be charged with a juvenile crime. But when the child’s not a minor, he can be certainly charged with a criminal offense.

It’s important we understand that a child is not born with criminal tendencies. There are always some factors that contribute to juvenile crime, leading them to dangerous situations. The most common types of juvenile crimes include criminal mischief, burglary, and misconduct.

A definite intervention is required at an early stage and in order to prevent juvenile crime, its root causes must first be clearly understood.

The factors that drive a teen to crime can be complex. The social, political, and environmental factors that strongly influence teen criminal behavior must be understood first in order to fight against it.

The major contributing factors to juvenile crimes include peer pressure, poor education, poor socioeconomic status, substance abuse, and neglectful parents. Let’s have a look at each of these factors to understand how they affect the teens and how they can be curtailed.

Peers are those people who belong to our age, our class, our school or they work with us. Peers play a very important and special role in our lives, either we can say in a positive way or in a negative way, it depends upon how we react to them. Especially, in schools and colleges, we got many friends, all of our age group. And all of them have a special bond with us. So it is almost impossible to get disconnected to them or to ignore them. Therefore how they behave and whatever they say leaves a great impact on our minds, maybe for lifetime. Therefore it is necessary to have a good peer group.

Psychologists believe that friends and peers highly effect young peoples’ decisions. There are many factors other than the peers that affect an adolescent’s behavior. And, therefore, you cannot quantify the extent to which a criminal behavior is linked to a delinquent peer. For example, personal factors, family factors, and society all play important role in shaping an adolescent. Having good friends can boost a child’s self-esteem, confidence, morale, moral values, and civic sense. On the other hand, bad company can cause more harm to the teenager. Some peers consciously pressurize the child to indulge in criminal activities. It is evident from past research that delinquent youth effect non-delinquent youth to join in their delinquent activities. This gives a kind of satisfaction and strength to delinquent youth.

It is evident that adolescents’ brain is not fully developed like adults’ brain. And, hence, they are more prone to get influence by criminal peer behavior than adults. Adolescent girls and boys spend more time with their friends and classmate inside and outside the school. This is also a big reason why they can easily adopt criminal behavior from their peers.

The peers groups are defined as social groups that are made of people with similar age, education or social status and which are primarily consisted of persons that share similar or same status and mostly they are almost the same age. (Lackovi –Grgin, 2006). Based on the researches of peers groups many scientists (Meada, Freud, Erikson, Piaget J), imply to important the peer influence on the social development (Ladd, 1999). The researches of the peer groups show how peer game has very important role in the socialisation (Cowen 1973 and Roff and Sell, 1967), but also that bad peer relation in the childhood results to later social unacceptable behaviours. Bukowski and Hoze (1989) develop a model of the peer relations through two basic dimensions of social functioning of persons that are in a way a mirror of children’s social competences: popularity and friendship. The popularity represents a perception of the person from the environment with high stage of acceptance, and the friendship as a two-way relation between two people filled with warmth and trust. With the friendship, a person satisfies the need for belonging through acceptance or desirability in the group, as well as the need for closeness that satisfies through friendly relations (Asher, 1996). In the literature, we can find several divisions of acceptance/rejection of children considering stage of preferences, and Coie (1984, according to Klarin, 2006) differ: popular, rejected, neglected, controversy and average child. Categories of rejected, isolated and neglected child belong to the category of unpopular children. The unpopular children are often more hyperactive, aggressive, egoistic and focused on themselves, overestimate their capabilities, neglecting the needs of others, lonely, shy, and rejection often appears as an important predictor of satisfaction with school, social self-respect, school achievements and perception of social support (Klarin, 2006). The pedagogy, all aforementioned connotations and labeling of children, does not accept. It considers them more as SOS signals of the children that cry for help, care and concern, but also for love, and an opportunity for an educational action. The category of the popular child and the child ‘a star’ belong to the category of the popular children that are characterised with friendliness, communicativeness, sense of humour, high self-respect and cheerful mood. Simel, Špoljarić and Buljubašić-Kuzmanić (2010) allege that popular children more often have close friend then the children that are not popular because they have more opportunities to make friendships. In addition, they allege that there is at least partial connection between popularity and friendship apropos how a weak peer acceptance does not necessarily result inadequate friendships. All mentioned speaks in favour of importance of peer groups, and especially in the age of middle childhood when the first friendship starts. In this period, the children are ready for cooperation and agreement, the friendship is observed as the relation of tolerance, trust and cooperation, and intimacy between the friends becomes an important feature of friendly relations.

Peer group involvement in social work and creative activities gives adolescents a good opportunity to adopt good habits. Sports give good opportunity to adolescents to spend time in healthy activities for example biking, soccer, swimming, basketball or other games. This gives the youth an opportunity to adopt good physical activities.

Criminal behaviour often times represents a collective response that is directed by subcultural values and norms of distinct collectivities such as peer groups within the larger group. Individuals in society will usually make friends or have their closest associates from among their peer groups. Therefore, peer associates have a great influence on the lifestyle of their members. In fact peer group association as an agent of socialization, determines to a large extent, what social codes an individual learns (Sutherland 1949, Allen, 2003, Nsofor, 2013). This implies that individuals whose core group members believe and act criminal within norms will learn and internalize more of criminal codes than those that conform to the norms of the society.

Group and Group Dynamics:

A group maybe defined as consisting of people with common characteristics who interact in regular patterns and share consciousness of membership as well as expectations and responsibilities (Horton and Hunt, 1984 and Roshni, 2012). Members of a group depend on each other to fulfill their primary and secondary needs and share common interests, goals and meanings. They also develop a strong feeling of ‘us’ or ‘we’. What is most essential in a social group is not the physical contact of members but the consciousness of membership.

Individuals through group interaction and experience internalize the norms of their culture and begin to share goals, values and life sentiments which to a large extent control or determine their actions. Their feelings become affected by group membership and group acceptance becomes of great need and importance. Other needs that group membership fill are the need for approval, protection and safety. A social group therefore, is a very vital social reality that has profound effect upon the behaviour of individuals in all social situations. Thus, whether a person becomes a criminal or not may be more determined by group ties and influences than by individual characteristics or chances. Group choices become very relevant. Also, behaviour that is criminal can thus be acted or developed as a result of membership of a non-conformist in-group from which an individual expects recognition, loyalty and help. In-groups often reward members with rights and opportunities unlike outgroups. Out-groups are group individuals do not expect privileges from and towards which they feel contempt and opposition.

Asch, (1952) carried out an experiment to ascertain how influential groups can be in the lives of people. He tested fifty people and 33 percent of them gave in to the group half the time, giving that they knew to be wrong answers, 40 percent gave wrong answers but met as often and 25 percent gave the right answers consistently. The result revealed that groups can be so powerful that people will be willing to say things that they know are not true. This becomes worrisome especially when the group of fifty Asch used consisted of strangers. The implication is that when the group consists of friends, people whom the members value highly and depend on for getting along in life, the expected conformity will be much higher. Others such as Levine, 1999 and Bond, 2005 replicated Arch‟s experiment and had the same results. These experiments illustrate the power of peer pressure and how easily people can succumb to groupthink. Henslin, (2008) noted that „groupthink‟ if not prevented can lead to the destruction of a society‟. Groupthink is one of the main causes of criminal behaviour by peer members. Janis, I (1972, 1982) used the term groupthink to refer to the collective tunnel vision that group members sometimes develop.

Peer Group and Subculture:

Peer groups, especially teenage and adolescent peer groups present to members models of behaviour. These models are not merely presentations but are actually rewarded sometimes and punished at other times. These groups sometimes do not only have standards that differ from those of the larger society but which also, sometimes are in opposition. Yet because members desire to be accepted, they act like the „meaningful others‟ (other members of the in-group). Ogbebor, (2012) identified that man learns by imitation and observed that in Nigeria youths through this means learn the act of crime. According to him, observation indicates that most violent crimes in Nigeria, are committed by youths. When children are unable to gain acceptance in their peer groups, they often experience a lifelong pattern of social rejection and failure (Schaeffer and Lamm, 1995). Also revealed is the fact that as children get to their middle teens, the peer group becomes highly and possibly the most important influence on attitudes, goals and conduct norms (Youniess, 1980). In other words, from peer evaluations, the individual’s image of himself/herself is being continuously formed and reformed. Bond (2003), Henslin (2008) and Gravira and Raphael, (2009) indicated that peer groups are so powerful that members are willing to deviate from the norms of the society in order to protect the interest, values, norms and expectations of their group thus members are under pressure to conform to peer subculture because the group consists of friends and people that they value highly and depend on for getting along in life.

Also peer group encourage conformity by thinking alike. That is through regular patterns of interaction, they begin to think alike and as a result, believe in only the „group view point which also becomes the focal point for action (Janis, 1972). On the basis of this, any suggestions or actions contradicting the group view point is considered as a sell out or indicators of disloyalty and such cases or peers are negatively sanctioned (punished). Thus, members of a peer group are often under pressure to deviate. Such pressure may operate within formal peer networks (for example, gangs) or informal peer networks (for example, friends).

Social scientists such as Mccord and Kevin, 2001, and Savnecki, 2004, identify a co-relate between peer influence and the development of anti-social behaviour. Others, such as Patterson, 1982, Landel and Edward, 1992 and Piquere, David and Al Blumstein 2003, suggest that peer influence in the form of “deviancy training” may actually be relevant to the early development of anti-social behaviour. On his part, McCord et al (2001) did not only observe that the presence of anti-social peers is a major determinant of criminal behaviour among children of 12-14 years old but also pointed out that among factors that have been found to be associated with adolescent deviant behaviour are peer delinquent behaviour involving peer approval of delinquent behaviour, attachment or allegiance to peers, association with peers pressure for deviance. Concerning peer group influence and age and gender, studies (Patterson, 1982, Nagin, 2001 and Savnecki, 2004) have shown that older adolescents and young male peer groups are more influenced than young females.

According to Le Blanc (2003), it should also be considered that the association with deviant peers is normally done in two ways: Having friends who commit criminal acts and join a more or less organized group of delinquents (a gang.) The degree of involvement with criminality, particularly with the seriousness and variety of them, tends to be higher for teenagers who claim to be members of a gang (Thornberry, Krohn, Lizotte and Chard-Wierschem, 1993; Thornberry, Krohn, Lizotte, Smith and Tobin, 2003).

Lipsey (1998) noted that for youth ages 12–14, a key predictor variable for delinquency is the presence of antisocial peers. McCord et al., (2001) Stated "Factors such as peer delinquent behavior, peer approval of delinquent behavior, attachment or allegiance to peers, time spent with peers, and peer pressure for deviance have all been associated with adolescent antisocial behavior." Conversely it is reported that spending time with peers who disapprove of delinquent behavior may curb later violence.

Steinberg (1987) founded that influence of peers and their acceptance of delinquent behavior are significant, and this relationship is magnified when youth have little interaction with their parents. Elliott al., (1989, 1986) explained that there is considerable evidence that not all types of delinquency are typically group offences. While some offences (such as drug and alcohol use, burglary, and vandalism) are committed mainly in groups, others (such as assaults, robberies, and most status offenses) are committed as often or even more often by solitary offenders as by groups.

Agnew (1991) in an analysis of data from the national youth survey, found that the influence of delinquent peers on delinquent behavior depends not only on the amount of time spent with friends but also on the extent to which delinquent patterns are presented in group interaction. The more peers are involved in delinquent behavior; the more likely a youth will be to engage in similar forms of delinquent behaviors. Research consistently shows that the more involve a youth is with delinquent friends, the more likely he or she is to engage in delinquent behavior. His general strain theory identifies additional sources of strain beyond the structural feature of anomie. In particular, he focuses on strain that result from negative social relationships and efforts to avoid unpleasant or painful situation. As such, he emphasizes the social psychological aspect of strain.

Peggy et al., (1986) for instance, found that friendship of adolescent males allow them to gain prestige, status; and self-identity more than do the friendships of adolescent females. More frequent and extensive association with delinquent peers leads to greater involvement in delinquency. Gang members commit more frequent and more serious crime as compared with delinquent youth who are not gang members.

Cohen (1955) observed that much of the delinquent activity in inner-city areas is committed by gang members and that most of these acts are done not for economic gain, but “for the hell of it.” He argued that most people adapt to strain collectively, by joining with others to find solutions. Confronted with the common problems of status frustration, lower class boys turn to each other to achieve status. According to Brochu (1995) illegal drug use is “almost automatically” associated with criminal behavior. The statistical relationship between illegal drug use and crime is convincing at first glance, but it is not possible to draw a conclusion regarding a definite cause-and-effect link between the two phenomena. The suggestion that drugs lead to crime ignores the impact that living conditions can have on an individual and takes no account, according to Serge Brochu (an expert in this field); of a body of data showing that most illegal drug users in Canada and elsewhere will never be regular users. It App. Science Report. 9 (1), 2015: 37-48 41 bears repeating that drug use is still, for the most part, a sporadic, recreational, exploratory activity. Most people are able to manage their drug use without any difficulty. Very few will become regular users, and even fewer will develop a drug addiction.

CONCLUSION:

Juvenile Delinquency and the problems related to it have been faced by all societies, all over the world, however, in the developing world the problems are all the more formidable. The process of development has brought in its wake a socio-cultural upheaval affecting the age-old traditional ways of life in the congenial rural milieu. In fact, various scientific advances and concomitant industrialization and urbanization have ushered in a new era, which is characterized by catastrophic changes and mounting problems. The paper concludes that since peer pressure and its influence exists in all adolescents and it is a strong denominator among the determinants of juvenile delinquency and adulthood crime, it is obvious that it is a cardinal problematic phenomenon for society. The youths of any society determine it is futuristic and enduring structural and institutional developmental state. Therefore if serious focal discourse, research, planning and proper execution is not put in place to address the problem of the influence of negative peer pressure on teens and adolescents there is great danger to the continued existence of peaceful, orderly and progressive societies. The paper suggests that solution to the problem can be approached through the grass root approach. That is by identifying and registering household units towards effective and timely execution of good and adequate policies arising from continuous research and proper planning.

REFERENCES:

1. Thornberry, T., Krohn, M., Lizotte, A. and Chard-Wierschem, D. (1993). The role of juvenile gangs in facilitating delinquent behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(1), 8-55. doi: 10.1177/0022427893030001005

2. Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A. and Tobin, K. (2003). Gangs and delinquency in developmental perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.

3. Lipsey MW, Derzon JH. 1998. Predictors of violent or serious delinquency in adolescence and early adulthood: A synthesis of longitudinal research. In Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 86–105.

4. Agnew R.1991. “The Interactive Effects of peer Variables on Delinquency.”Criminology

5. Ahmadi H.2005. Sociology of Deviances, Tehran: Universities' Humanities Books Compilation and Study Organization (SAMT). A Study of Socioeconomic Factors Affecting Male Juvenile Delinquency in Ahvaz City 288.

6. Altschuler D, Brounstein P. 1991. Patterns of drug use, drug trafficking, and other delinquency among inner-city adolescent males in Washington, DC. Criminology 29(4):589-622.

7. American Psychological Association.1993. “Violence and youth: psychology’s response”, summary report of the APA Commission on Violence and Youth: Washington, D.C.

8. Elliott DS, Scott M.1996. “Delinquent Friends and Delinquent Behavior: Temporal and Development Patterns.” In Delinquency and Crime, Edited by J. David Hawkins, New York: Cambridge University Press.

9. Elliott DS. 1993. Youth violence: An overview. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Center for the Study of Youth Policy.

10. Elliott DS.1994. Serious violent offenders: Onset, developmental course, and termination, The American Society of Criminology 1993 presidential address. Criminology 32(1)21

11. Asher, S. R., and Rose, A. J. (1996). Promoting children's social-emotional adjustment with peers. In. P. Salovey and D. J. Sluyter (Ed.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (196 – 224). New York: Basic Books.

12. Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press.

13. Allen, J. P., Weissberg, R. P., and Hawkins, J. A. (1989). The Relation between Values and Social Competence in Early Adolescence. Developmental psychology, 25(3), 458–464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.3.458

14. Crosswhite, J.M. and Kerpelman J.L. (2005). „Coercion Theory Self-Control and Social Information Processing‟, Understand Potential Mediators for How Parents Influence Deviant Behaviour. Deviant Behaviour 30(7) 611-696.

15. Dambazzau, A. B. (2011). Criminology and Criminal Justice. Kaduna, Nigerian Defence Academy Press.

16. Dittes, J.E. and Kelly, H.H. (1955). „Effects of Different Conditions of Acceptance upon Conformity to Group Norms’ Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology Vol 55: 100 – 107

17. Duesenberry, J.S. (1949). Income, Saving and the Theory of Consumer Behaviour‟ Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard university Press

18. Durkheim, E. (1966). “Suicide: A Study in Sociology Translated by J.A. Speulding and G. Simpson Trans New York The Press 1951.

19. Esiri M. and Ejechi, E. (2013). ‘Area Boys Syndrome and the Upsurge of Juvenile Delinquency in Nigeria‟ In Ethnographer Vol. 11 No 3 March 2013 ISSN: 1199-5223. Published by the Niger Delta Research Assessment in Collaboration with the Centre for Niger Delta Studies Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island.

20. Gravira A. and Raphael S. (2009). „School Based Effects and Juvenile Behaviour‟ In Review of Economics and Statistics 83:2 (2001)

21. Henslin, J. (2008). Social Problems: A Down into Earth Approach 8th ed. Boston: Allen and Bacon.

22. Horton, P.B. and Hunt, C. (1984). Sociology, Singerpore: McGrow-Hill Book Co.

23. Holist, Lorine and Lorvie (2009). „Adolescent Maltreatment, Negative Emotion and Delinquency’ An Assessment of General Strain Theory and Family – Based Strain” Journal of Criminal Justice 38 (5): 379 - 87

24. Igbinovia, P.E. (2003). The Criminal in all of Us: Whose Ox have we not Taken” An inaugural Lecture Delivered at the University of Benin, November 27th 2003 Benin: University of Benin Press.

25. Iyoha, O. (1997). Sociological and Legal Elements of Deviance. Benin-City, Nigeria: Goboh Ventures

26. Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

27. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink. Boston, Mass: Houghton Mifflin.

28. Kandel, E. and Edward, P. L. (1992). ‘Peer Pressure and Partnerships’ Journal of Political Economy Vol 100(4): 801-817

29. Knoester, C. and Hayne, D. L. (2005). „Community Context, Social Integration into Family and Youth Violence’, Journal of Marriage and Family 67 (3): 767-780

30. Krauth, B. (2004). Peer Affects and Selection Effects on Youth Smoking in California, Simon Fraser University.

Received on 28.04.2020 Modified on 19.05.2020

Res. J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020; 11(2):148-152.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5828.2020.00026.1