Reading Analyses

Adolescent Male and Female Gang Members’ Experiences with Violent Victimization, Dating Violence, and Sexual Assault Angela R. Gover &Wesley G. Jennings & Richard Tewksbury Received: 25 April 2008 / Accepted: 28 August 2008 / Published online: 21 January 2009 # Southern Criminal Justice Association 2009 AbstractA substantial amount of scholarship has been devoted to examining the relationship between gang membership and criminal offending. This research has produced a wealth of qualitative and quantitative studies indicating that gang membership increases the likelihood of criminal offending for both males and females. Less research, however, has examined the relationship between gang membership and violent victimization. The present study adds to the literature by examining the relationship between gender, gang membership, and three types of victimization. Specifically, this paper focuses on whether self-reported gang membership is uniquely related to victimization experiences for females compared to males. Results from a statewide survey of public high school students in South Carolina indicate that gang membership is significantly related to the risk of victimization for both males and females. The implications of these findings for research and policy are discussed.

KeywordsGangs.

Gender.

Victimization.

Dating violence Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 DOI 10.1007/s12103-008-9053-z NO9053; No of Pages A. R. Gover School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado Denver, 1380 Lawrence Street, Suite 525, Denver, CO 80217-3364, USA e-mail: [email protected] W. G. Jennings (*) Department of Justice Administration, University of Louisville, Brigman Hall, Room 215, Louisville, KY 40292, USA e-mail: [email protected] R. Tewksbury Department of Justice Administration, University of Louisville, Brigman Hall, Louisville, KY 40292, USA e-mail: [email protected] Introduction For nearly 100 years social scientists have conducted research on the relationship between gang activity and criminal offending (Esbensen and Huizinga1993;Esbensen and Winfree1998; Thrasher1927). This research has produced a number of qualitative and quantitative studies about the influence of gang membership on criminal activities (see Hughes2005;Thornberryetal.2003). Gangs, defined as“social groups that are organized around delinquency”(Miller1998, p. 429) are commonly associated with the sale of drugs and commission of violent acts (Hagedorn1998; Peterson et al.2004). In addition, membership in a gang increases criminal activity even among those who are already engaged in crime (Thornberry1995). Recent observational studies as well as survey research indicate that there is a strong association between membership in a gang and a variety of criminal activities (Katz et al.2005; Peterson et al.2004; Taylor et al.2007). The accumulation of research on gangs indicates that gang membership increases a youth’s involvement in crime and violence, which in turn increases their likelihood of becoming a victim of a violent crime (Hunt and Joe-Laidler2001; Miller 1998,2001; Miller and Decker2001; Peterson et al.2004; Taylor et al.2007).

Criminological research has clearly established the relationship between participation in gangs and participation in delinquency, including violent behavior (Curry et al.1996, 2002; Dukes et al.1997; Egley and Ritz2006;Thornberryetal.2003). Research indicates that delinquent lifestyles lead to risk taking behaviors that are associated with victimization (Lauritsen et al.1991;MustaineandTewksbury2000). Consistent with this theoretical perspective, gang members are at an increased risk for violent victimization because they tend to be the main targets of violence from rival gangs and because violence occurs within gangs (Curry and Decker1998;Miller1998,2001; Miller and Decker2001; Taylor et al.2007). As gangs are increasingly organized there is a corresponding increase in the risk of victimization for members (Decker et al.

2008). Gang membership increases one’s risk of victimization because involvement in deviant behavior and risk taking activities (e.g., fighting, alcohol and drug consumption, etc.) places individuals in environments with offenders seeking criminal opportunities and victims (Mustaine and Tewksbury2000).

Although a long history of gang research is available, it has not been until the last decade that female gang members have been seriously addressed (Esbensen et al.

1999; Fleisher1998; Miller1998,2001 ; Miller and Brunson2000; Miller and Decker2001; Moore and Hagedorn2001). One fact established in this literature is that females, although still marginalized and largely relegated to secondary and supportive roles in mixed sex gangs (see Fleisher1998; Turley2003), are moving towards equality in gang roles and activities (Anderson et al.2003). As such, not only are female gang members increasingly involved in committing delinquent (including violent) acts, but so too may they be increasingly vulnerable to violent victimization - because of their presence in potential offender rich environments.

Gender and Gangs Frederic Thrasher’s(1927) classic studyThe Gangmentioned that female gangs and gang members were rare and that when present gang girls were near universally 104 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 auxiliary members of male gangs. This view and understanding of females’relationship with gangs persisted for a half-decade. Not until the 1970s, accompanying women’s strides toward social, political and economic equality were female criminal offenders, including gang members, addressed by scholars, law enforcement officials and others as significant and serious public safety concerns (see Hughes2005). By the 1970s though, researchers began to recognize that females played important roles in youth gangs. Brown’s(1977) study of Black female gangs in Philadelphia, for example, found that“the female is an intrinsic part of the gang’s group identity and is involved in various gang functions, rather than just ancillary activities”(p. 226). This evolution of women’s roles has become a staple of contemporary gang research, with increasing recognition that females play significant, yet still not equal, roles in gangs (Fleisher 1998; Joe and Chesney-Lind1995; Miller1998,2001; Thornberry et al.2003).

Although exact numbers may not be possible to identify, it is widely believed that the true number of female gang members is higher than official estimates indicate (Esbensen et al.2001). Across varying research sites and sampling methods studies have estimated that anywhere from less than 10% to up to 50% of gang members are females (Esbensen and Deschenes1998; Esbensen and Winfree1998).

As their numbers have grown and their roles have evolved, females have experienced both increasing independence in some gang structures (Harris1988; Taylor1993)and an enhanced visibility in gang (and all criminological) research (Chesney-Lind1997; Curry1998; Esbensen et al.2001). Although gang involvement increases the risk that females will be involved in serious crimes, there remain both qualitative and quantitative differences between female and male gang members’forms, frequency and severity of delinquency and violence. Bjerregaard and Smith (1993), for example, found that serious delinquency was lower among gang girls compared to gang boys.

Evaluation data from the Gang Resistance Education and Training (GREAT) program (Deschenes and Esbensen1999) also indicates that female gang members report lower levels of violent crime than their male counterparts. Interestingly, although female gang members’offending behaviors have been assessed and contrasted with that of males’, few attempts at examining the relationship between women’sgang membership and victimization have been completed (Miller and Decker2001).

Gender, Gang Membership, and Victimization Gang membership, for both males and females, is associated with increased risks of criminal, especially violent, victimization (for review, see Taylor2008).Whilemalegang members typically have higher ratesof victimization (Taylor et al.2007), female’s rates and experiences are not insignificant, and are often the result of different traits, roles, relationships and behaviors than men’s victimizations. For female gang members the risks of victimization arise from both retaliatory behavior associated with being in a gang and sexual and physical victimizationfrom fellow male gang members (Fleisher 1998; Hunt and Joe-Laidler2001 ; Miller1998,2001). In fact, ethnographic research has suggested that young women may be used as“sex objects”by their own gang members (Campbell1990; Fleisher1998; Miller1998; however, also see Rosenbaum1996).

Both ethnographic and survey research suggests that females’risk of victimization is clearly shaped by gender roles. For example, Miller (1998) notes that young women Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 105 adopting“masculine attributes”may increase their risk of victimization because they become more heavily involved in risky and delinquent behavior, and their victimization experience (e.g., sexual victimization) may increase the likelihood that they are victimized in the future because they become viewed as“weaker”than their male gang counterparts (pp. 433–434). Hunt and Joe-Laider (2001) also suggest that female gang members are at greater risk of victimization through the experience of gang initiation (also see Knox2004), conflicts with males in rival gangs, as well as conflicts with female gang members in both their own and rival gangs. Where females’victimization risks most clearly diverge from those of their male counterparts, however, is in the patriarchal and subjugating behavior of men in their own gangs.

Girls in male dominated gangs are more likely to be sexually assaulted as a method of gang initiation (Fleisher1998;Knox2004;Miller1998). Additionally, female gang members may be required to sleep with multiple male gang members as a method of initiation. This pattern, however, does not appear to exist in gangs not dominated by males (Joe and Chesney-Lind1995; Miller2001).

Research also suggests that gender may moderate the risk of serious violence for female gang members (Miller1998,2001). Qualitative interviews with female gang members and quantitative research on gang homicides in St. Louis, for example, suggests that females are at reduced risk of serious violent victimization (e.g., homicide) because they are not expected to engage in the most serious forms of violence that increase one’s risk for violent victimization (Miller and Decker2001). As Miller and Decker (2001)note,“Fewer expectations were placed on them [girls] with regard to involvement in criminal activities such as gun use, drug sales, and other serious crimes; this situation apparently limited their exposure to risk of gang-related victimization”(p. 131). In essence, by limiting their immersion in criminogenic settings and activities, female gang members’exposure to potential victimizers is reduced, thereby reducing instances of victimization. Thus, while the research reviewed above tends to focus on female gang members and victimization, it is certainly important to recognize and reiterate that victimization among male gang members is a prevalent and oftentimes frequent event (for review, see Taylor2008).

Current Study At present, the relationship between women’s gang membership and victimization risks has been established through ethnographic work (e.g. Miller2001). However, there remains a gap in our knowledge about women gang members’victimization experiences, how these experiences contrast with their male counterparts, and what (if any) factors are related to greater and lesser victimization experiences for women in gangs. Also lacking at present is empirical assessments of the relationship between gang membership and victimization for females in general population samples. The present study adds to the literature by examining the relationship between gang membership and the risk of victimization for females and males among a sample of public high school students in the state of South Carolina.

Analysis not only documents and empirically assesses victimizations, but also highlights gender differences in victimization patterns between male and female gang members across an entire state.

106 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 Data and Method The data used in this study come from the 1999 South Carolina Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS). The YRBS is an ongoing state and national survey conducted by state contracts for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Division on Adolescent and School Health. The original purpose of the YRBS was to estimate the prevalence of health-related risk behaviors among public high school students over time. The YRBS uses a three-stage, stratified cluster sampling design that, when weighted, represents the age, race, and gender composition of all South Carolina public high schools.

In the first stage of the design, all South Carolina high schools were stratified into small (58–876 students), medium (877–1,284 students), and large (1,285–2,577 students) schools. In the second stage of the sampling design individual schools were sampled according to each of three strata, which resulted in a final sample of 58 (22 small, 21 medium, and 15 large) public high schools. Schools in each stratum were then rank-ordered according to their minority representation and selected systematically using a random start, with each stratum proportional to size of the enrollment. The third stage of the sampling design involved sampling the requisite number of classes in each school until approximately 100 students were enrolled.

The unit of analysis for these data is the individual respondent (N = 4,597). This survey had an 83% student response rate.

Dependent Variables Violent victimization experiences were assessed using three separate dichotomous measures. High school students were asked whether they had been injured in a physical fight in the past 12 months in which the injury required treatment from a doctor or nurse (violent victimization). Students were also asked whether they had ever been hit, slapped, or physically hurt on purpose by their girlfriend or boyfriend during the previous 12 months (dating violence). Finally, students were asked to report whether they had ever been forced to have sexual intercourse when they did not want to (sexual assault) during their lifetime. Thus, the violent victimization and the dating violence measures were annual prevalence estimates and the sexual assault measure was a lifetime prevalence measure because of the way the questions were asked in the SCYRBS.

Explanatory Variables The main explanatory variables of interest are gang membership and gender. Gang membership was assessed by asking students to indicate if they had been a member of a gang during the previous 12 months. Gender was measured as a dichotomous variable (female = 1).

Independent variables include family structure, age, and race as control variables since research indicates that these demographic factors have been shown to be associated with the risk of victimization (Lauritsen and White2001). Youth from two-parent households, for example, are less likely to engage in activities that place them at risk for victimization (Coker et al.2000;Gover2004). Therefore, family structure was Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 107 measured as a dichotomous dummy variable denoting households in which the respondent lived with both of their natural or adopted parents in comparison with single parent or otherwise configured homes (1 = two-parent family). Race was measured as a dichotomous dummy variable (1 = black, 0 = all other races). Age was measured as a continuous variable ranging from a minimum of 12 to a maximum of 18 years old.

Description of Participants Ta bl e1presents the descriptive statistics for the dependent and independent variables.

The mean age of the sample was 16 years (SD= 1.24). Of the participants, 42.3% were Black, 49% were White, and 7.7% were of other ethnic groups (e.g., Hispanics and Asians). Approximately 53% of the participants were female, and roughly 51% of the youth lived in nuclear families with two-parent households. Eleven percent (N = 528) of the sample indicated that they were active gang members during the preceding 12 months. As shown in Table1, victimization of these students was a relatively rare event. In terms of victimization experiences, 11% of the sample reported that they had been sexually assaulted during their lifetime. Approximately 12% of the sample reported being physically beaten by the person they dated during the prior year. Only 3.9% of the sample reported being physically injured during a fight in the past 12 months that required treatment by a doctor or nurse. These descriptive statistics indicate that both gang membership and victimization occur at relatively low rates within the general sample of high school adolescents.

Findings The focus of this study is on gender differences in victimization patterns between male and female gang members. Table2provides a descriptive comparison of gender differences in victimization patterns and demographic characteristics for the entire sample as well as within the sample of gang members. For the entire sample, the data indicate that the risk of sexual assault is significantly higher for females compared to males. Specifically, 11.6% of females report being forced to have sex against their will during their lifetime compared to only 6% of males. In addition, females report a significantly higher prevalence of dating violence during the previous 12 months compared to males (11.3% versus 8.7%). In contrast, the Table 1Sample characteristics of youth Variables Mean Value SD Sexual Assault (%) 11.19 31.53 Dating Violence (%) 12.42 32.98 Violent Victimization (%) 3.92 19.40 Gang Membership (%) 11.50 31.90 African-American (%) 42.27 49.40 Average Age (years) 15.99 1.24 Nuclear Family (%) 51.64 49.97 Female (%) 53.36 49.89 108 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 prevalence of violent victimization resulting in injuries from a physical fight during the previous 12 months is significantly higher for males (4%) compared to females (1.7%). With regard to the demographic characteristics of race, family structure, and age there appears to be few absolute differences between males and females, although males are significantly more likely than females to live in nuclear families with both biological parents (54.8% versus 51.1%).

The results indicate greater parity with regard to victimization patterns between male and female gang members, with the exception of gang boys being more likely than gang girls to be injured in fights. Surprisingly, the results indicate that the prevalence of sexual assault is equally high for both male and female gang members. Specifically, 24.5% of male and 28.2% of female gang members report having been sexually assaulted during their lifetime. Additionally, there are not statistically significant gender differences in the prevalence of dating violence for gang members. More than one-quarter of male (28.1%) and female (29.9%) gang members report having been victims of dating violence in the previous year. This simple comparison of gender differences, therefore, suggests that for both males and females those involved in gangs have a greater risk of experiencing victimization. These comparisons, however, are limited because they cannot assess the independent relationship between gang membership, gender, and victimization patterns.

To examine this issue a series of multivariate analyses are presented.

Multivariate Analysis Our analysis focuses on the relationship between gang membership, gender, and victimization experiences among South Carolina public high school students. Because the dependent variables of interest are dichotomous, logistic regression models are used (Long1997). Because these data were collected using a complex survey design involving multistage cluster sampling, the use of standard logistic regression would be inappropriate (Lee et al.1986). To handle these issues a variance function estimation was used that was developed for use with multistage sampling designs that also involve weights (Eltinge and Sribney1996). Specifically, the complex survey estimation routine written for Stata version 6.0 was used, which estimates a logistic regression model using a pseudo-maximum likelihood routine that allows for probability sampling weights, stratification, and clustering (Stata Corporation1999). Results from the series of logistic regression models are displayed in Table3. First, models were estimated on the full sample to examine the independent relationship between gang membership, Table 2Characteristics of youth by gender and gang membership Total Sample (N = 4,591) Gang Youth Sample (N = 528) Male (46.6%) Female (53.4%) Male (63.8%) Female (36.2%) Sexual Assault (%) 6.0 11.6* 24.5 28.2 Dating Violence (%) 8.7 11.3* 28.1 29.9 Violent Victimization (%) 4.0 1.7* 14.0 9.0* African-American (%) 40.6 42.9 45.5 43.6 Nuclear Family (%) 54.8 51.1* 43.2 43.3 Average Age (years) 16.0 15.9 16.0 16.0 * t-test within sample comparison of means p < .05 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 109 Table 3Logistic regression models of victimization by gender a Sexual Assault Dating Violence Violent Victimization Full (N = 4,482)Male (N = 2,088)Female (N = 2,401)Full (N = 4,488)Male (N = 2,088)Female (N = 2,406)Full (N = 4,460)Male (N = 2,065)Female (N = 2,402) Gang Membership 3.66* 4.58* 2.88* 3.53* 3.74* 3.28* 3.84* 3.43* 5.34* African-American 1.15 1.47* 0.97 1.17 1.21 1.14 1.02 0.86 1.37 Nuclear Family 1.11* 1.19* 1.07 1.07 1.16* 1.01 0.96 0.92 1.06 Age 0.75* 0.86 0.68* 0.85 0.91 0.81 0.79 0.81 0.81 Female 1.84* - - 1.36* - - 0.48* - - Nagelkerke R 2 0.07 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.05 a - Odds ratios reported * p < .05 110 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 gender, and victimization experiences. Second, separate models for males and females were estimated to assess the interactive relationship between gender and gang membership on victimization.

The results from all of the full models indicate that gang membership is significantly related to a higher risk of violent victimization. Self-reported membership in gangs increases the odds of sexual assault by 266%. Gang membership increased the odds of violent dating victimization by 253%. In terms of serious injuries from fighting, gang membership increased the odds by 284%. It is clear from these findings that gang membership is highly significant for the risk of violent victimization. The results also indicate that gender is associated with victimization risks. Females are at an increased risk of sexual assault and dating violence. For example, being a female increased the odds of sexual assault by 84%. Males, on the other hand, were at an increased risk of serious injuries from fights. Being a female decreased the odds of injuries from fights by 52%. The direction of the effect for family structure suggests that nuclear families provide some protection from victimization risk, but these effects are only statistically significant for sexual assault. Together these findings are consistent with previous research and indicate that victimization patterns are associated with gang membership among adolescents.

The separate logistic regression models (by gender) indicate that gang membership is significantly related to all three forms of violent victimization for both males and females.

For example, gang membership is associated with a 358% increase in the odds of sexual assault for males. Gang membership is also associated with a 274% increase in the odds of dating violence and a 243% increase in the odds of serious injuries for males. The models for females indicate similar results. Gang membership is associated with a 188% increase in the odds of experiencing sexual assault for females (lifetime estimate). Self- reported membership in a gang is also associated with a 228% increase in the odds of dating violence for females. For females who are members of gangs the odds of serious injuries from fights that require medical attention increases by 434%. These results suggest that for both sexes victimization experiences are significantly associated with gang membership. Whereas prior research has argued that female gang members have heightened risks for sexual victimization, this study suggests that such risk may not be unique to females. A comparison of coefficients test (see Paternoster et al.1998) for gang membership on all three measures of victimization between male and female models indicates nonsignificant differences. Consequently, gang membership does not have a gender specific effect on these measures of violent victimization. Therefore, it appears that there are global differences in the gender specific risks of victimization (e.g., girls are more likely than boys to experience sexual assault and dating violence), and being a member of a gang is associated with a greater risk of victimization for all adolescents.

Discussion This study examined gender differences in gang membership and the risk of victimization. Most research on victimization of females in gangs has been restricted to single site qualitative studies. While these studies are informative about the process and nature of victimization for female gang members, they have not been able to make inferences about the overall risk of victimization for youth gang Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 111 members and the relative risk for females involved in gangs. Eleven percent (N = 528) of youths surveyed from the state of South Carolina self-reported membership in gangs, and approximately 36% of gang members were female. These results are consistent with other research and suggest that female gang membership is not rare (Esbensen and Deschenes1998; Esbensen and Winfree1998). In addition, the results from this research suggest that risks of victimization are not significantly different for male and female gang members. The unexpected finding from this study, however, was that female gang members did not have a greater risk for dating violence and sexual assault compared to similarly situated male gang members.

There are, however, a number of limitations to the existing data that suggest caution should be exercised in interpreting the results. First, the data collected and analyzed focuses only on public high-school students in the state of South Carolina. While the sample is representative of the high school population in this state, it does not capture the risks associated with gang membership among the most at-risk youth - those who have dropped out of school. Second, the data used in this survey are cross-sectional and therefore do not allow one to make any assertions regarding causality or time-ordering of victimization and gang membership. As a result, the findings from this study can only discuss the general risk enhancement of violent victimization associated with gang membership and cannot explain whether gang membership specifically causes victimization. It is likely that some victimization experiences occurred before youth joined a gang and some victimization occurred subsequent to gang membership.

Longitudinal data are needed to explain how much gang membership is the direct cause of future victimization. Third, when interpreting the findings from this research it is particularly important to note the differences in the measurement for the victimization experiences in that violent victimization and dating violence were annual prevalence estimates and sexual assault victimization was a lifetime prevalence estimate. However, it is reasonable to suspect that past sexual assault victimization experiences in the home may be a greater antecedent to gang membership for girls compared to boys (Chesney- Lind et al.1996). Fifth, the South Carolina Youth Risk Behavior Survey does not contain variables that allow one to test known theoretical constructs of victimization (e.g., routine activities, lifestyles, and association with delinquent peers) (Akers1998; Cohen and Felson1979; Hindelang et al.1978). As a result, we are not able to discern the independent contribution of gang membership relative to other known theories of victimization. Thus, the findings from this study should be interpreted with attention to the fact that there are likely a number of other theoretically relevant variables that if available may have affected the results presented herein (i.e., omitted variable bias).

Finally, these data do not detail the situations that led to dating violence and sexual assault. It is possible that, for example, males use more liberal interpretations of dating violence and sexual assault compared to females. In addition, these data do not explain the extent to which males and females are embedded in the gang structure. It is possible that males on average have stronger gang attachments than females and as a result are more likely to become victims of violence. Taken together, adolescence is a key stage in the life course of individuals as they prepare for transitions into adult life.

Part of a positive transition into healthy adulthood appears to be the avoidance of negative health related experiences, such as sexual assault and dating violence. Since gang membership is related to an adolescent’s risk for experiencing victimization, gang involvement is a key social ingredient in the life course.

112 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 Implications From a primary prevention perspective, schools or communities should be encouraged to focus on positive youth development and the creation of alternatives to gang affiliation before hardcore gang activity takes hold (Evans et al.1999;Harperand Robinson1999). This may be particularly important given the current lack of success plaguing most gang intervention projects (Cohen et al.1995). Findings from this study suggest that programs focused on preventing or decreasing rates of physical fighting (resulting in injury), dating violence, and sexual assault should not ignore the relationship between experiencing these events and gang membership, if prevention programs are to be ecologically sound. The gang can be a micro-system that exerts the most powerful influence over adolescent behavior. If gang membership is ignored, prevention/intervention efforts may fail to bring about sustainable changes.

Preventing children and adolescents from joining gangs promises to be a cost- effective long-term strategy. For example, one way to achieve and sustain gang and violence prevention/intervention is to target individuals and their environments (Hawkins et al.1992; Pentz et al.1989). The overall emphasis of gang and violence prevention programs should be on promoting positive health and social behaviors that are incompatible with a wide range of adolescent risk behaviors (Jessor et al.

2003). Gang membership and violence prevention is imperative vis-à-vis the intentional and unintentional injuries caused by physical fighting, dating violence and sexual assault. These behaviors and their consequences take their toll in direct medical costs, indirect economic costs to communities, and in the emotional and social costs of premature adolescent mortality and disability (Valois et al.1995; Valois and McKeown1998). Additional prevention/intervention efforts that have been shown to be effective with gangs include“lever-pulling strategies”where law enforcement tries to proactively disrupt street-level drug markets, aggressively serve warrants, assist with mounting federal prosecutions, and changing the community supervision of gang members who are out on parole and probation (see Weisburd and Braga2006).

Ultimately, while much is known about the gang membership-offending link, research has only recently begun to examine the victimization experiences among gang members in general, and among male and female gang members in particular. We hope that the findings from this study provide a stepping stone for future quantitative research in this area.

References Akers, R. (1998).Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

Anderson, J. F., Brooks, W., Langsam, A., & Dyson, L. (2003). The“new”female gang member:

Anomaly or evolution?Journal of Gang Research,10,47–65.

Bjerregard, B., & Smith, C. (1993). Gender differences in gang participation, delinquency, and substance use.Journal of Quantitative Criminology,4, 329–355.

Brown, W. K. (1977). Black female gangs in Philadelphia.International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology,21, 221–228.

Campbell, A. (1990). Female participation in gangs. In C. R. Huff (Ed.),Gangs in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chesney-Lind, M. (1997).The female offender: Girls, women, and crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 113 Chesney-Lind, M., Shelden, R. G., & Joe, K. (1996). Girls, delinquency, and gang membership. In C. R.

Huff (Ed.),Gangs in America(pp. 185–204, 2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activities approach.

American Sociological Review,44, 588–608.

Cohen, M., Williams, K., Bekelman, A., & Crosse, S. (1995). Gang involvement. In M. W. Klien, C. L.

Maxon, & J. Miller (Eds.),The modern gang reader(pp. 245–254). Los Angeles: Roxbury.

Coker, A. L., McKeown, R. E., Sanderson, M., Davis, K. E., Valois, R. F., & Huebner, E. S. (2000).

Severe dating violence and quality of life among South Carolina high school students.American Journal of Preventive Medicine,19, 220–227.

Curry, G. D. (1998). Female gang involvement.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,35,100–118.

Curry, G. D., & Decker, S. (1998).Confronting gangs: Crime and community. Los Angeles: Roxbury Press.

Curry, G. D., Ball, R. A., & Decker, S. H. (1996).Estimating the national scope of gang crime from law enforcement statistics. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

Curry, G. D., Decker, S. H., & Egley, A. (2002). Gang involvement and delinquency in a middle-school population.Justice Quarterly,19, 275.

Decker, S., Katz, C. M., & Webb, V. J. (2008). Understanding the black box of gang organization:

Implications for involvement in violent crime, drugs sales, and violent victimization.Crime & Delinquency,54, 153–172.

Deschenes, E. P., & Esbensen, F. A. (1999). Violence and gangs: Gender differences in perceptions and behavior.Journal of Quantitative Criminology,15,63–96.

Dukes, R. L., Martinez, R. O., & Stein, J. A. (1997). Precursors and consequences of membership in youth gangs.Youth and Society,29, 139–165.

Egley, A., & Ritz, C. E. (2006).Highlights from the 2004 National Youth Gang Survey. Washington, DC:

Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention.

Esbensen, F. A., & Deschenes, E. P. (1998). Multisite examination of youth gang membership: Does gender matter?Criminology,36, 799–827.

Esbensen, F. A., & Huizinga, D. (1993). Gangs, drugs, and delinquency in a survey of urban youth.

Criminology,31, 565.

Esbensen, F. A., & Winfree Jr., L. T. (1998). Race and gender differences between gang and nongang youths: Results from a multisite survey.Justice Quarterly,15, 505–526.

Esbensen, F. A., Deschenes, E. P., & Winfree Jr., L. T. (1999). Difference between gang girls and gang boys: Results from a multisite survey.Youth and Society ,31,27–53.

Esbensen, F. A., Osgood, D. W., Taylor, T. J., Peterson, D., & Freng, A. (2001). How Great is G.R.E.A.T.?

Results from a longitudinal quasi-experimental design.Criminology and Public Policy,1,87–118.

Eltinge, J., & Sribney, W. (1996). Linear, logistic and probit regressions for survey data.The Stata Technical Bulletin Reprints,6, 239–245.

Evans, W. P., Fitzgerald, C., Weigel, D., & Chvilicek, S. (1999). Are rural gang members similar to their urban peers? Implications for rural communities.Youth & Society,30, 267–282.

Fleisher, M. S. (1998).Dead end kids: gang girls and the boys they know. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Gover, A. R. (2004). Risky lifestyles and dating violence: A theoretical test of violent victimization.

Journal of Criminal Justice,32, 171–180.

Hagedorn, J. M. (1998). Gang violence in the postindustrial era. In M. Tonry, & M. Moore (Eds.),Youth violence:

Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 24(pp. 365–419). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Harper, G. W., & Robinson, W. L. (1999). Pathways to risk among inner-city African American adolescent females: The influence of gang membership.American Journal of Community Psychology,27, 383–404.

Harris, M. C. (1988).Cholas: Latino girls and gangs. New York: AMS.

Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Miller, J. Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention.

Psychological Bulletin,11 2,64–105.

Hindelang, M. J., Gottfredson, M. R., & Garofalo, J. (1978).Victims of personal crime: An empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co.

Hughes, L. A. (2005). The representation of females in criminological research: A content analysis of American and British journal articles.Women & Criminal Justice,16,1–28.

Hunt, G., & Joe-Laidler, K. (2001). Situations of violence in the lives of girl gang members.Health Care for Women International,22, 363–384.

Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., Costa, F. M., Dong, Qi, Zhang, H., & Wang, C. (2003). Adolescent problem behavior in China and the United States: A cross-national study of psychosocial protective factors.

Journal of Research on Adolescence,13, 329–360. 114 Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 Joe, K. A., & Chesney-Lind, M. (1995).“Just every mother’s angel:”An analysis of gender and ethnic variations in youth gang membership.Gender and Society,9, 408–431.

Katz, C. M., Webb, V. J., & Decker, S. H. (2005). Using the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program to further understand the relationship between drug use and gang membership.Justice Quarterly,22,58–88.

Knox, G. (2004). Females and gangs: Sexual violence, prostitution and exploitation.Journal of Gang Research,11,1–15.

Lauritsen, J. L., & White, N. (2001). Putting violence in its place: The influence of race, ethnicity, gender, and place on the risk for violence.Criminology and Public Policy,1,37–60.

Lauritsen, J. L., Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1991). The link between offending and victimization among adolescents.Criminology,29, 265–292.

Lee, E. S., Forthofer, R. N., & Lorimor, R. J. (1986). Analysis of complex survey data: Problems and strategies.Sociological Methods and Research,15,69–100.

Long, J. S. (1997).Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Miller, J. (1998). Gender and victimization risk among young women in gangs.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,35, 429–453.

Miller, J. (2001).One of the guys: Girls, gangs and gender. New York: Oxford University Press.

Miller, J., & Brunson, R. (2000). Gender dynamics in youth gangs: A comparison of males’and females’ accounts.Justice Quarterly,17, 419–448.

Miller, J., & Decker, S. H. (2001). Young women and gang violence: Gender, street offending, and violent victimization in gangs.Justice Quarterly,18,115–140.

Moore, J., & Hagedorn, J. (2001).Female gangs: A focus on research. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2000). Comparing the lifestyles of victims, offenders, and victim- offenders: A routine activity theory assessment of similarities and differences for criminal incident offenders.Sociological Focus,33, 339–362.

Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients.Criminology,36, 859–866.

Pentz, M. A., Dwyer, J. H., & MacKinnon, D. P. (1989). A multicommunity trial for primary prevention of adolescent drug abuse: Effects on drug use prevalence.Journal of the American Medical Association, 261, 3259–3266.

Peterson, D., Taylor, T. J., & Esbensen, F. A. (2004). Gang membership and violent victimization.Justice Quarterly,21, 793–815.

Rosenbaum, J. L. (1996). A violent few: Gang girls in the California Youth Authority.Journal of Gang Research,3,17–23.

Stata Corportation (1999).Stata statistical software: release 6.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.

Taylor, C. (1993).Girls, gangs, women, and drugs. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.

Taylor, T. J. (2008). The boulevard ain’t safe for your kids.Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice,24, 125–136.

Taylor, T. J., Peterson, D., Esbensen, F. A., & Freng, A. (2007). Gang membership as a risk factor for adolescent violent victimization.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,44, 351–380.

Thrasher, F. (1927).The gang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Thornberry, T. (1995). Membership in youth gangs and involvement in serious and violent offending. In R. Loeber, & D. P. Farrington (Eds.),Serious and violent juvenile offenders(pp. 147–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Thornberry, T., Krohn, M., Lizotte, A., Smith, C., & Tobin, K. (2003).Gangs and delinquency in developmental perspective. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Turley, A. C. (2003). Female gangs and patterns of female delinquency in Texas.Journal of Gang Research,10,1–12.

Valois, R. F., & McKeown, R. E. (1998). Frequency and correlates of fighting and carrying weapons among public high school adolescents.American Journal of Health Behavior,22,8–17.

Valois, R. F., McKeown, R. E., Garrison, C. Z., & Vincent, M. L. (1995). Correlates of Aggressive and violent behaviors among public high school adolescents.Journal of Adolescent Health,6,26–34.

Weisburd, D., & Braga, A. A. (Eds.) (2006).Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

Am J Crim Just (2009) 34:103–115 115