Citation

Roebuck J, Johnson R. Crime Delinq. 1962; 8(2): 172-181.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1962, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/001112876200800210

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Seventy-one criminals with long arrest histories that revealed no pattern or concentration on a specific variety of crime were compared with the remainder of a total sample of 400 criminals, nearly all of whom did show a pattern in their criminal activities. The writers hypothesized that a comparison of the no-pattern group with the remainder of the offenders would reveal differ ences that would show why these 71 criminals did not evince any particular pattern. They also hypothesized that the no-pattern group might consist of two subgroups--one bright and highly mobile (in terms of shifts toward more "advanced" types of crime), and a second so dull that more experienced criminals would not accept them as apprentices. However, bright, mobile offen ders were almost nonexistent in the no-pattern group, indicating that criminal progression of adult criminals takes place within, not between, specific types of crime. While intellectually dull, the no-pattern group was no more so than the whole sample, so that lack of intellectual ability does not seem to be the cause of their lack of pattern. The introverted, "marginal" character of their personal relations suggests that these offenders showed no pattern because they did not have close enough contact with other criminals to learn effective techniques. Because of their naivete in criminal operations and consequently their frequent incarceration, they were shunned by other criminals. Thus, they were further limited in their opportunities to learn a single, "sophisticated" pattern of crime.