Inherent in Anderson’s (1994: 82) model is the notion that individuals’ attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors are, in part, a function of the neighborhood context in which they are positioned. Matsueda, Drakulich, and Kubrin (2006: 340) noted that the “code of the streets” is an objective property of the neighborhood that operates above and beyond compositional characteristics of the residents (see also Cao, Adams, and Jensen, 1997: 375–6 Fischer, 1995: 547). By treating the street culture as a neighborhood-level property, Anderson (1994: 82) argued that the source of violence is not only an individual-level process in which one adopts the street code but also an ecological one that is embedded in the broader social context. In this sense, Anderson (1994) contended that a neighborhood contextual component to the street culture serves as an “institutional feature” of disadvantaged neighborhood street life that structures public interactions, especially violence ( Anderson, 1999 Matsueda, Drakulich, and Kubrin, 2006). He argued that the street culture is an ecological construct that is an emergent property of structurally disadvantaged neighborhoods and that it shapes values that influence violence among adolescents. In particular, Anderson (1994) suggested that the aforementioned structural conditions lead to a sense of hopelessness and cynicism about societal rules and their application, thereby resulting in a street culture that undermines mainstream conventional norms ( Bruce, Roscigno, and McCall, 1998 Horowitz, 1983 Hughes and Short, 2005 Kubrin and Weitzer, 2003 Miller, 1958 Sampson and Wilson, 1995). In Code of the Street, Elijah Anderson (1999) outlined a multilevel process in which macrostructural patterns of disadvantage, racial inequality, and limited economic opportunities foster a street culture that is conducive to violence ( Bernard, 1990 Krivo and Peterson, 1996 Massey and Denton, 1993 Peterson and Krivo, 1993 Wilson, 1987, 1996). Anderson (1999: 33) defined the neighborhood street culture as “a set of informal rules governing interpersonal public behavior, particularly violence… a rationale allowing those who are inclined to aggression to precipitate violent encounters in an approved way.” Additionally, Anderson (1999: 68–72) viewed adoption of the street code as an individual-level process in which one either fully or partially embraces the norms of the street culture, “or at least learns to comport themselves in accordance with its rules.” In particular, does neighborhood street culture influence violent delinquency among African American adolescents, net of individual-level street code values? Also, does neighborhood street culture moderate individual-level street code values on violent delinquency among African American adolescents? These questions are paramount to Elijah Anderson’s (1994) “code of the street” thesis derived from his ethnography of inner-city neighborhoods. Thus, fundamental questions about neighborhood street culture’s influence on violence remain unanswered. This gap in the research literature exists despite the increased interest in neighborhood effects generated by Wilson’s (1987) work on the concentration of poverty in disadvantaged neighborhoods. This line of research has generated an extensive body of literature underscoring the significant impact that neighborhood structural context has on an array of outcomes ( Bursik and Grasmick, 1993 Sampson, Morenoff, and Gannon-Rowley, 2002).ĭespite this sizable body of literature underscoring the importance of neighborhood context, research investigating the effect of neighborhood street culture on violence in disadvantaged neighborhoods has been understudied. Research in this area has shown that neighborhood context influences a variety of outcomes, including victimization ( Rountree, Land, and Miethe, 1994), delinquency ( Bursik and Grasmick, 1993 Simcha-Fagan and Schwartz, 1986 Simons et al., 2005 Wikström and Loeber, 2000), and violence ( Bellair and McNulty, 2005 Morenoff, Sampson, and Raudenbush, 2001 Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls, 1997 Silver, 2000). Scholars have devoted renewed interest to the effects of neighborhood context on problem behaviors ( Sampson and Lauritsen, 1994 Sampson, Morenoff, and Gannon-Rowley, 2002).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |