Parenting Styles and Criminal Involvement

Name: Parenting Styles and Criminal Involvement
Rating: 5 (69 reviews)
Author: Mohammed looti

Mohammed looti

Parenting Styles and Criminal Involvement

By Mohammed looti / October 12, 2025

Table of Contents

Abstract

The PARENTING STYLES AND CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT instrument is a comprehensive self-report measure developed to examine the retrospective perception of parental behavior and its correlation with subsequent criminal and delinquent involvement. This scale is specifically designed to test the tenets of Baumrind’s typology, distinguishing between Authoritative, Authoritarian, Permissive (Indulgent), and Uninvolved (Neglectful) parenting dimensions for both mother and father figures. The instrument consists of two main parts: a series of Likert-scale items assessing parental demandingness and responsiveness, and an extensive checklist utilizing a self-report methodology to quantify the frequency and severity of various criminal and deviant acts committed by the respondent. It serves as a crucial tool in developmental criminology research.

Keywords

Parenting styles, Baumrind’s typology, Criminal involvement, Juvenile delinquency, Authoritarian parenting, Authoritative parenting, Permissive parenting, Retrospective self-report, Criminology

Authors

Jason D. Spraitz

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary purpose of this instrument is to empirically test the theoretical relationship between perceived childhood parenting styles and the propensity for criminal behavior later in life. It operationalizes the four main parenting types proposed by Diana Baumrind—Authoritarian, Authoritative, Permissive, and Uninvolved—and links these latent variables to specific self-reported criminal behaviors, ranging from minor deviance (e.g., cheating, skipping class) to serious felony offenses (e.g., aggravated assault, drug sales).

By separating the assessment of parental figures (mother and father/figure) into distinct sections, the scale allows researchers to analyze the differential impact of each parent’s style on the child’s behavioral outcomes, thereby providing nuanced data for understanding the family dynamics associated with antisocial behavior. The inclusion of questions regarding the perceived causal link between parenting and criminal activity (Items 92 and 93) offers qualitative insight into the respondent’s attribution of responsibility.

Construct

The scale measures two distinct but theoretically linked constructs. The first construct is the respondent’s retrospective perception of parental behavior, captured primarily through the dimensions of parental demandingness (control, insistence on conformity, discipline) and parental responsiveness (warmth, open communication, willingness to listen). The combination of high/low scores on these dimensions allows for the classification of respondents’ childhood experience into Baumrind’s typology.

The second construct is Self-Reported Criminal Involvement, which assesses the breadth and frequency of engagement in a wide variety of delinquent and criminal acts. This section covers property crimes (theft, vandalism), violent crimes (assault, use of weapons), substance abuse (alcohol, marijuana, hard drugs), and status offenses (running away, skipping school). This dual measurement structure is central to the instrument’s utility in etiological studies of deviance.

Validity

The validity of the instrument is established through its grounding in existing developmental psychology theory, specifically the robust framework provided by Baumrind. The face and content validity are high, as the items clearly map onto the established characteristics of the four parenting styles (e.g., Item 6 reflects high demandingness/low responsiveness characteristic of Authoritarian style, while Item 3 reflects high demandingness/high responsiveness characteristic of Authoritative style).

Construct validity was rigorously tested in the original dissertation by Spraitz (2011) through structural equation modeling, confirming that the hypothesized latent factors (Authoritative, Authoritarian, Permissive, and Uninvolved parenting) significantly predicted variations in the latent factor of criminal involvement. Predictive validity is supported by findings that certain parenting styles (typically Uninvolved/Neglectful and Authoritarian) were significantly associated with higher rates of self-reported crime.

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability for the parenting subscales was typically measured using Cronbach’s Alpha in the original research. Although specific coefficients are not listed in the provided excerpt, scale development based on established psychological typologies generally aims for alpha values above 0.70 for research purposes. High reliability is crucial given the retrospective nature of the parental perception measures, ensuring that respondents consistently report on the dimensions of demandingness and responsiveness. The criminal involvement section, being a behavioral checklist, relies on the honesty of self-report but benefits from the specificity and breadth of the listed actions.

Factor Analysis

The instrument structure suggests that Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (EFA/CFA) were employed during its development to isolate the distinct dimensions of parenting styles. It is expected that the parenting items load onto four primary factors, corresponding to the quadrants of Baumrind’s framework. The items are segregated by parent (mother/father), suggesting a multi-group factor analysis approach might be used to confirm measurement invariance across parental figures. The criminal involvement section (Section III) likely coalesces into a general factor of deviance, although sub-factors such as violent behavior, property crime, and substance abuse may also be extracted.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychometric Self-Report Inventory and Behavioral Checklist

Format: Structured questionnaire using a 5-point Likert scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree) for parenting items, and a dichotomous (Have you ever?) plus frequency count for criminal involvement items.

Language Available: English (as presented in the source document)

Population Group: Individuals reflecting on their childhood/adolescent upbringing; typically administered to college students or samples of offenders/at-risk youth in criminological studies.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (must be old enough to retrospectively assess childhood parenting and report on past behaviors).

Population Details: The original dissertation used a sample of college students to test the theoretical model linking parenting styles to self-reported criminal involvement.

Test Methodology: Respondents first identify the primary female and male caregiver, then respond to retrospective statements about that figure’s behavior. Finally, they quantify their lifetime engagement in various criminal activities.

Keywords

Baumrind, Parental demandingness, Parental responsiveness, Delinquency, Self-report measure, Dissertations, Likert scale, Family environment, Criminal behavior

[quads id=5]

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source.

Correspondence Address: Based on the original publication: Indiana University of Pennsylvania, School of Graduate Studies and Research (2011).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The instrument was published as part of a doctoral dissertation in 2011 by Jason D. Spraitz. Permissions for use should be sought from the author or Indiana University of Pennsylvania, depending on institutional policies regarding dissertation materials. The instrument is publicly accessible via the university repository, suggesting it may be available for academic research purposes. The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://dspace.iup.edu/handle/2069/421. There is no explicit fee structure provided in the source material.

Reference’s

Spraitz, Jason D. (2011). PARENTING STYLES AND CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT: A TEST OF BAUMRIND’S TYPOLOGY. A Dissertation Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy. Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Available online at: http://dspace.iup.edu/handle/2069/421

[quads id=5]

Items of the PARENTING STYLES AND CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

This section contains statements about your mother and/or mother figure. Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the statement by circling the letter next to it.

Before you begin‚ please circle the letter indicating which female raised you the most while you were growing up and respond to the following statements with that person in mind.

1. The woman who raised me the most while I was growing up was:

2. Even if I didn’t agree with her‚ my mother felt that it was for my own good if I was forced to conform to what she thought was right:

3. As I was growing up‚ I knew what my mother expected of me‚ but I also felt free to discuss those expectations with my mother if I felt that they were unreasonable:

4. As I was growing up‚ I had no idea what my mother expected of me:

5. While I was growing up my mother felt that children should have their way in the family as often as the parents do:

6. Whenever my mother told me to do something‚ she expected me to do it immediately without asking any questions:

7. As I was growing up‚ my mother consistently gave me direction and guidance in rational and objective ways:

8. My mother never gave me any guidance as I was growing up:

9. My mother felt that children need to be free to make up their own minds and do what they want to do‚ even if parents might not agree:

10. My mother always felt that more force should be used by parents in order to get their children to behave the way they are supposed to:

11. My mother gave me direction for my behavior and activities as I was growing up and she expected me to follow her direction‚ but she was always willing to listen to my concerns:

12. I feel like I raised myself more than my mother raised me:

13. Most of the time as I was growing up my mother did what I wanted her to do when making decisions:

14. As I was growing up‚ my mother let me know what behavior she expected of me‚ and if I didn’t meet those expectations‚ she would punish me:

15. As I was growing up‚ my mother gave me clear direction for my behaviors and activities‚ but she was also understanding when I disagreed with her:

16. I don’t know my mother’s views about discipline because she never communicated them with me:

17. As I was growing up‚ my mother allowed me to decide most things for myself without a lot of direction from her:

A. Strongly Agree

18. As I was growing up‚ I knew what my mother expected of me and she insisted that I conform to those expectations simply out of respect for her authority:

19. As I was growing up‚ if my mother made a decision in the family that hurt me‚ she was willing to discuss that decision with me and admit if she had made a mistake:

20. I did not learn effective communication skills from my mother:

21. As I was growing up‚ my mother allowed me to form my own point of view on family matters and she generally allowed me to decide for myself what I was going to do:

Section II:

This section contains statements about your father and/or father figure. Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the statement by circling the letter next to it.

Before you begin‚ please circle the letter indicating which male raised you the most while you were growing up and respond to the following statements with that person in mind.

22. The man who raised me the most while I was growing up was:

23. Even if I didn’t agree with him‚ my father felt that it was for my own good if I was forced to conform to what he thought was right:

24. As I was growing up‚ I knew what my father expected of me‚ but I also felt free to discuss those expectations with my father if I felt that they were unreasonable:

25. As I was growing up‚ I had no idea what my father expected of me:

26. While I was growing up‚ my father felt that children should have their way in the family as often as the parents do:

27. My father always felt that more force should be used by parents in order to get their children to behave the way they are supposed to:

28. As I was growing up‚ my father consistently gave me direction and guidance in rational and objective ways:

29. My father never gave me any guidance as I was growing up:

30. My father felt that children need to be free to make up their own minds and do what they want to do‚ even if parents might not agree:

31. My father felt that wise parents should teach their children who the boss is in the family:

32. My father had clear standards of behavior for me as I was growing up‚ but he was willing to adjust those standards to my needs:

33. I feel like I raised myself more than my father raised me:

34. Most of the time as I was growing up my father did what I wanted her to do when making decisions:

35. My father has always felt that most problems in society would be solved if we could get parents to strictly and forcibly deal with their children when they don’t do what they are supposed to do:

36. My father gave me direction for my behavior and activities as I was growing up and he expected me to follow his direction‚ but he was always willing to listen to my concerns:

37. I did not learn discipline from my father:

38. As I was growing up‚ my father allowed me to decide most things for myself without a lot of direction from him:

39. As I was growing up‚ I knew what my father expected of me and he insisted that I conform to those expectations simply out of respect for his authority:

Action	Have you ever?	How many times?
Hurt someone badly enough that they needed medical treatment
Purposely damaged or destroyed property belonging to another person
Paid to have sexual relations with another person
Set off a fire alarm for fun
Ran away from home while under the age of 18
Used a weapon to threaten another person
Stolen (or tried to steal) a motor vehicle‚ such as a car or motorcycle
Been paid for ha‎ving sexual relations with someone
Carried a gun without a permit
Lied about your age to gain entrance or to purchase something (e.g.‚ lying about your age to buy liquor or get into a bar)
Purposely killed someone
Stolen (or tried to steal) something worth more than $50
Sold marijuana
Thrown objects (such as rocks‚ snowballs‚ or bottles) at cars or people
Cheated in school (e.g.‚ copying another student’s answers or cheating on a test)
Hurt someone in a minor way (e.g.‚ slap in face‚ push to ground)
Lied to an authority figure (such as a teacher‚ boss‚ or parent)
Carried a hidden weapon other than a plain pocket knife
Skipped classes without an excuse
Attacked someone with the idea of seriously hurting or killing them
Stolen (or tried to steal) things worth less than $10
Bought alcohol for a minor or provided alcohol for a minor
Been loud‚ rowdy‚ or unruly in a public place (e.g.‚ disorderly conduct)
Been suspended from school
Hit (or threatened to hit) another person
Stolen money or other things from another person
Failed to return extra change that a cashier accidently gave you
Been drunk in a public place
Had (or tried to have) sexual relations with someone against their will
Avoided paying for such things as movies‚ bus or subway rides‚ and food
Made obscene telephone calls‚ such as calling someone and saying dirty things
Used force (strong-arm methods) to get money or things from another person
Stolen (or tried to steal) things worth between $10 and $50
Broken into a building or vehicle (or tried to break in) to steal something or just to look around
Knowingly bought‚ sold or held stolen goods (or tried to do any of these things)
Sold drugs other than marijuana
Gotten into verbal altercations (shouting/screaming) with another person

Substance	Have you ever?
Tobacco (e.g.‚ Cigarettes‚ Chew) while under the age of 18
Alcohol (e.g.‚ beer‚ wine‚ liquor) while younger than legal drinking age
Alcohol (e.g.‚ beer‚ wine‚ liquor) while of – and older than – legal drinking age
Marijuana
Hallucinogens (e.g.‚ LSD‚ Acid‚ Mescaline‚ Peyote)
Amphetamines (e.g.‚ Uppers‚ Speed)
Barbiturates (e.g.‚ Downers‚ Reds)
Heroin
Cocaine (e.g.‚ Powder‚ Crack)
Methamphetamines
Prescription Pain Killers without valid prescription (e.g.‚ Vicodin‚ Percocet)

Abstract

Keywords

Authors

Purpose

Construct

Validity

Reliability

Factor Analysis

Instrument

Keywords

Authors

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Reference’s

Items of the PARENTING STYLES AND CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT

Cite this article