Vandalism among adolescents - a comparison of european countries

Vandalism among

adolescents

A comparison of European

countries

C. Gavray ULG (Liège, Belgium)

N. Vettenburg UGent (Gent, Belgium)

LOGO

LIEGE

Different explanations of

vandalism

• Urban problems: Ghettoïsation of certain districts, cankers urban,….

• ‘broken window’: degradation asks degradation > vulgarizing of the act > feeling of impunity of the authors

• Social vulnerability and disorganization

• Feelings of uncentainty >choice for an alternative way • Development elements: marks their territory (graffiti,

tags), identity research, ..

 Invite further reseach of the explanatory factors of the vandalism on available data

ISRD2

Second International Self-Report Delinquency

Study

• Data collection 2006/2007

• More than 30 participating countries

• Already several national and

comparative publications

• In this contribution: 6 European

• Different groups of factors (i.e., demographic, family, school, peer, self-control, attitude to violence scores as well as lifestyle related factors) were inserted blockwise into separate logistic regression models to explain

‘vandalism’

• Odds ratios were used to assess whether, other things being equal, youths with specific characteristics are more or less likely to engage in delinquent behaviour than those in another (reference) group.

West-Europa

Table 1: Odds ratios of logistic regression for vandalism on demographic, family- and social environment-related, individual descriptors and lifestyle variables

AU B F G NL CH Block 1: demographic Male 1.7 ** 2.63*** 1.98** 2.05*** 2.39*** 1.68** Age .803 .810 .878 .884 1.089 .870 Migrant (ref=native) 2nd _{generation .746 1.83* 1.45 .940 1.206 .918} 1st _{generation .698 1.3 1.81 .481} ** .552 .655 Block 2: family Broken home 1.041 .803 1.51 .926 .827 1.089

Weak relationship with mother

.816 .553 .480

* .665 .711 .897

Block 3: social environment

AU

B F G NL CH

Weak attachment to school score

1.104 .995 .986 1.286** 1.018 .939

Exposition to violent school environment score 1.295* 1.027 1.232 1.132 1.188 .870 Skip school 1.9 58* ** .941 1.522 1.370* 2.429*** 1.824***

Grade (reference: 7th _grade)

8th _{grade .840 1.367 .948 1.010 .810 1.223}

9th _{grade .725 1.604 1.312 .652 .552 1.218} Neighboorhood 1.091 1.682*

Block 4: individual AU B F G NL CH

Low self-control score . 4 0 3 ** * .822 .600* .358*** .372*** .452***

Positive attitude to violence score 1.491 * 2.628*** 1.870* 1.890*** 1.997*** 2.244*** Block 5: lifestyle Alcohol 3.905 ** * 2.817* * 1.607 2.017*** 2.269* 2.025* Drugs 2.096 ** * 2.981* ** 2.645*** 1.584** 1.951** 1.883*** Delinquent friends 2.574 ** * 6.829* ** 1.705 3.247*** 4.984*** 3.904*** Goes out 1.611 1.046 2.109* 1.201 .817 1.622

Time spent with (reference: alone) Family 1.977 .864 .304* 1.300 2.186 1.339 Friends 1.688 2.489 .807 1.812* 2.213 1.430 Discriminated .746 .900 .715 1.364 1.167 1.145 Victim 1.446 * 1.071 1.198 1.348* 1.031 1.515*

Interesting results… but

are the same factors explicatif for

vandalism by girls and boys?

Contribution of the gender

theory to refine this question

• the gender theory accentuates the cultural

characteristics and not the congenital

differences and hierarchy between male and

female.

In that, these differences, in particular as

regards delinquent behavior, are likely to

change through time, within sight of the

context and of the opportunities offered to the

two groups (boys & girls)

Focus on Belgium

• Belgian data ISRD2 (UGent/ Ulg): 2247

young people of the three first years of

the secondary school (12 to 15y.)

• Questions on behavior but also on

various aspects of the family life,

Did you ever damage on purpose something,

such as a bus shelter, a window, a seat in the

bus or train or a car?

YES 15.5% of the boys and 6.3% of the girls

Did you do it during the last 12 months?

YES 9.5% of the boys and 3.7% of the girls

How often ?

Explanatory factors of

‘vandalism – ever’

totally group

• Alcohol consumption and another products • Type of education

• The evaluation of the neighboorhood • Victim (last 12 months)

• To lose appetite

• Have no impact: the size of the city, broken home,

Explanatory factors of

vandalism

boys

• Delinquent friends

• Positive attitude to violence score • Time spent with friends

• Exposition to violent school environment score • Feeling to be discriminated

• Low self-control score

• Alcohol consumption or other products

• problems of relations with his/her mother & father • Serious disease/accident of one of his/her parents

Explanatory factors of vandalism

girls

• R2= 0.62 p < 0.001

• rather attend a school in a big city than in a medium-sized city

• bad school results and relational problems with the teachers

• Victim (last 12 months)

• On wellbeing

• Painful life events (loss a brother, sister…) • Alcohol consumption or other products • The evaluation of the neighboorhood

Another research on the impact of the proximity

compared to the opinions and stereotyped attitudes from the point of view of gender

(data collected for the French Community, 2010)

Did you ever damage on purpose

something`gratuitement'

15.6% of the boys and 6.9% of the girls

(against 15.5% and 6.3% in ISRD2 )

For boys

• Bond between vandalism and

+ a low self-control

+ a valorization of the male stereotypes:

. legitimacy of the force and violence as well as unconditional presence in public space

. a desire of domination on sexual and emotional matter,

. a hierarchy between school matters and male and female professions.

+ an important effect of discrimination and injustice

felt from the society, adults and in particular from

the parents.

In the group of young people whose parents never

give pleasure or are never interested in the

follow-up of the school results : 40% of the boys commit

vandalism

+ an important tendency to indiscipline on school

and absenteeism

+ an effect of the lack of future perspectives which

results in a lack of school and professional ambition

For girls

• no higher appreciation for power and violence by girls who made themselves guilty to vandalism

• > another logic

• important relation with

+ the score of victimisation, living, both inside and outside, with a feeling of oppression : increased risk of vandalism with rebellie against the parental requirements and against excessive parental control

. school performances and the relationship with the teachers ( When this climate is very bad: 18% girls concerned with vandalism against less than 9% by better climate) . Contrary to the boys, in an historic gap with regard to the disillusioned boys, contemporary girls invest school and academic success as a chance of personal and family promotion. The behaviour

• no higher appreciation for power and violence by

girls who made themselves guilty to vandalism

• > another logic

• important relation with

– the score of victimisation, living, both inside and outside, with a feeling of oppression : increased risk of vandalism with rebellie against the parental

requirements and against excessive parental control – school performances and the relationship with the

teachers. When this climate is very bad: 18% girls concerned with vandalism against less than 9% by better climate

Conclusion

• Good consistency between the results of the different countries with regard to the breeding ground of

vandalism

• Need for better understanding in comparison what supports the vandalism of the girls and the boys

• By the boys: traces of experienced victimisation under an identity in school and work context which seems to them unfavourable

• By the girls: traces of a more personal insecurity (because of family events, of school failures,

confrontation to degraded places), all that together with

a somatization

These findings are:

– Interesting for the comprehension of the phenomena and formulation of theories