English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

vance in explaining delinquency causation. These attempts have often yielded relatively favorable results. However, we still find ourselves at a stage where we have difficulty specifying the most important predictors of various forms of criminal behavior. We are not too effective in extracting from our theoretical maze of knowledge the unique processes that are most vital in explaining delinquency production of a certain type. Perhaps the lack of confidence that is often placed in the ability of current theories to explain delinquency is due to our enormous theoretical expectations. It may be somewhat unrealistic to expect delinquency theories to explain all aspects and instances of a behavioral phenomenon. Yet, critics frequently hinder the development process for various ideas by pointing out the particular cases in which a certain proposition does not fit empirically. As Roebuck noted, "Criminologists appear to delight in the destruction of each others' theories."' The theoretical disputes encountered in the literature are both provocative and enlightening, but, in the final analysis, may be destructive because they may distract the scientific community from the important task of explaining certain behavioral forms.

Delinquency Causation: A Typological Comparison of Path Models