Do Types of Employment Matter in Explaining Juvenile Delinquency? A Longitudinal Study of South Korean Youth

Abstract

This study examines the effects of job type on crime and substance use. The longitudinal panel data from the Korean Youth Panel Survey conducted by the National Youth Policy Institute are utilized to explore this question. Results from the fixed effects models show that a job status change from nonworker to worker holding an informal job increases the chance of participating in crime and substance use. Interestingly, a job status change from nonworker to worker holding a formal job is not associated with an involvement in crime and delinquency. In addition, it shows that the effects of job type on crime and delinquency are not varied by gender except for an intensive female worker who holds a formal job.

Keywords

employment youth longitudinal delinquency substance use

Juvenile Employment

Traditionally, the number of working youth in South Korea is few. Doing nonacademic activities such as having a job has been regarded as undesirable or nonconforming behavior during middle and high school years (South Korean Ministry of Employment and Labor, 2006). As affected by Confucianism (Aoki, 2008), academic achievement has been viewed as the most important and reliable way to attain a good occupation and high socioeconomic status in South Korea. This Korean culture that regards youth holding employment as an undesirable social act is quite a contrast to the cultural norm of the United States, where it is believed that both academic and nonacademic work provide juveniles with an important developmental context during their school years (Apel, Bushway, Paternoster, Brame, & Sweeten, 2008).

Despite the negative view on juvenile employment, South Korean society has recently experienced a rapid increase of youth who are holding nonacademic jobs since the year of 2000. The most important reason for the recent increase in juvenile employment in South Korea is the gap between their daily life as consumers and their purchasing power (Moon, 2003). Due to westernization, South Korean youth have strong material desires compared to the past. The number of items they want to purchase such as smart phones or game supplies has increased (Moon, 2003). Thus, they begin to find jobs so as to have purchasing power without parental meddling. Another factor is the market needs for inexpensive and temporary labor in South Korea. As South Korea has become more westernized, the service sector of the economy such as cafes, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants has grown. According to the South Korean Ministry of Employment and Labor (2006), most youth are employed at simple service sector (e.g., giving out ad-fliers or serving in a restaurant). As the number of working youth has increased, the labor law in South Korea has been revised to include provisions that specify the age (15 years old) and maximum hours (no more than 42 h per week) to protect them from work-related problems (e.g., overdue wages and wage exploitation). Despite its recent growth in South Korea, research involving juvenile employment has not received much attention.

While there have been a number of U.S. studies that examine the relationship between juvenile employment and delinquency, these studies report inconsistent results with regard to the effects of juvenile employment on delinquency (Bachman, Safron, Sy, & Schulenberg, 2003; Kouvonen & Kivivuori, 2001; Longest & Shanahan, 2007; Ploeger, 1997; Safron, Schulenberg, & Bachman, 2001; Steinberg & Dornbusch, 1991; Wright, Cullen, & Williams, 1997). The majority of these studies show that juvenile employment increases the risk of participating in delinquency. Other studies that control preexisting individual differences, however, report that juvenile employment has no effect on delinquency in recent years (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2008; Apel, Paternoster, Bushway, & Brame, 2006; Paternoster, Bushway, Brame, & Apel, 2003; Rocheleau & Swisher, 2012; Staff & Uggen, 2003). Compared to other areas of delinquency research (e.g., a peer and delinquency relationship), the empirical evidence of these findings is weak. Furthermore, there are relatively small numbers of studies that examine the effects of other aspects of juvenile employment on delinquency (i.e., types of juvenile jobs).

The current study examines the effects of various types of juvenile work on delinquency by using a series of fixed effects models to address preexisting individual differences. Particularly, it examines the effects of job type and work hours on crime and substance use based on the longitudinal data from the Korean Youth Panel Survey conducted by the National Youth Policy Institute (2010). This study contributes to the study of juvenile employment and delinquency outside the United States, since the data were collected in a country with a different culture and tradition.

Past Research

Early work experience may open up an opportunity for a juvenile to participate in an unstructured social activity (e.g., drug use, smoking, gambling, class cutting, or/and skipping school). In particular, it is difficult for an intensive youthful worker to create a good balance between two different roles—as a student and an employee (Warren, 2002). More importantly, his or her level of social control can be weakened (Hirschi, 1969). Bachman et al. (2003) also argue that youth who work long hours are more likely to show interpersonal aggression. McMorris and Uggen (2000) report that high school students who work more than 20 h per week are more likely to use alcohol. Kouvonen and Kivivuori (2001) examine the relationship between work hours and delinquency in Finland and conclude that intensive work (i.e., working more than 20 h) is positively related to deviance (e.g., beating up someone, driving without a license, buying stolen goods, vandalism at school, and drunk driving). Interestingly, they find no significant effect on delinquency for youth who work moderate hours. Longest and Shanahan (2007), however, find that regardless of the length of working hours—whether youth are working moderately (1-20 h per week) or intensively (more than 20 h per week)—employed youth are more likely to use alcohol than their counterparts.

Nevertheless, the positive relationship between juvenile employment and delinquency is still in dispute. A handful of studies find that a positive association exists between juvenile employment and delinquency because of preexisting differences in individuals (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2008; Paternoster et al., 2003; Rocheleau & Swisher, 2012; Staff & Uggen, 2003). In particular, differences in individuals (i.e., poor relationships with parents and teachers, lower grades, delinquent peer associations, and status offenses/substance use history) come before they start working, and these preexisting differences in individuals influence their participation in delinquency or other problematic behaviors. For instance, based on the data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), Paternoster et al. (2003) find no effects of long work hours on delinquency, using fixed effects models. Apel et al. (2007) also report that there are no effects of employment on delinquency and substance use after controlling for preexisting differences between workers and nonworkers. Apel et al. (2008) argue that the effects of work intensity are limited to an association between school dropout and substance use. Based on the first and second Wave of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, Rocheleaus and Swisher (2012) also show that there are no effects of work hours on alcohol use.

Past research examines the link between youth employment and deviance (i.e., the effects of working hours on delinquency). However, it is assumed that certain job type may generate more criminal opportunities, thus it is necessary to examine the effects of job type on deviance. Only a handful of studies explore the relationship between job type and delinquency (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2008; Apel et al., 2006; Brame, Bushway, Paternoster, & Apel, 2004; Kouvonen & Kivivuori, 2001; Mortimer, 2003; Staff & Uggen, 2003; Wright & Cullen, 2000, 2004; Wright et al., 1997).

While full-time employment is regarded as normative among adults, juvenile employment is typically viewed as voluntary or part-time as there is a consensus that school-related activities should be a top priority during adolescence (Apel et al., 2006; Wright et al., 1997). In this regard, adolescent jobs that are compatible with student roles are considered as desirable and beneficial because they are more likely to provide opportunities to develop pro-social skills and increase responsibilities (Wright & Cullen, 2000). However, problems arise due to the fact that most adolescent jobs are limited to the service sector (i.e., performing monotonous activities and provide minimal opportunity to develop skills and responsibilities). Rather these simple labor jobs provide increased opportunities for youthful employees to associate with delinquent peers or adults at work places (Apel et al., 2006; Kouvonen & Kivivuori, 2001; Mortimer, 2003; Wright & Cullen, 2000). Put differently, criminal opportunities may arise because most informal jobs such as babysitting or yard work that comprise the majority of youth employment are often less structured and less supervised (Apel et al., 2006; Wright & Cullen, 2004).

A couple of studies that examine the effects of different job types on juvenile delinquency report problems associated with temporary or intermittent jobs (Apel et al., 2006; Staff & Uggen, 2003; Warren, 2002; Wright & Cullen, 2000, 2004). Using the data from the Youth Developmental Study (YDS), Staff and Uggen (2003) explored the relationship between delinquency and several aspects of adolescent employment (i.e., learning opportunities, autonomy, social status, stress, wages, and compatibility between school and work). They found that students who have a job that is compatible with schoolwork have lower rates of drinking and school deviance. Students who have a job that offers conventional learning opportunities show a reduced use of alcohol in 12th grade. Furthermore, students who have a job that is age appropriate, compatible with schoolwork, or offers opportunities to learn new skills are less likely to use alcohol, although work hours increase. However, jobs that provide autonomy, social status, and high wages are associated with an increase in juvenile delinquency. These work conditions are often viewed as beneficial for adults, but are harmful for teen workers. One possible shortcoming of this study is that the respondents in the YDS are not nationally sampled and only official arrests are used to measure the dependent variable. Thus, unreported delinquent behaviors are not included in their models for analysis. Apel et al. (2006) use the NLSY applying random effects models and report informal jobs (i.e., freelance jobs performed for several people without a specific boss such as babysitting, lawn care, or paper routes) are associated with greater risk for delinquency and substance use across different ethnicity groups (i.e., White, Black, and Hispanic) and gender. However, formal jobs such as jobs performed for a specific employer with an ongoing relationship are not related to increase of substance use. Warren (2002) also reports that informal jobs such as babysitting or lawn care have a negative effect on dropout rates and lead to a greater risk for delinquency and substance use among juveniles. Only the study conducted by Monahan, Steinberg, and Cauffman (2013) found that income is related to antisocial behaviors (i.e., delinquent activities for obtaining financial gain). Aggressive behaviors (i.e., criminal activities against a person) are not moderated by any type of job (i.e., food/restaurant, skilled labor, and unskilled labor). However, their findings are somewhat difficult to apply to the majority of youth because they use the data from the Pathways to Desistance study which is a panel survey that followed only serious juvenile offenders (i.e., convicted of felony or similarly serious nonfelony offenders) in Phoenix, AZ (N = 654) and Philadelphia, PA (N = 700) for 5 years.

In general, the association between an informal job and delinquency is due to the characteristics of the job itself. Informal jobs are often less structured and less supervised (Apel et al., 2006; Wright & Cullen, 2004). In particular, informal jobs may increase opportunities to associate with delinquent peers or adults at work places. As adolescents are usually employed in the service sector and perform monotonous activities, there are few chances to develop skills or responsibilities (Wright & Cullen, 2000). These findings, however, are based on a small body of literature. Consequently, there is a need for more empirical studies that look at the effects of job type on delinquency. In particular, it is necessary to use analytical methods that control preexisting differences between individuals. In addition, most of the past research, including a few recent studies that have found no effects of juvenile employment on delinquency draw their conclusions based on a similar data set from NLSY (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2008; Apel et al., 2006; Brame et al., 2004; Paternoster et al., 2003). Some research using the NLSY data include only formal jobs in which youth work for a specific employer as a measure of employment although most adolescent jobs are informal. (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2008; Brame et al., 2004; Paternoster et al., 2003).

Existing research lacks explanation regarding the effects of gender on delinquency among working youth. Prior studies merely describe the differences in job type between males and females; noting that male youth are often employed in general manual labor jobs such as yard working or construction, while female youth are often employed in service sector jobs such as cashier, clerk, or babysitter (Apel el al., 2006; Monahan et al., 2013; Staff & Uggen, 2003). To date, however, there is no existing research that examines whether gender moderates the effects of job type and work intensity on delinquency.

Current Study

Westernization of South Korea exerts influence on every aspect of society, including youth employment. The recent trend regarding youth employment in South Korea presents a pattern similar to the United States. The number of working youth increases and they largely occupy the service sector, performing monotonous activities rather than providing skilled labor. Past studies show a positive relationship between employment and delinquency as working youth have more chances than nonworkers to associate with deviant peers without adult supervision. Employment also provides youth with more financial resources, which in turn, increases the possibility of their involvement in deviance such as alcohol consumption, drug use, or sniffing aerosol gas (Longest & Shanahan, 2007). The current study hypothesizes that the relationship between employment and delinquency is similar in South Korea.

First, it is hypothesized that informal and formal jobs will have different impacts on delinquency, as characteristics of informal and formal jobs are different. As consistent with past research (Apel et al., 2006; Wright & Cullen, 2004), it is expected that informal jobs increase the possibility of participation in delinquency because they weaken the attachment to school or parents and increase the opportunity for delinquent peer associations. Second, it is hypothesized that aspects of job type (i.e., informal/formal jobs and work hours) have different impacts on delinquency. Apel et al. (2006) assess the effects of formal and informal work on delinquency, but the impact of working hours is considered only in formal work. The current study considers employment including job type (formal and informal) and work hours (moderate and intensive). Finally, it is hypothesized that the effects of job type are moderated by gender. The current study attempts to fill the gaps in the existing body of literature through the use of econometrics models to control preexisting individual differences in the South Korean youth sample.

Method

Data

This study used the data from the Korea Youth Panel Survey (hereafter the KYPS) that interviewed a nationally representative adolescent sample and their parents (or guardians) in South Korea. The KYPS data were designed and implemented by the National Youth Policy Institute (2010) in South Korea to study work experience, deviant behavior, fear of crime, academic performance, career plans, and a number of other factors derived from educational and criminological perspectives (National Youth Policy Institute, 2010). The KYPS applied a stratified multistage cluster sampling method to sample eighth grade students (most of respondents were at the age of 15) in South Korea. The panel of eighth grade students and their parents were surveyed every year from 2003 (Wave 1) to 2008.¹ For this study, the KYPS from Wave 1 to Wave 5 was utilized and the sample of this study was restricted to respondents who participated in all 5 Waves. The number of eighth grade student samples at Wave 1 was 3,499. The number of respondents was 3,188 for Wave 2, 3,017 for Wave 3, 2,910 for Wave 4, and 2,721 for Wave 5.² This yielded the final sample of 2,713 respondents.³

Measures

Crime and Substance Use

Crime and substance use were the dependent variables in this study. Crime included assault, group fighting, robbery, theft, harassment, threat, bullying, and sexual assault. Substance use was measured by cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption. Marijuana use or other substance uses were not included in the KYPS, as drug problems were not prevalent in South Korea among adults and the number of drug users among adolescents was extremely low in South Korea (South Korean Ministry of Justice, 2014). Both crime and substance use were dichotomized: those who were involved in one of crime and substance use were coded 1; those who were not involved in either were coded 0.

Job Type

Job type comprised the independent variable in this study. As used in the previous studies, job type was divided into two dimensions: informal and formal. However, it is not feasible to adopt the same measures used previously. As this study used secondary data (KYPS), only those comparable measures from the previous studies were adopted. Previous studies defined informal jobs as work performed for several people without a specific boss such as babysitting or yard work (Apel et al., 2006; Staff & Uggen, 2003; Warren, 2002; Wright & Cullen, 2000, 2004). In this study, informal jobs were defined as jobs for which respondents did not write a contract with a specific employer (i.e., self-employed, freelance, intermittent, or temporary jobs such as paper route or babysitting since contracts were seldom required in these sorts of jobs). These measures of informal jobs were very close to those measures of informal jobs found in previous studies. In past studies, formal jobs were defined as work performed for a specific employer with whom the employee had an ongoing relationship. This study defined a formal job as a job performed for a specific boss with whom the employee maintained a relationship for a while.

To examine the specific aspects of juvenile employment, job type (informal and formal) and work hours were combined. In most studies, more than 20 h of work per week was defined as intensive work (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2008; Apel et al., 2006; Mortimer, 2003; Paternoster et al., 2003; Staff & Uggen, 2003; Wright et al., 1997). The current study considered it reasonable to adopt this definition (the use of 20 h per week) as a measure of work intensity for eighth graders to 12th graders in South Korea. Moreover, since most respondents in the KYPS were students who were supposed to engage in school at least 40 h per week, students who worked more than 20 h per week performed the equivalent of a 60-hour work per week. This study included measures of (1) moderate-informal jobs (informal jobs working 1-20 h per week), (2) intensive-informal jobs (informal jobs working more than 20 h per week), (3) moderate-formal jobs (formal jobs working 1-20 h per week), and (4) intensive-formal jobs (formal jobs working more than 20 h per week).⁴ Those who do not have working experiences were coded 0, moderate-informal workers were coded 1, intensive-informal workers were coded 2, moderate-formal workers were coded 3, and intensive-formal work were coded 4.

Other Variables

This study applied fixed effects models to control time invariant variables. For example, gender was dichotomized: males were coded 0 and females were coded 1. However, this approach did not control for unobserved time variant variables. To address this problem, an array of time variant variables was measured.

In the KYPS, youth were asked about the number of their close peers who were involved in eight types of delinquent behaviors. In this study, deviant peer exposure was the composite measure of the number of close peers who were (1) disciplined, (2) suspended, or (3) expelled from school, (4) drank, (5) smoked, and (6) had unexcused truancy. The number of deviant peers was summed and natural log transformation was applied.

Five items were included to measure attachment to parents. Each participant was asked whether parents (1) try to spend much time together with him or her, (2) always treat him or her with love and affection, (3) parents and he or she understand each other well, (4) parents and he or she talks about everything, and (5) he or she talks with parents about his or her thoughts and what he or she experiences while away from home. The mean value of each composite measure (5-point scale) was used.

A four-item measure was also included to identify the level of parental supervision. As working adolescents spent more time without parental supervision, it was necessary to examine how much parental supervision was on their children when they were away. Each participant was asked when he or she goes out whether parents usually know (1) where he or she is, (2) whom he or she is with, (3) what he or she does, and (4) when he or she returns. The mean value of each composite measure (5-point scale) was used.

To measure school performance, overall grades for five subjects (Korean, Mathematics, English, Social Studies, and Science) received in the past semester were included. The mean value of each composite measure (5-point scale) was used. As attachment to schoolteachers was an important protective factor against crime, students’ attitude toward schoolteachers was included. This composite measure consisted of three items that measured how youth view and feel about their schoolteachers. Each participant was asked (1) whether he or she can talk about all their troubles and worries to his or her schoolteachers, (2) whether schoolteachers treat him or her with love and affection, (3) whether he or she wants to become a person just like his or her schoolteachers. The mean value of each composite measure (5-point scale) was used.

To measure self-control, each participant was asked (1) whether he or she jumps into exciting things even if he or she has to take a test tomorrow, (2) whether he or she abandons a task when it becomes hard, (3) whether he or she enjoys risky activities, (4) whether he or she enjoys teasing and harassing others, (5) whether he or she loses his or her temper whenever angry, and (6) whether he or she does not do homework habitually. The mean value of each composite measure (5-point scale) was used. Household income was recoded into four categories (e.g., less than KRW2,000,000 coded as 1, between KRW2,000,001 and KRW3,000,000 coded as 2, between KRW3,000,001 and KRW4,000,000 KRW coded as 3, more than KRW5,000,000 coded as 4).⁵

Whether or not respondents live with both of their biological parents was dichotomized. Respondents who were not living with both of their biological parents were coded 0 and respondents who were living with both of their biological parents were coded 1.

Analysis

In this study, fixed effects logistic models are applied to estimate the effects of job type and moderation effects of gender on delinquency. Fixed effects models are one of the econometrics models used to analyze panel data (Allison, 2009). Fixed effects models rely only on within individual differences between Waves, so they provide better control for preexisting differences. As working during adolescence is not a random event, there is a possibility that preemployment differences exist between working and nonworking youth (Apel et al., 2007; Apel et al., 2006; Paternoster et al., 2003). For example, adolescent workers may be more likely to engage in delinquency, less likely to attach to their parents or schoolteachers, and less likely to commit to their schoolwork even before they start working. Fixed effects models can resolve these preexisting conditions by relying on within individual changes over time rather than comparing between individual differences. Thus, fixed effects models that rely on within individual differences between Waves are better suited for this study than random effects models that rely on between individual differences in this study.⁶ Furthermore, fixed effects models provide control for observed and unobserved time invariant factors such as underlying individual characteristics (e.g., risk-taking tendencies) that are hard to control for in regression models. Therefore, fixed effects models are free from bias that is attributable to individual characteristics that are time stable.

A basic fixed effect logistic model for examining the relationship between employment and juvenile delinquency is presented below:

\log (\frac{P_{i t}}{1 - P_{i t}}) = β X_{i t} + ϵ_{i t}, i = 1, . . ., n; t = 1, 2, . . ., T

$P_{i t}$ is the probability of participating in delinquency for person i at time t and $X_{i t}$ is the time variant employment experience for person i at time t.

As time invariant variables cannot be estimated in fixed effects models, variables should be time-variant in the models. However, interaction effects between time variant and time invariant variables can be included in fixed effect models (Allison, 2009). Thus, the moderation effects of gender on types of jobs and delinquency can be estimated by the fixed effects models. The basic model for testing the moderation effect of gender is presented below:

\log (\frac{P_{i t}}{1 - P_{i t}}) = β_{1} x_{1 i t} + β_{2} x_{1 i t} \times z_{i} + ϵ_{i t}, i = 1, . . ., n; t = 1, 2, . . ., T

$P_{i t}$ is the probability of participating in delinquency for person i at time t, $X_{1 i t}$ is the time variant employment experience (types of jobs) for person i at time t, $z_{i}$ is the time invariant gender for person i, and $β_{2}$ is the interaction effect that explains whether the effects of a job are different by gender. In this study, as dependent variables are dichotomized, fixed effects logistic models are utilized.⁷

Youth who make a decision to work are different from nonworking youth. Those working youth are more like to have personal tendencies of showing risk-taking behaviors (Bachman et al., 2003; Kouvonen & Kivivuori, 2001). Since fixed effects models rely on within individual changes between Waves to estimate the effects of covariates, results are not going to be biased due to a small subgroup of participants who commit crime. Furthermore, the most unique feature of the fixed effects models is providing better control on spurious relationships between unknown variables and employment or delinquency (Allison, 2009; Greene, 2008; Hsiao, 2007). However, if selection bias is due to time variant unobserved variables, the estimations of fixed effects models might be inconsistent.

Results

The descriptive findings for the variables are presented in Table 1. From Wave 1 to Wave 5, as the number of youth who committed crime decreases, the number of youth who participated in substance use generally increases. Table 2 presents that the means of females and males who use substances are the same, whereas the mean of females in crime are lower than that of males. In addition, the number of working youth generally increases from Wave 1 to Wave 5. In particular, while formal jobs increase from Wave 1 to Wave 5, informal jobs start to increase from Wave 4. Both intensive-informal jobs and intensive-formal jobs show consistent increase from Wave 1 to Wave 5. Finally, moderate-informal jobs decrease from Wave 1 to Wave 4, whereas moderate-formal jobs do not show changes between Waves.

Table 1:

Descriptive Statistics in Each Wave

Variable	Wave 1	Wave 2	Wave 3	Wave 4	Wave 5
Variable	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)
Crime	0.19 (0.09)	0.09 (0.29)	0.05 (0.23)	0.05 (0.21)	0.03 (0.17)
Substance use	0.32 (0.46)	0.30 (0.46)	0.38 (0.49)	0.46 (0.21)	0.54 (0.49)
Job types (informal and formal jobs)	0.28 (0.68)	0.21 (0.59)	0.19 (0.56)	0.25 (0.61)	0.47 (0.68)
Job types and work hours	0.18 (0.52)	0.17 (0.57)	0.24 (0.76)	0.33 (0.89)	0.70 (0.90)
Delinquent peer exposure	0.59 (1.00)	0.62 (1.07)	0.79 (1.10)	0.89 (1.13)	1.02 (1.15)
Attachment to parents	3.34 (0.76)	3.42 (0.76)	3.44 (0.72)	3.46 (0.74)	3.52 (0.76)
Parental supervision	3.22 (0.86)	3.39 (0.83)	3.37 (0.83)	3.42 (0.82)	3.46 (0.84)
Attachment to schoolteachers	2.46 (0.82)	2.62 (0.82)	2.61 (0.81)	2.63 (0.88)	2.61 (0.90)
School performance	3.15 (0.81)	3.13 (0.82)	3.00 (0.72)	2.97 (0.71)	3.01 (0.69)
Self-control	3.32 (0.66)	3.07 (0.67)	3.35 (0.66)	3.36 (0.65)	3.35 (0.65)
Monthly household income	1.99 (1.03)	2.06 (1.03)	2.18 (1.05)	2.27 (1.07)	2.37 (1.02)
Living with biological parents	0.94 (0.25)	0.91 (0.28)	0.90 (0.30)	0.91 (0.28)	0.91 (0.29)

Table 2:

Descriptive Statistics by Gender

Variable	Total(n = 13,565)		Male(n = 6,830)		Female(n = 6,735)
Variable	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Crime	0.13	0.33	0.16	0.36	0.10	0.30
Substance use	0.40	0.49	0.40	0.49	0.40	0.49
Job types (informal and formal jobs)	0.20	0.49	0.20	0.48	0.21	0.50
Job types and work hours	0.32	0.86	0.31	0.85	0.33	0.88
Delinquent peer exposure	0.78	1.10	0.89	1.19	0.67	1.00
Attachment to parents	3.44	0.75	3.34	0.73	3.53	0.75
Parental supervision	3.37	0.83	3.23	0.82	3.51	0.82
Attachment to schoolteacher	2.58	0.84	2.62	0.81	2.55	0.87
School performance	3.06	0.67	3.10	0.69	3.03	0.65
Self-control	3.34	0.66	3.30	0.65	3.37	0.66
Household income	2.17	1.05	2.18	1.04	2.16	1.05
Living with biological parents	0.91	0.27	0.91	0.27	0.91	0.28

The effects of job type on crime, using fixed effects logistic regression models are examined. First, it presents the effects of informal and formal jobs on crime⁸ (Table 3; Model 1). In particular, it shows that an informal job is positively and significantly related to crime, but a formal job is insignificantly related. A job status change from nonworker to worker holding an informal job increases the involvement in crime by 30%. However, a job status change to worker holding a formal job is not related to committing crime. This may be due to the fact that formal jobs are more structured and supervised as they involve working with a specific employer.

Table 3:

Fixed Effects Logistic Regression Predicting Effects of Job Types on Crime

	Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Coef.	SE	Coef.	SE
Informal job	0.265*	0.124
Formal job	0.316	0.203
Moderate-informal job			0.148	0.145
Intensive-informal job			0.494*	0.193
Moderate-formal job			0.219	0.334
Intensive-formal job			0.407	0.239
Deviant peer exposure	0.444***	0.042	0.441***	0.042
Attachment to parents	0.003	0.080	0.004	0.080
Parental supervision	−0.004	0.066	−0.005	0.067
Attachment to schoolteachers	−0.075	0.053	−0.073	0.053
School performance	−0.096	0.085	−0.102	0.085
Self-control	−0.412***	0.056	−0.413***	0.086
Household income	0.021	0.051	0.019	0.052
Living with biological parents	−0.202	0.238	−0.211	0.238
Wave
2	−1.631***	0.095	−1.637***	0.095
3	−2.419***	0.111	−2.434***	0.112
4	−2.821***	0.124	−2.845***	0.124
5	−3.454***	0.144	−3.507***	0.148
	LR χ²(14) = 1453.15 (p < .001)		LR χ²(16) = 1455.65 (p < .001)

Note. LR = likelihood ratio.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 3 also presents the effects of job type (informal and formal jobs) and work hours on crime. Model 1 shows that informal work is positively and significantly related to crime. Importantly, it shows that holding an intensive-informal job is positively and significantly related to crime (Table 3; Model 2). If a job status switches from nonworker to worker employed in an informal job for more than 20 h per week, he or she is more likely to participate in crime (i.e., his or her odds of committing crime increase by 64%). However, a job status change from nonworker to worker employed in an informal job for fewer than 20 h per week does not have any impact on crime. In contrast to the impact of having an intensive-informal job, no effect on crime has been found regarding intensive or moderate-formal jobs.

The results of fixed effects logistic regression models that predict participation in substance use are shown in Table 4. As Model 1 in Table 4 shows both informal work and formal work are positively and significantly related to substance use. This suggests a job status change from nonworker to worker in an informal or a formal job increases a chance to participate in substance use by 56% and 55%, respectively. Therefore, the odds of participating in substance use are roughly the same for those engaging in informal or formal jobs.

Table 4:

Fixed Effects Logistic Regression Predicting Effects of Job Types on Substance Use

	Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Coef.	SE	Coef.	SE
Informal job	0.447***	0.095
Formal job	0.437**	0.158
Moderate-informal job			0.431***	0.113
Intensive-informal job			0.481**	0.156
Moderate-formal job			0.344*	0.254
Intensive-formal job			0.384*	0.188
Deviant peer exposure	0.963***	0.035	0.964***	0.035
Attachment to parents	−0.121*	0.061	−0.120*	0.061
Parental supervision	−0.094	0.051	−0.094	0.051
Attachment to schoolteachers	−0.110**	0.039	−0.111	0.039
School performance	−0.159**	0.062	−0.159**	0.061
Self-control	−0.228***	0.039	−0.228***	0.039
Household income	−0.059	0.038	−0.059	0.038
Living with biological parents	−0.190	0.178	−0.194	0.177
Wave
2	−0.156*	0.081	−0.158*	0.081
3	0.199*	0.080	0.198*	0.081
4	0.707***	0.082	0.706***	0.082
5	1.107***	0.085	1.104***	0.086
	LR χ²(14) = 1865.15 (p < .001)		LR χ²(16) = 1865.48 (p < .001)

Note. LR = likelihood ratio.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The model that examines the effects of types of work involvement (i.e., incorporating the aspects of job type and work hours) on substance use is presented in Table 4. In particular, it shows that all types of work involvement are positively and significantly related to substance use (Table 4, Model 2). As a job status switches from nonworker to worker who is employed in an informal job for fewer than 20 h per week, he or she is more likely to participate in substance use (p < .001). His or her odds of participating in substance use increase by 54%. Also, if a job status switches from nonworker to worker employed in an informal job for more than 20 h per week, he or she is more likely to participate in substance use (p = .0021). His or her odds of participating in substance use increase by 52%. Interestingly, if a job status switches from nonworker to worker employed in a formal job for less than 20 h per week, he or she is more likely to participate in substance use (p = .0132). His or her odds of participating in substance use increase by 41%. In addition, if a job status switches from nonworker to worker employed in a formal job for more than 20 h per week, he or she is more likely to participate in substance use (p = .0112). His or her odds of participating in substance use increase by 49%. Furthermore, although the odds ratios of moderate-informal job and intensive-informal job are greater than those of moderate-formal work and intensive-formal job, the result shows that a status change to worker increases the probability to participate in substance use regardless of job type. This may be due to the fact that working youth experience adult roles earlier than their counterparts. In other words, when a juvenile has either an informal or formal job, he or she is more likely to be exposed to adult roles and cultures than nonworking youth. Conversely, both informal and formal jobs carry a degree of opportunity and temptation similar to that found in the adult workplace (e.g., discretionary income, drinking, smoking, etc.). This may put working youth at an increased risk of participating in substance use regardless of the nature of the job.

Whether the effects of informal and formal jobs on crime are moderated by gender is shown in Table 5. First, the interaction effects between job type (informal and formal jobs) and gender are included in the Model 1. It presents whether the effects of job type on crime vary across gender. The result shows that both the interaction effects (i.e., between gender and informal job and between gender and formal job) are not statistically significant, which suggests that the effects of informal and formal jobs on crime are not distinguished by gender. Next, the interaction effects among specific job type (informal and formal), work hours, and gender are included in Model 2. It presents whether the effects of work involvement on crime are moderated by gender. The result shows that all the interaction effects between job type and gender are insignificant, which indicates that the effects of job type on crime do not differ by gender.

Table 5:

Fixed Effects Logistic Regression Predicting Gender Moderation Effects on Crime

	Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Coef.	SE	Coef.	SE
Informal job	0.275	0.158
Formal job	0.172	0.269
Moderate-informal job			0.168	0.190
Intensive-informal job			0.467	0.241
Moderate-formal job			0.063	0.445
Intensive-formal job			0.271	0.391
Gender moderation effect
Gender × informal job	−0.023	0.248
Gender × formal job	0.327	0.391
Gender × moderate-informal job			−0.041	0.293
Gender × intensive-informal job			0.067	0.380
Gender × moderate-formal job			0.359	0.667
Gender × intensive-formal job			0.307	0.462
Delinquent peer exposure	0.446***	0.042	0.444***	0.042
Attachment to parents	0.004	0.080	0.006	0.081
Parental supervision	−0.004	0.066	−0.006	0.067
Attachment to schoolteachers	−0.075	0.053	−0.073	0.054
School performance	−0.098	0.085	−0.105	0.085
Self-control	−0.412***	0.056	−0.415***	0.056
Household income	0.021	0.052	0.019	0.052
Living with biological parents	−0.191	0.28	−0.201	0.239
Wave
2	−1.630***	0.095	−1.637***	0.095
3	−2.421***	0.111	−2.437***	0.112
4	−2.823***	0.124	−2.849***	0.125
5	−3.460***	0.144	−3.513***	0.148
	LR χ²(16) = 1453.90 (p < .001)		LR χ²(20) = 1456.40 (p < .001)

Note. LR = likelihood ratio.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 6 presents whether the effects of job type on substance use are moderated by gender. First, the interaction effects between gender and formal jobs are significantly related to substance use (Model 1). This indicates that the effects of a formal job on substance use are moderated by gender. Put differently, if a female switches her job status from nonworker to worker in a formal job, she is less likely to participate in substance use. Her odds of participating in substance use decrease by 57%, as compared to a male. However, the interaction effects between gender and informal jobs are insignificant. Finally, the interaction effects between work involvement (combination of informal/formal job and work hours) and gender are estimated. When job type is divided into moderate-formal job, intensive-formal job, moderate-informal job, and intensive-informal job, the gender moderation effects of formal job are presented differently depending on whether a formal job is intensive or moderate.

Table 6:

Fixed Effects Logistic Regression Predicting Gender Moderation Effects on Substance Use

	Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Coef.	SE	Coef.	SE
Informal job	0.4938***	0.136
Formal job	0.859***	0.229
Moderate-informal job			0.337*	0.163
Intensive-informal job			0.813***	0.231
Moderate-formal job			0.793*	0.371
Intensive-formal job			0.902**	0.278
Gender moderation effect
Gender × informal job	−0.090	0.190
Gender × formal job	−0.834**	0.313
Gender × moderate-informal job			0.180	0.225
Gender × intensive-informal job			−0.633	0.311
Gender × moderate-formal job			−0.500	0.505
Gender × intensive-formal job			−1.022**	0.375
Delinquent peer exposure	0.966***	0.035	0.964***	0.035
Attachment to parents	−0.127*	0.061	−0.129*	0.061
Parental supervision	−0.092	0.051	−0.090	0.050
Attachment to schoolteachers	−0.111**	0.039	−0.109**	0.039
School performance	−0.158**	0.061	−0.157*	0.062
Self-control	−0.228***	0.039	−0.230***	0.039
Household income	−0.059	0.038	−0.060	0.038
Living with biological parents	−0.185	0.177	−0.188	0.177
Wave
2	−0.151	0.081	−0.153	0.081
3	0.205*	0.081	0.200*	0.081
4	0.710***	0.082	0.709***	0.082
5	1.113***	0.084	1.109***	0.086
	LR χ²(16) = 1872.23 (p < .001)		LR χ²(20) = 1878.38 (p < .001)

Note. LR = likelihood ratio.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

As shown in Table 6, only the interaction effects between gender and an intensive-formal job are significantly related to substance use. In particular, a female youth is less likely to participate in substance use (p < .001) only when she switches from nonworker to intensive worker (more than 20 h per week) in a formal job. As compared to a male counterpart, her odds of participating in substance use decrease by 65%. However, the effects of moderate formal job, moderate-informal job, and intensive-informal job on substance use do not differ by gender. This may be due to the fact that male and female workers who engage in intensive-formal work may have different purposes for working.

Discussion

The current study examines the effects job type on delinquency (crime and substance use) to fill the gaps of previous studies that have produced mixed results. In particular, this research looks at the impact of juvenile employment on delinquency in South Korea, which has a cultural context different from the United States. First, this research examines the effects of formal and informal jobs on crime and substance use. Consistent with the past findings, a youth holding an informal job is at greater risk of committing crime, while having a formal job has no significant impact on crime. An informal job usually lacks adult supervision; therefore, an adolescent who has an informal job has more opportunities to associate with peers in an unstructured environment. An informal job, performed without a specific boss, is often less supervised than formal jobs. Furthermore, youth who have informal jobs are more likely to interact with people who do not have characteristics (e.g., age, social economic status, or neighborhood) in common (Greenberger, Steinberg, Vaux, & McAuliffe, 1980).

Conversely, a formal job is relatively more structured as it has a specific employer who can supervise an adolescent worker. In addition, an adolescent employee in a formal job may have more personal responsibilities and higher performance standards as an employee than a juvenile who holds an informal job. The effects of having a job on substance use, however, have not varied by the job type. A status change from nonworker to worker, regardless of job type, enables a youth to have more financial resources and autonomy from his or her parents, which may result in participating in unstructured socializing experiences such as drug use. Consequently, working experiences may put adolescents in an adult-like environment and culture that provide them opportunities for experiencing substance use.

The effects of formality of jobs and work hours on substance use and crime are also examined. All types of jobs, however, are significantly associated with increasing the likelihood of participating in substance use. In addition, a youth holding an informal-intensive job is more likely to commit crime. Consistent with previous studies that show an informal job and intensive work have negative impacts on an adolescent worker, the current study also finds that an adolescent, who works as an intensive-informal worker, is more likely to commit crime.

Finally, no gender moderation effects are found in the models that present the relationship between employment and crime. The interaction effects (i.e., between gender and job types, between gender and formality of job and work hours) are not statistically significant. Although females usually commit less violent crime than males (Tibbette & Herz, 1996), this study shows no gender moderation effects on the relationship between job type and crime. However, the moderation effects of gender are presented differently in the models that predict substance use. While the interaction effects between gender and an informal job are not statistically significant, the interaction effects between gender and a formal job are statistically significant in predicting substance use. This indicates that if a female youth holds a formal job, the odds of participating in substance use are significantly lower than that of a male adolescent. This may be because female adolescents who are employed in formal jobs are more influenced by informal social control than male adolescents because South Korea still has features of a patriarchal society (Kang, 2014). Regarding the effects of formality of jobs and work hours on substance use, only the interaction effects between female and intensive-formal job is significant. If a female youth holds a formal job and works more than 20 h per week, she is less likely to use cigarettes or alcohol as compared with a counterpart male. It seems that the purpose of work might be different for males and females. In particular, a female intensive worker whose goal for working is money is not stronger than a male counterpart. A male youth who wants to work for monetary gain has increased risks of participating in substance use as his discretionary income induces him to buy cigarettes or alcohol. Furthermore, this may be because specific features of an intensive-formal job between males and females are different. Among intensive-formal workers, males often have jobs that provide more chances for exposure to an adult-like environment and association with delinquent peers, which could lead to precocious behaviors.

While this study attempts to fill the gaps of previous research, it has a few limitations. First, more aspects of employment need to be considered in future research. This study considers only formality and work hours. To better understand the relationship between employment and delinquency, a future research should consider dynamic dimensions of employment such as duration of employment, seasonality of employment (e.g., summer-only work or school-year work), purposes of employment, and wage. The results of this study might not be applicable to other countries as South Korea has unique culture, educational environment, and demographic characteristics. Thus, it is necessary to replicate the current study in a different cultural context.

Despite its limitations, this study presents meaningful implications with regard to the relationship between juvenile employment and delinquency. First, labor law should be revised to regulate informal youth jobs and limit working hours for juvenile workers as intensive/informal jobs are more likely associated with committing crime. In addition, the number of working youth in South Korea has been increasing since the 2000s, and it is expected that this trend will be maintained for a while. As a result, it is necessary to establish systems or programs that support adolescent workers. In particular, to address the problems related to juvenile employment, policy makers should consider effective youth job programs. A model in Germany is a good example that supports both work and education. As a part of school curricula in Germany, a job program assists youth in transitioning into the labor market (Bachman et al., 2003). This German model is one solution to the problems related to juvenile employment. Finally, support and resources from parents, schools, community, and government are necessary to reduce the negative effects of juvenile employment.

Footnotes

Notes

Hee Jung Lee is a secretary official in the Classification and Examination Division of Ministry of Justice in South Korea. She earned her PhD in School of Criminal Justice and Criminology from University of Massachusetts, Lowell.

Byung Jun Cho, PhD, is an associate professor in Criminal Justice Department at Westfield State University. His research focuses on testing criminological theories.

References

Allison

(2009). Fixed effects regression models. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Aoki

(2008). Confucius vs. Socrates: The impact of educational traditions of East and West in a global age. International Journal of Learning, 14(11), 35-40.

Apel

Bushway

S. D.

Brame

Haviland

A. M.

Nagin

D. S.

Paternoster

(2007). Unpacking the relationship between adolescent employment and antisocial behavior: A matched samples comparison. Criminology, 45, 67-97.

Apel

Bushway

S. D.

Paternoster

Brame

Sweeten

(2008). Using state child labor laws to identify the causal effect of youth employment on deviant behavior and academic achievement. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 24, 337-362.

Apel

Paternoster

Bushway

S. D.

Brame

(2006). A job isn’t just a job: The differential impact of formal versus informal work on adolescent problem behavior. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 333-369.

Bachman

J. G.

Safron

D. J.

S. R.

Schulenberg

J. E.

(2003). Wishing to work: New perspectives on how adolescents’ part-time work intensity is linked to educational disengagement, substance use, and other problem behaviors. International Journal of Behavior Development, 27, 301-315.

Brame

Bushway

S. D.

Paternoster

Apel

(2004). Assessing the effect of adolescent employment on involvement in criminal activity. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 20, 236-256.

Greenberger

Steinberg

L. D.

Vaux

McAuliffe

(1980). Adolescents who work: Effects of part-time employment on family and peer relations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 9, 189-202.

Greene

W. H.

(2008). Econometric analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

10.

Heckman

J. J.

(1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5, 475-492.

11.

Hirschi

(1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.

12.

Hsiao

(2007). Panel data analysis—Advantages and challenges. Test, 16, 1-22.

13.

Kang

(2014). Love and money: Commercial postpartum care and the reinscription of patriarchy in contemporary South Korea. Journal of Korean Studies, 2, 379-397.

14.

Korean Statistical Informational Service. (2015). Household income data. Retrieved from http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=117&tblId=DT_33104_N101&vw_cd=MT_STOP_TITLE&list_id=117_33104_A01&seqNo=&lang_mode=ko&language=kor&obj_var_id=&itm_id=&conn_path=E1

15.

Kouvonen

Kivivuori

(2001). Part-time jobs, delinquency and victimization among Finnish adolescents. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 2, 191-212.

16.

Longest

K. C.

Shanahan

M. J.

(2007). Adolescent work intensity and substance use: The mediational and moderational roles of parenting. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 703-720.

17.

McLaughlin

M. J.

Sainani

K. L.

(2014). Bonferroni, Holm, and Hochberg corrections: Fun names, serious changes to p values. PM&R, 6, 544-546.

18.

McMorris

B. J.

Uggen

(2000). Alcohol and employment in the transition to adulthood. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 41, 276-294.

19.

Monahan

K. C.

Steinberg

Cauffman

(2013). Age differences in the impact of employment on antisocial behavior. Child Development, 84, 791-801.

20.

Moon

(2003). The relationship between students’ involvement in labor market and deviance. Studies on Korean Youth, 10(3), 83-103.

21.

Mortimer

J. T.

(2003). Working and growing up in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

22.

National Youth Policy Institute. (2010). KYPS 8th grade panel user guide. Sejong, South Korea: Author.

23.

Paternoster

Bushway

Brame

Apel

(2003). The effect of teenage employment on delinquency and problem behaviors. Social Forces, 82, 297-335.

24.

Ploeger

(1997). Youth employment and delinquency: Reconsidering a problematic relationship. Criminology, 35, 659-675.

25.

Rocheleau

G. C.

Swisher

R. R.

(2012). Adolescent work and alcohol use revisited: Variations by family structure. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 694-703.

26.

Safron

D. J.

Schulenberg

J. E.

Bachman

J. G.

(2001). Part-time work and hurried adolescence: The links among work intensity, social activities, health behaviors, and substance use. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42, 425-449.

27.

South Korean Ministry of Employment and Labor. (2006). The report on youth employment. Gwacheon: Author.

28.

South Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare. (2015). Poverty line. Sejong: Author.

29.

South Korean Ministry of Justice. (2014). The white paper on crime of 2013. Gwacheon: Author.

30.

Staff

Uggen

(2003). The fruits of good work: Early work experiences and adolescent deviance. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 40, 263-290.

31.

Steinberg

Dornbusch

S. M.

(1991). Negative impact of part-time employment during adolescence: Replication and elaboration. Developmental Psychology, 27, 304-313.

32.

Tibbette

Herz

(1996). Gender differences in factors of social control and rational choice. Deviant Behavior, 17, 183-208.

33.

Warren

J. R.

(2002). Reconsidering the relationship between student employment and academic outcomes: A new theory and better data. Youth & Society, 33, 366-393.

34.

Wright

J. P.

Cullen

F. T.

(2000). Juvenile involvement in occupational delinquency. Criminology, 38, 863-892.

35.

Wright

J. P.

Cullen

F. T.

(2004). Employment, peers, and life-course transitions. Justice Quarterly, 21, 183-205.

36.

Wright

J. P.

Cullen

F. T.

Williams

(1997). Working while in school and delinquent involvement: Implications for social policy. Crime & Delinquency, 43, 203-221.