“I Still Love My Hood”: Passive and Strategic Aspects of Role Residual Among Former Gang Members

Abstract

One important aspect of gang disengagement that has been largely overlooked is the role of identity in the time following membership. Research has shown that former gang members often retain social and emotional ties with their former gang peers and may experience role ambiguity as a result. Despite this, there has been virtually no examination of role residual—the lingering aspects of one’s former identity—that may exist among these individuals. Using life history interviews, the current study addresses this gap by examining role residual among a sample of 30 former gang members. A total of 25 participants (83%) identified three types of role residual—symbolic, demeanor, and worldview. In contrast to previous scholarship, role residual appeared to manifest as passive and strategic occurrences.

Keywords

gangs desistance qualitative methods identity attitudes behavior

Introduction

Extant literature on gang disengagement has focused not only on the motives and methods of exit but also on the persistent social ties after leaving (e.g., Bubolz, 2014; Decker, Pyrooz, Sweeten, & Moule, 2014; Pyrooz & Decker, 2011; Pyrooz et al., 2014). Indeed, gang members often maintain social and emotional ties to the gang in the time following exit. As such, identifying as a former gang member does not necessarily mean a complete divorce from gang life. Lingering emotional and social ties complicate the meaning of being a former gang member (Decker & Lauritsen, 2002) as these individuals may continue to engage in gang-related violence and exposure to increased victimization (Pyrooz & Decker, 2011; Pyrooz et al., 2014). Not only may former gang members continue to be enmeshed in gang life but also they may also experience stigma and discrimination (Lee & Bubolz, 2020; Rosen & Cruz, 2018) considering they “continually have to deal with society’s reaction to their once having been a part of a previous role” (Ebaugh, 1988, p. 5). Complicating matters further, role residual—the lingering aspects of a former identity that exists after group exit—may contribute to misidentification among law enforcement officers when deciding to include individuals on gang databases. This is problematic because misidentified individuals may be subjected to discrimination, gang enhancement statutes, the denial of bail, and targeted law enforcement efforts (Lee & Bubolz, 2020; Leyton, 2003).

Currently, research on the topic of role residual suggests that it is a passive occurrence that operates in an unintentional manner (Ebaugh, 1988; Simi et al., 2017). For instance, former gang members may continue to wear certain colors associated with their former gang or present an aggressive posture for no objective purpose. This conceptualization does not consider the intentional and strategic enactment of an individual’s former identity to achieve specific goals, and as such, fails to capture the complexities associated with role residual. Relatedly, there has been virtually no examination of role residual among former gang members. Although Decker, Pyrooz, and Moule’s (2014) study on role exit among former gang members identified the existence of role ambiguity (i.e., the uncertainty about one’s relationship to the gang), there was no discussion or examination of role residual. Given the empirical and conceptual void in the existing literature, the current study advances previous research by categorizing the various types of role residual (i.e., symbolic, demeanor, and worldview) as well as how they operate (i.e., passively and strategically).

Gang Identity and Core Expectations

Research in criminology has incorporated some aspects of identity and emphasized how individuals see themselves as well as the various influences that shape their sense of self (Becker, 1963; Heimer & Matsueda, 1994; Horowitz, 1983; Leverso & Matsueda, 2019; Tannenbaum, 1938; Vigil, 1988). Identity can be understood as “the shared social meanings that persons attribute to themselves in a role” (Burke & Reitzes, 1991, p. 242). Although identity is a central aspect of the gang experience (Cohen, 1990), few studies have teased out the specific microlevel identity mechanisms associated with gang membership (e.g., Bubolz & Lee, 2019; Horowitz, 1983; Lauger, 2012; Vigil, 1988). Identity has been utilized as a conceptual basis not only for understanding gang involvement but also for explaining violence (see Bubolz & Lee, 2019; Hughes & Short, 2005; Lauger, 2012; Stretesky & Pogrebin, 2007). Interestingly, violence serves a reciprocal function of reinforcing the gang identity. For instance, violent initiation rituals provide members with a new source of social identity and increases group cohesion and solidarity (Decker, 1996; Descormiers & Corrado, 2016). Importantly, most individuals who join gangs experience gang initiations during their adolescent years (Descormiers & Corrado, 2016) when identity development is particularly important (Erikson, 1977). As such, the opportune timing of gang involvement/initiation during adolescence reflects a quintessential moment for identity development. This is especially important considering that gangs socialize members into a cultural system that encourages conformity with group symbols, demeanor, and worldviews. These three aspects of gang life are particularly salient because they represent core features of the gang identity (Decker & Van Winkle, 1996; Horowitz, 1983; Vigil, 1988).

The display of symbols (e.g., colors, numbers, letters) represents one of the most important aspects of the gang identity. Scholars have long observed that symbolic devices such as signs, colors, gang argot, and style of dress are subtle forms of communication that promote mutual action and cohesion and express group identification (Horowitz, 1983; Thrasher, 1927; Vigil, 1988). Indeed, clothing and other related items and style of dress assume the symbolic role of a uniform (Jankowski, 1991). While in Thrasher’s (1927) time, these identifiers included things like blouses and ties, modern gang members signal their affiliation through colors, particular clothing items, and distinct styles. For instance, Blood and Crip gangs are often associated with the colors red and blue, respectively. Moreover, baseball caps and clothing of a professional sports team may be used to signify one’s gang affiliation—not as an endorsement for the actual team. Likewise, gang members may adopt specific logos as their own and subsequently display them (Howell, 2012).

In addition to symbolic representations, gangs place a premium on violent comportment. Aggressive and preemptive stances are viewed favorably by the gang as these behaviors are perceived to be effective strategies in preventing and reacting to actual and perceived slights (Decker, 1996; Decker & Van Winkle, 1996; Horowitz, 1983; Vigil, 1988). Recognized as a means for street survival, gangs encourage violence as an acceptable and expected course of action for resolving disputes, gaining social approval and legitimacy, and elevating the collective status of the group (Decker, 1996; Klein, 2007; Lauger, 2012; Short & Strodtbeck, 1965; Vigil, 1988). Consequently, gang members are expected to be tough (show physical strength and fearlessness) and have heart (the willingness to engage in violence, regardless of the personal risks). Through this process, the gang enhances its members’ defiant individualism, resulting in increased levels of physical aggression, predatory behaviors, and public displays of defiance (Jankowski, 1991).

Although the gang’s cultural system promotes deviant behaviors (e.g., aggression and violence) and exclusivity (e.g., symbolic representation), the gang does espouse positive worldviews that cultivate cohesion and bonding, namely brotherhood and loyalty (Jankowski, 1991; Keiser, 1969; Thrasher, 1927). These worldviews are prominent within gangs, given that racial/ethnic violence and community disorganization are common factors in their formation (Alonso, 2004; Cureton, 2009; Howell, 2015) and that many gang members have dysfunctional home lives (Fleisher, 2000; Howell, 2012; J. Miller, 2001). As such, these ideologies not only serve a group purpose but may also be intrinsically appealing to the individual gang member. Numerous studies have documented the importance of brotherhood and the sense of belonging as important reasons for gang involvement (e.g., Decker & Van Winkle, 1996; Vigil, 1988). In short, given the centrality of these expectations to the gang identity, it is conceivable that former gang members may have difficulty abandoning these behaviors and beliefs. As such, the ongoing display of gang symbols and aggressive demeanor as well as the continued internalization of gang worldviews by former gang members can lead to their misidentification as active members from law enforcement and society more broadly.

Theoretical Framework

Ebaugh’s (1988) theory of role exit is an important contribution to sociological literature. Based on interviews with 106 individuals who exited from a variety of roles (e.g., doctors, police officers, teachers, nuns), Ebaugh (1988) found the role exit process comprised four stages—first doubts, seeking alternatives, the turning point, and creating the ex-role—and involved the management of tensions that exist between former, current, and future selves. While consideration of each phase is important, we focus on the concept of role residual found in the final stage of the exit process—creating the ex-role. Ebaugh (1988) defined role residual as “the identification that an individual maintains with a prior role such that the individual experiences certain aspects of the role after he or she has in fact exited from it” (p. 173). Therefore, role residual permeates into the current conceptualization of the self and affects how individuals see and present themselves in their present identities. Ex-members struggle to emotionally distance themselves from self-perceptions and normative expectations of their previous role (Ebaugh, 1988). Consequently, they may continue to exhibit certain attitudes, mannerisms, and behaviors associated with their former identity. Indeed, Ebaugh (1988) found that role residual was present among all participants in her study and was displayed through various behaviors such as a continued expression of love for one’s former role and the utilization of one’s previous title when being addressed (e.g., referring to oneself as Doctor). Since Ebaugh’s (1988) seminal work on role exit, other scholars have tested her propositions and expanded on her theoretical framework among other roles and populations such as drug addicts, athletes, and teachers (T. L. Anderson & Bondi, 1998; Drahota & Eitzen, 2004; Harris & Prentice, 2004).

The concept of role residual has direct implications for research examining disengagement from deviant groups because it contends that criminal desistance is not a process of immediately knifing off past preferences and associations (see Caspi & Moffitt, 1993). For instance, a recent study among former White supremacists found that role residual occurred as momentary flashes and situational relapses (Simi et al., 2017). The former referred to brief moments where previous thoughts, feelings, and involuntary physiological reactions (e.g., goose bumps) related to White supremacy resurfaced. The latter were situational incidents characterized by a visible embodiment of one’s former White supremacist identity, such as verbal and physical gestures (e.g., performing the Nazi salute).

To date, only one study has applied Ebaugh’s (1988) theory of role exit for understanding gang disengagement. Drawing on a sample of 260 self-identified former gang members, Decker, Pyrooz, Sweeten, and Moule (2014) found that due to persistent social ties with their gangs, some participants experienced role ambiguity—an ambivalence about their position and relationship with the gang. Although this study provided a thorough and comprehensive examination of the role exit process, unfortunately, there was little discussion about role residual. In an effort to advance this field of gang research, the current study focuses particularly on the different types of role residual experienced by former gang members.

Method

Role residual was examined by interviewing a sample of 30 former gang members located in the Midwestern United States. Gaining access to this population was time consuming and required the help of gatekeepers who were either former gang members themselves or otherwise had a high degree of rapport with individuals who were former gang members. The first author had an existing friendship with an individual who worked at a local gas station that served as a hangout spot for gang members. A significant amount of time was spent hanging around this gas station with the intent of establishing rapport and recruiting participants for the study. The experience created opportunities for contact with numerous members of the community that included current and former gang members, and a variety of community activists working to prevent violence.

In addition to spending time at a local gas station, weekly meetings were also attended that included the chief of police, police captains, religious leaders, gang interventionists and preventionists, leaders of summer job programs, and other concerned citizens. These meetings were open to the public with the goal of developing solutions to address the problem of street gangs and violence in the community. While attending these meetings, the first author met several former gang members as well as gatekeepers who recommended referrals in the community. Various community events were also attended such as marches to end violence, community protests of police abuse of power, town hall–style meetings, and other community recreational center events. This level of immersion provided opportunities to meet many members of the community, including former gang members who ultimately participated in the study and provided additional referrals. Importantly, participants were only included in this study if they identified as a former gang member. Indeed, self-nomination is the most robust indicator of gang membership (Curry et al., 2014; Esbensen et al., 2001).

Data collection and fieldwork were conducted primarily through semi-structured life history interviews that occurred between May 2011 and July 2013. The name of the city and study participants was concealed as a precaution to mask their identities and provide anonymity. Instead, pseudonyms were used to deidentify persons, places, and gang-related characteristics (e.g., specific logos associated with gangs and gang names). Historically, research on gangs has often revealed the location of data collection, but in this instance, the benefits of engaging in such practice is outweighed by the need for human subject protection. Interviews were conducted in natural environments such as local restaurants and inside the participants’ homes and vehicles. Interviews conducted in natural environments increase the validity of data, encourage a relaxed atmosphere, and increase rapport (Fleisher, 2000). While there were no cash or gift card incentives, many interviews took place at restaurants where the first author paid for the participant’s meal.

The primary purpose of the study was to examine the motives and methods associated with leaving the gang; however, the study also utilized a grounded theory framework that allowed for new and unexpected findings to emerge through the inductive process (Charmaz, 2014; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). One unexpected finding that was generally consistent across study participants was the presence of role residual. This finding emerged from the life history interviewing strategy employed by the first author. Interviews were structured in a way that first asked about participants’ earliest memories and then progressed in a chronological order. Individuals were asked to describe events and conditions such as family characteristics and dynamics, school performance and attitudes, reasons for joining and leaving the gang, and experiences in the time following gang membership. Life history interviewing is a comprehensive data collection technique that is commonly used to study members of deviant and criminal groups (e.g., Bubolz & Lee, 2019; Bubolz & Simi, 2015, 2019; A. Campbell, 1984; Fleisher, 2000; Gilfus, 1992; Giordano, 2010; Shaw, 1930, 1931; Shover, 1996; Simi et al., 2013, 2016; Vigil, 1988; Whyte, 1943).

Interviews lasted approximately 2.5 hr, but some participants allowed for interviews and observations that spanned an entire day and on multiple occasions. Although 30 study participants were included in the sample, there were a total of 58 unique interview sessions. A total of 28 follow-up interviews were conducted across 18 members of the sample. Specifically, 11 participants had 1 follow-up interview, 5 participants had 2 follow-up interviews, 1 participant had 3 follow-up interviews, and 1 participant had 4 follow-up interviews. Interviews were tape recorded, transcribed, and later analyzed.

In addition to life history interviews, there were numerous situations that allowed for an ethnographic approach to data collection. In these situations, observation notes were captured and later analyzed. Notes were taken after interviews to contextualize interactions between the first author and participants. These notes included details about the location of the interview; various interactions between the author, the participant, and other individuals (e.g., family members); and details regarding the participants themselves (e.g., attire, demeanor, and initial impressions of the interview).

Both authors engaged in hand coding of the interview transcripts. In addition to hand coding, we organized the frequencies of emergent themes using Microsoft Excel. Furthermore, through Microsoft Excel, we created cross-matrices to examine the convergence of multiple types of role residual examined in this study. Coded responses stemmed primarily from the following questions: (a) Do you currently have any preferences for things that remind you of gang life? (b) Do you currently avoid wearing any certain colors, symbols, or things that were once associated with rival gangs? (c) Do you still behave the same way and do the same things as current gang members? (d) Do you think your gang involvement itself has had any sort of long-term effects on you? These questions were structured in a way to isolate the occurrence of role residual directly to one’s former gang identity and not to preferences that existed prior to involvement. As such, all frequencies reported in this study reflect participant responses that directly attributed their role residual to their prior gang involvement. This strict standard was enforced, resulting in the exclusion of two participants, given that their responses described preferences for aspects of the gang identity that existed prior to joining.

There were no specific parameters for what guided the types of role residual we expected to find. As such, the differentiations discussed in the results emerged naturally through the course of the analytic process. During analysis, we discovered that three types of role residual existed among participants—symbolic, demeanor, and worldview. First, symbolic role residual referred to ongoing self-presentations associated with their former gang identity. This included color preferences and certain sports apparel and logos. Second, residual demeanor reflected behavioral manifestations of one’s former gang identity, including aggressive and violent posturing. Third, residual worldview referred to a continued predilection for the gang’s codes and values. For the current study, these three categories were treated as mutually exclusive; however, participants often reported more than one type of role residual. Furthermore, we considered a participant’s acknowledgment of role residual as a valid measure of its existence, regardless of whether it was observed by the first author during the interview.

In addition to the aforementioned types of role residual, we also made a conceptual distinction between passive and strategic role residual. The former referred to role residual that manifested in an unintentional way and emerged, given its lingering importance for one’s self-concept. As such, passive role residual occurred without a specified outcome in mind and was not situationally conditioned. In contrast, unlike previous conceptualizations of role residual as a passive occurrence (Ebaugh, 1988; Simi et al., 2017), strategic role residual is a purposeful, intentional, and executed use of one’s former identity to achieve a specific outcome. Moreover, this type of role residual appeared more situationally based (i.e., utilized to fend off victimization or gain access to current members) than its passive counterpart. This distinction was not grounded in the existing literature, but rather was developed from the authors’ interpretation of the data as it emerged during analysis. To be sure of these conceptual categories, both authors engaged in reflexive discussion to validate findings and achieve intercoder reliability (J. L. Campbell et al., 2013).

With regard to racial and ethnic composition, the sample comprised 20 African Americans, 6 Hispanics or Latinos, 1 Caucasian, and 3 individuals who described themselves as having multiple races and ethnicities. There were 29 males and 1 female in the sample who represented a history of involvement with 23 different gangs in the city of interest. While active, 18 individuals described themselves as having high status (original gangsters, shot-callers, or veteranos), whereas the remaining 12 participants described themselves as regular members without a leadership role in their respective gangs. The median age across study participants was 35 years—the youngest was 22 and the oldest was 55 years of age. A total of 17 participants indicated they were single, separated, or divorced and 13 individuals were married. At the time of the interview, 23 were employed in various professions, including the food industry, skilled trades, and social service and government agencies. Members of the sample left their respective gangs for a variety of reasons, and many cited numerous and equally influential events that culminated in their final decision to leave. Commonly cited reasons for leaving included parenthood, spirituality, and violence and victimization; however, the reason most frequently reported was disloyalty and lack of social support among gang peers. Specifically, a total of 12 individuals (40%) reported substantial interpersonal conflict in the gang or a lack of support in the time following victimization or incarceration.

Results

Of the 30 study participants, a total of 25 individuals (83%) described experiencing some type of role residual that they attributed directly back to their former gang identity. At the time of the interview, these individuals had left their gang for an average of approximately 10 years. As previously stated, these types of role residual included a preference for symbols, demeanor, and worldview that were indicative of their prior gang identity. To reiterate, role residual was also found to be passive or strategically enacted. Of the three categories of residual identified (symbols, demeanor, worldview), 17 participants indicated they had two or three of these residual preferences, whereas 8 individuals reported maintaining only a single dimension of role residual. In addition, 12 participants described using role residual in a strategic manner, whereas 13 participants described a passive occurrence of residual that manifested across one or more categories (i.e., symbols, demeanor, worldview). Across the entire sample, 10 participants described maintaining both strategic and passive forms of role residual.

Symbolic Residual

Symbols are central to human life, are imbued with meaning (Blumer, 1986; Mead, 1934), and serve as a mechanism for organizing collective identity and identification (Fine & Kleinman, 1979). This is especially true of gangs, where symbols and colors (e.g., tilted hats, sports apparel, pitchforks) hold a central importance to the gang identity and distinguishes them from other groups (Brotherton & Barrios, 2004; Decker & Van Winkle, 1996; Sheldon et al., 2013). As such, the difficulty in abandoning this aspect of the gang is not inconceivable. Moreover, the continued expression of symbols among former gang members is not inconsequential, as these modes of self-presentation can solicit harassment and discrimination from law enforcement and community members (Lee & Bubolz, 2020). Given the resilience of this quality of gang membership, it was not surprising that a total of 21 participants indicated an ongoing preference for symbols associated with their former gang. Moreover, we found that symbolic role residual was primarily a passive enactment and emerged as a personal preference for colors and symbols, not as a strategy for achieving a particular goal. Of the 21 participants, a total of 19 individuals articulated a passive form of symbolic residual. Interestingly, some participants arrived to the interview wearing clothing such as red or blue T-shirts or pants, baseball hats with gang symbols embroidered on the front, and bracelets woven in a specific color pattern associated with their former gang. The following individual named Marvin identified with the Michigan Wolverines and the colors blue, gold, and yellow. Rather than knifing off his past (Caspi & Moffitt, 1993), he continued to embrace certain colors associated with his former gang.

. . . gold and yellow, still love them. Love them, because that’s in my blood. When I get cut, blue, gold, and yellow comes out of my veins. It’s not that red stuff that probably come out of your veins. Blue, gold and yellow come out of here. (Marvin, January 30, 2013, 15 years since gang exit)

Marvin joined his gang at the age of 15 years and remained a member until he was shot by a rival gang member at the age of 19 years while attending a party. The gunshot wound caused partial asphyxia to the brain and resulted in complete paralysis below the waist, brain damage, and a partial loss of vision. At the time of the interview, Marvin had been out of the gang for approximately 15 years and required in-home nurses to take care of daily responsibilities (e.g., cooking, cleaning). In addition, Marvin’s gang peers raided his home while he was recovering in the hospital. When he recovered, the items were never returned. It was this disloyalty that pushed him toward leaving; however, Marvin continued to express love and admiration for the colors reflective of his former gang.

Similarly, Jerome maintained a residual preference for colors associated with his gang even though he acknowledged the team itself was not very accomplished: “Well, like we wore Toronto Maple Leaves clothes so like for some reason, I still buy that shit. They’re like a terrible fucking hockey team . . . never ever play good at all . . .” (Jerome, December 10, 2012, 15 years since gang exit). In addition to wearing Toronto Maple Leaves apparel, Jerome also arrived to the interview wearing a baseball cap with a large letter “M” embroidered on the front. This is an important observation because his former gang identified with this letter. It also confirmed the symbolic role residual described in the interview.

Of the 21 participants who indicated a symbolic role residual, two individuals expressed a strategic and purposeful use of symbols from their former gang. Jackson joined his gang at the age of 11 years and remained a member until he was 29 years. He decided to leave his gang after feeling abandoned by his gang peers during his incarceration. Interestingly, when he arrived to the interview, Jackson was wearing his former gang’s colors—he had on a white T-shirt and black jeans and wore a white and black cotton woven wristband.

I just like black and white . . . I mean, if I can wear black jeans, I wear black jeans, you know. White shirts, I like wearing white shirts with black jeans or the opposite . . . maybe to a certain extent I could still feel like I’m still that tough guy, that macho guy, that guy from Fremont Street (gang name) but I don’t have to display those colors and represent it in that aspect . . . there’s maybe a little bit of power there still. (Jackson, August 30, 2013, 6 years since gang exit)

Leaving the gang can feel isolating for many individuals. As described by Jackson, this appears particularly true for those who leave gangs that exude power and fear. Jackson maintained an ongoing preference for the colors white and black in part because it provided him a sense of power during a time when he might have otherwise felt vulnerable and isolated. As such, he relied strategically on the continued display of these colors to regain a sense of toughness.

Although symbolic role residual can be strategically utilized to achieve self-empowerment, it can also be used to prevent victimization. This was the case for Marcus, who joined his gang when he was only 11 years old and left at the age of 18 years after becoming a father. During the interview, he explained that as an active member, he would strategically wear neutral colors to avoid violent victimization.

You never wore blue because it identified you as a Crip. If you walk somewhere else they’re gonna know he’s a Crip, let’s shoot him. Everybody down here is mostly Blood so you never wore red or blue, most of us wore black. That’s probably why I still wear black today because I just wore it so much but um black t-shirts, black Dickies, um and uh if you saw me driving by you would throw the hood up. (Marcus, February 2, 2012, 3 years since gang exit)

Marcus’ strategic use of neutral colors helped him to keep a low profile after leaving the gang. Interestingly, Marcus grew up and continued to live in a predominantly Blood neighborhood that frequently experienced gun violence. As such, not wearing red or blue clothing was a necessary strategy to avoid victimization from both residents and gang rivals. However, black was not the only color that would have been perceived as neutral. Marcus had the option of wearing a variety of other colors to avoid victimization (e.g., yellow, green, white), yet he continued to wear exclusively black after leaving his gang.

Residual Demeanor

Demeanor that demonstrates toughness is an important expectation of the gang identity (Densley, 2012; Deuchar & Weide, 2019; Horowitz, 1983; W. B. Miller, 1958). In fact, gang behaviors often revolve around status, masculinity, and aggression (Deuchar & Weide, 2019; Fleisher, 2000). Failure to demonstrate this tough exterior can invite trouble, victimization, and a perception of illegitimacy (Lauger, 2012). Even relatively small transgressions such as staring at someone too long can be interpreted as a challenge and thus necessitate a violent response (Horowitz, 1983). Given the centrality of an aggressive and tough demeanor to the gang identity, residual demeanor was also common among the sample. Specifically, a total of 14 individuals continued to exhibit demeanor consistent with their former gang. Importantly, they directly attributed these behaviors to their former gang identity as opposed to other causes. Of the 14 individuals who described residual demeanor, a total of 6 participants expressed a passive enactment of such behaviors as it remained a core component of their overall sense of self. For example, Jerome joined his gang when he was 17 years old and became the leader before leaving at the age of 23 years. He had been out of the gang for 15 years at the time of the interview but continued to display anger and aggression that he linked directly back to his former gang life.

. . . I think that I obviously don’t have a normal way of dealing with stuff when I’m angry, so it’s caused some obvious anger issues . . . The smallest [thing] that could take place, can turn into something a little out of control faster than it’s supposed to . . . It’s some weird thing where you just demand respect from somebody or something. It could be a simple issue where the person you’re dealing with doesn’t even know you or who you are. Sometimes it’s like it just gets a little bit out of control because of the anger issues and stuff. (Jerome, June, 9, 2011, 15 years since gang exit)

Demanding respect is crucial among gang members and others who have become accustomed to life in impoverished communities; however, this aspect of the gang identity is not well received in mainstream society. At the time of the interview, Jerome was aware of his anger issues and was seeking treatment from a therapist.

Similarly, Johnny also continued to exhibit an aggressive demeanor and a desire to dominate people and social situations. While an active gang member, Johnny had a long history of predatory violence. In fact, he has been incarcerated several times in his life, first at the age of 16 years for kidnapping, robbery, use of a firearm, and the use of a knife in the commission of a felony. Violence was a routine part of Johnny’s gang life and contributed heavily to his aggressive demeanor, which he continued to display even after leaving his gang. Interestingly, others in his social environment have also acknowledged his residual demeanor.

. . . other people tell me, they point out things about me and stuff indicating that yeah, you still have some lingering issues and stuff still sticking around from my gang days or whatever. I don’t know I guess the way I talk, the way I conduct myself with other guys, I’m very aggressive . . . I have to be the leader. I ain’t no follower. I have to dominate situations on them so it’s like things like that . . . (Johnny, October 11, 2013, 18 years since gang exit)

In addition to passive forms of residual demeanor, eight participants described a strategic and goal-oriented use of this role residual. Specifically, some individuals stated that when they felt threatened or wanted to seek revenge for a wrongdoing, they would draw from their former gang identity. For example, Vaughn joined his gang at the age of 13 years and remained a member until he was 21 years old. When discussing his violent tendencies as a gang member, Vaughn stated, “I’d go and retaliate for whatever reason or just go shoot them for the hell of it, just because I was beefing with you.” He described difficulties adjusting to life outside the gang and the residual demeanor that persisted namely as a strategy to deal with other people.

I was still struggling and the first thing I’d do if somebody pissed me off, I’m about to blow your fucking head off . . . because it’s a lifestyle that I was in for so long that I was trying to get accustomed to being a civilian. I would be more cautious of who I was around and what I was doing because any little thing could trigger and set you off. Every gang member’s on edge, always at all times. You can go in a room and wake up a gang member and see if they jump up and if they don’t swing at you, they got something in their hands . . . (Vaughn, February 16, 2013, 13 years since gang exit)

For Erving and Benjamin, their residual demeanor was situational and surfaced when they felt threatened. For instance, although looking at someone the wrong way is a minor transgression when compared with more direct forms of ridicule or physical victimization, Erving interpreted these minor acts as a sign of disrespect that required a violent response. Moreover, Benjamin described the strategic use of his residual demeanor during incidents of violent victimization. He indicated that he was willing to become violent and fight in the same fashion as when he was an active member of his gang. In this way, Benjamin was able to harness his residual demeanor as a means of protection during threatening situations.

If I feel disrespected, honestly yeah, probably and I think that’s from the . . . that’s probably the only thing that I still have from the gang life. If I’m at a bar or something and somebody just kind of looks at me the wrong way, I’m just like, what are you looking at? I’ve been in fights up at La Taqueria too. (Erving, March 26, 2013, 6 years since gang exit)

That’s one thing right now that, I went back to that gang mentality . . . we were walking down the street when they robbed us. They put a gun and kicked my face in, ripped open my mouth, so yes . . . That’s sometimes where my mentality comes back. Where I can’t escape. I try to be a bigger man, but if I do ever see these guys I’m going to do crazy stuff . . . It’s like something you’ve got to handle . . . One thing about me that hasn’t changed, I’m not looking out for fights, I’m not looking for fights, I avoid them but if you want to get down and you want to fight then I won’t have a problem with it . . . if he has a grudge and he wants to do something I might still get my feet wet. (Benjamin, February 1, 2013, 5 years since gang exit).

Much like Benjamin, Carter discussed the strategic use of his residual demeanor to avoid violent confrontations; however, he also described strategically drawing on his residual demeanor as a means for accessing current gang members. At the time of the interview, Carter was informally reaching out to active gang members as a form of street-level gang intervention.

Even myself is out of it, but there’s no way that I could have the access to them without being a part of it. Not active, not doing nothing out here, but if they don’t see me in some type of way, then we could never go in there and talk to them. It’s almost like being in the Marines, the Army, Air-force, Navy . . . There has to be a certain swag or style about me that’s going to come in, something that they’re still able to see, something that’ll keep you safe if me and you went out at night and I walked up and I don’t have to say nothing. Even if we were in L.A., or another city, they’ll be able to see a persona about me that knows, okay, him . . . once you are, you always are. (Carter, July 24, 2013, 14 years gang exit)

Carter’s strategic use of residual demeanor is different because he was intentionally sending signals (his “swag” or “persona”) to would-be aggressors that allowed him to remain safe while gaining access to current gang members.

Residual Worldview

Many gangs in the United States have strong ideological roots that focus on improving neighborhoods and ending the plight of minorities (Howell, 2015). Numerous politically oriented gangs formed in the 1960s and 1970s and encouraged racial justice and unity (Diamond, 2009; Howell, 2015). These ideological orientations are passed from one generation of gang members to the next and taught to new recruits. These worldviews provide not only an overarching interpretation of the world but also a justification for its superiority over other sets of beliefs (Jankowski, 1991). Generally, these worldviews are organized around a few core concepts that emphasize community, notably brotherhood, loyalty, and the willingness to fight on behalf of fellow gang peers (Jankowski, 1991; Keiser, 1969; Mitchell et al., 2017). For instance, the Latin Kings maintain what they call the “five points” that include respect, honesty, unity, knowledge, and love for others in the gang (Brotherton & Barrios, 2004).

A total of nine individuals described an ongoing preference for worldviews associated with their former gang. In line with the previous findings, residual worldview was also enacted both passively and strategically. Related to the former, five participants described a passive residual worldview. For example, TJ left the gang but maintained a passive endorsement of his former gang’s belief system.

I hold on to the code a lot. I really hold on to that. I still wouldn’t tell anything. If I was the only witness and I’ve seen it right there in my face, I wouldn’t say nothing . . . I don’t know, I just, I can’t shake it, it was drilled into me. That’s something to live by . . . sticking to that code is just something that’s handy. I would never let that go, you know what I mean. I tell my kids, my nephews; you don’t tell on each other. Even if it’s just taking a cookie out of the cookie jar, you don’t tell on each other. That’s just not acceptable in my life. (TJ, April 6, 2013, 5 years since gang exit)

Although the street code is not used exclusively by gang members (Mitchell et al., 2017), TJ maintained an allegiance to the code which allowed him to possess certain aspects of his former gang identity and abandon other less desirable attributes. Much like TJ, the following individual also maintained a passive form of gang ideology where he continued to value the brotherhood and loyalty that was represented among members of the gang. Interestingly, it was also the disloyalty among his fellow members that compelled him to leave his gang.

Man, I still love my hood, but what they doing ain’t cool sometimes. I can’t keep being a part of that either. If I do, I may end [up] dead being on somebody t-shirt or something . . . I feel like my hood had a big part in me becoming this person that I’m becoming right now . . . I’ll never be like, fuck my hood. There’s been times where I’m just like I’m going to fuck them up because I was mad at them, but I still got love for them, but at the end of the day, when I get older, it’s not going to mean anything to me. That’s all I want. I want to get to that point where it don’t mean anything to me. (Joe, July 31, 2012, 1 year since gang exit).

In addition to passive forms of residual worldview, there were also four participants who strategically capitalized on these beliefs to achieve a greater goal or purpose. For instance, Drake described the six core values that members of his former gang were expected to follow.

I feel like gangs can be a good thing for the community if the energy is diverted in another direction. I don’t look at them like they are bad . . . I mean, you join a fraternity you always going to be a frat brother . . . like each gang had their own morals and their own rules and stuff and with my gang . . . we got a lot of laws and lot of policies that are good things. If followed they can form you into a great man . . . Some of the things knowledge, wisdom and understanding with the six point star each point from top all the way around love, live, loyalty, knowledge, wisdom, and understanding which are not bad things . . . Like with the Crips, community, revolutionary, inter-party service. Crip gang wasn’t designed to go out and shoot and fight all day . . . In my gang, you’re not supposed to drink, you’re not supposed to do anything addictive . . . You’re supposed to get into politics, you’re supposed to study things, you’re supposed to get knowledge. I don’t even know who came up with gang banging. You bang, then you’re doing all the opposite of what you’re supposed to do. You’re shooting, you’re fighting, and all of this other stuff. (Drake, August 2, 2012, 4 years since gang exit)

Despite Drake’s former gang identity, he believed that gangs could be transformed into a positive source of change for the community. In fact, Drake and his brother started a street-level outreach group designed to help individuals desist from the criminal behaviors associated with gangs. Drake’s ongoing predilection for the positive and ideal aspects of his gang remained with him even though he had been out for 4 years. Much like Drake, Owen was also involved in street-level gang interventions and believed he could harness the positive aspects of the gang as a tool for change.

It was more community, to help better our community . . . more aspects like the Black Panthers so to speak. More around in that type of community, be like the Black Panthers, be all you can be . . . feed, mental food, nourishment, whole nine, protect the community. It’s always been like that man so, so I asked myself what happened to the vision? . . . I’ve been doing this shit when I was a kid man. And to say fuck the Crips, I can’t just say fuck you all, I gotta try to figure out a way to fix it. You see what I’m saying, I can’t just say fuck you all because that’s what everybody else is doing. So if I just say man I’m not dealing with you suckers no more, we gonna have another generation of assholes, so I’m just trying to figure out a way of how can we change how they think . . . just trying to find a positive side of that man, cause it wasn’t built like that and I tell people that now today. (Owen, June 26, 2012, 11 years since gang exit)

Both Drake and Owen continued to believe in the positive worldviews of their gangs and strongly felt that gangs could be used to effect positive change. Resembling social movements aimed at community change, Drake and Owen strategically utilized the original principles of the gang worldview to inform their approach to street-level gang intervention.

Discussion

Drawing from life history interviews with a sample of 30 former gang members, this study found that role residual was a common experience. In total, 25 participants (83%) indicated role residual related to symbols, demeanor, and worldviews reflective of their former gang. Moreover, we found that within these three types, role residual was enacted passively and strategically. Importantly, the strategic use of role residual is a salient finding as it is distinct from previous research, namely residual found among former violent White supremacists (Simi et al., 2017). One potential reason for these differences is that gang culture may be accepted among a portion of those living in disadvantaged neighborhoods (see Patillo, 1998). Comparatively, outside of much smaller social networks and White separatist communities, it is difficult to find a similar level of social acceptance of right-wing extremists (see Simi & Futrell, 2015).

One interesting aspect concerning role residual is the influence of other contextual factors, namely motives for disengagement. To assess this potential relationship, we cross-examined the relationship between participants’ motives for disengagement and their description of role residual; that is, whether the lack of loyalty and social support, violence and victimization, spiritual awakening, and parenthood was related to a preference for gang symbols, demeanor, and worldview. Interestingly, no discernible relationships emerged among participants who cited role residual (i.e., 25 participants). One possible reason may be that participants are not making a direct association between their motives for leaving and the display of role residual, given that they were asked about these topics at different points in the interview.

However, when examining the negative cases (i.e., the five participants who reported no role residual), one noteworthy finding was apparent. Specifically, of these individuals, a total of four (80%) cited spirituality, or a spiritual awakening, as a primary reason for their gang departure. Although the relationship between spirituality as a motive for leaving and a lack of role residual was not directly examined, one possible reason may account for this observation. Former gang members who report a sense of spiritual calling and devotion are more likely to find the gang lifestyle as incompatible with their newfound identity, given that these two lifestyles may generate a high degree of role conflict (Bubolz, 2014; Stryker & Macke, 1978). For example, gangs encourage violence and retribution, whereas traditional forms of Christianity condone such behaviors and espouse forgiveness. Given this observation, spirituality as a motive for disengagement may provide a buffer against role residual and serve as a particularly powerful force of gang exit.

Drawing from these findings, three avenues for future research should be considered. First, scholars should seek to further analyze the extent to which contextual factors contribute to the existence of role residual. Although motives for disengagement were not found to be related to the type of role residual among the current sample, these relationships may be associated with other factors such as time since gang exit and geographic location. Second, efforts should be made to examine this phenomenon among other deviant groups as well as other racial and ethnic gangs. For example, given the secretive nature of Asian gangs (Choo, 2007; Vigil & Yun, 1990), it is possible that role residual operates differently or less frequently. Moreover, strategic role residual may be less prevalent among White gang members who typically have greater access to legitimate opportunities and social capital. Third, the social acceptance of role residual should be examined. For example, symbolic role residual may elicit discrimination from law enforcement, employers, and community members (Lee & Bubolz, 2020). However, residual worldview may also grant access to certain jobs in disadvantaged neighborhoods (e.g., gang interventionist). Nonetheless, it is possible that the continued display of role residual can engender a mixed or confused understanding of an individual’s gang involvement (Densley & Pyrooz, 2019).

Despite the interesting findings from this study, there are two limitations that warrant discussion. First, participant’s acknowledgment of role residual was taken as a valid measurement, regardless of whether it was observed by the interviewer. As such, even those participants who did not come dressed in gang-related attire (e.g., colors), act in a way consistent with gang demeanor (e.g., aggressive), or express gang worldviews, but stated they did so in the interview were included in the total frequencies reported. As noted in the methodology, the questions used to capture responses for analysis were structured so that participants had to directly attribute their role residual to their former gang identity. This ensured a high level of confidence about the validity of these responses. Second, the sample lacked racial and gender diversity. The majority of participants were males who identified as either African Americans or Hispanic/Latino. While efforts were made to include additional females and a more racially and ethnically diverse sample composition, these attempts were largely unsuccessful. Difficulty recruiting a more diverse sample was attributed to a saturation of social network chains and outright refusals for interviews. In addition, the majority of gatekeepers were primarily African American males, and therefore, the majority of participants came from this demographic. Given this limitation, the generalizability of these findings to former gang members in other contexts is unknown.

Despite these limitations, our findings offer a level of caution regarding gang databases, namely the inclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria often involve nonweighted indicators of gang membership that are subjective including associating with known gang members, dressing like a gang member, using gang signs, possessing gang paraphernalia, and having gang tattoos (Barrows & Huff, 2009; Leyton, 2003). While it may appear that former gang members who display role residual are not functionally different from current gang members, empirical research suggests otherwise—former gang members are less likely to engage in violence and have less contact with the gang (Decker, Pyrooz, Sweeten, & Moule, 2014). As such, law enforcement needs to be cautious when determining the membership status of these individuals and including them in gang databases. Being in a gang database may not only increase harassment from law enforcement and discrimination in housing and employment markets but also lead to the wrongful application of gang enhancement statutes, the denial of bail, and targeted law enforcement efforts (Leyton, 2003). Indeed, the continued targeting of these individuals may encourage a return to active gang involvement (Decker, Pyrooz, Sweeten, & Moule, 2014). Although many jurisdictions are required to review and purge gang databases after a specified number of years (typically 3–5 years; Barrows & Huff, 2009), role residual displayed by former gang members may be enough to justify their continued inclusion by law enforcement officials. Indeed, continued adornment of gang colors can elicit discriminatory police contact (Lee & Bubolz, 2020; Leyton, 2003). In addition, once placed on a gang database, trivial activities that are not gang related may be sufficient evidence to justify ongoing inclusion. For example, in their gang assessment, Simi and Hoffman (2012, p. 11) found

that a person on the gang list could have his or her clock restarted [requiring an additional 3-5 years on the gang database] for something as trivial as a traffic stop in which this person is riding in a car with a childhood friend who happens to be a gang member.

This may be particularly common, given that once individuals have left their gang, the departure may not become known to law enforcement.

Moreover, if stigma results from being placed in a gang database, former gang members may experience greater levels of negative psychological functioning, social withdrawal, and other mental health concerns as suggested by studies on inmate populations (Moore et al., 2016; Moore & Tangney, 2017). Law enforcement should be concerned as these risk factors are also related to criminal involvement (Johnson et al., 2018; Mallett et al., 2009; Siennick, 2007).

Given the potential repercussions with wrongful inclusion in a gang database, we propose that a weighted classification system be utilized. While gang databases are important investigative tools, many of these systems do not weigh the inclusion criterion differently, but instead rely on meeting a set number of indicators (see Barrows & Huff, 2009). While this system has merit, we believe it can be improved, given that not all indicators hold equal and valid bearing regarding one’s current gang involvement. Our findings suggest that the display of gang symbols and colors is a poor indicator of actual gang involvement, given the prevalence of symbolic role residual. As such, a style of dress that contains gang symbols or colors should not be weighted as equally as self-nomination for determining active gang membership. While the logistics behind a weighted classification system is beyond the scope of this article (e.g., allocation of points, specific inclusion criteria), we strongly believe that this system would more accurately identify current members and, thus, reduce the potential harm caused to former gang members who have been wrongly identified and subjected to stigma and discrimination (Lee & Bubolz, 2020). In the case of mistaken inclusion, legal recourse should be an option so that former gang members can appeal their placement and have their name removed from the database (Leyton, 2003). This is an especially important concern for former gang members who exhibit passive forms of role residual related to symbolic and worldview preferences, that is, those individuals who appear involved in a gang (i.e., dressed like a gang member), but do not display violent or aggressive behaviors.

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Bryan F. Bubolz

Bryan F. Bubolz is an assistant professor of criminal justice at Northern Michigan University. His research focuses on identity, gangs, violent extremism, and disengagement.

Sou Lee is an assistant professor of sociology and criminology at Gonzaga University. His research focuses on identity mechanisms, street gangs (with an emphasis on Asian street gangs), and prison gangs in the Philippines.

References

Alonso

A. A.

(2004). Racialized identities and the formation of black gangs in Los Angeles. Urban Geography, 25(7), 658–674.

Anderson

T. L.

Bondi

(1998). Exiting the drug-addict role: Variations by race and gender. Symbolic Interaction, 21(2), 155–174.

Barrows

Huff

C. R.

(2009). Gangs and public policy: Constructing and deconstructing gang databases. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(4), 675–703.

Becker

H. S.

(1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. Free Press.

Blumer

(1986). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. University of California Press.

Brotherton

Barrios

(2004). The almighty Latin king and queen nation: Street politics and the transformation of a New York City gang. Columbia University Press.

Bubolz

B. F.

(2014). Once a gang member always a gang member? A life history study of gang desistance (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska at Omaha). Available from. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3633798)

Bubolz

B. F.

Lee

(2019). Putting in work: The application of identity theory to gang violence and commitment. Deviant Behavior, 40(6), 690–702.

Bubolz

B. F.

Simi

(2015). Disillusionment and change: A cognitive-emotional theory of gang exit. Deviant Behavior, 36(4), 330–345.

10.

Bubolz

B. F.

Simi

(2019). The problem of overgeneralization: The case of mental health problems and U.S. violent white supremacists. American Behavioral Scientist. doi.org/10.1177/0002764219831746

11.

Burke

P. J.

Reitzes

D. C.

(1991). An identity theory approach to commitment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54(3), 239–251.

12.

Campbell

(1984). The girls in the gang: A report from New York City. Oxford University Press.

13.

Campbell

J. L.

Quincy

Osserman

Pedersen

O. K.

(2013). Coding in-depth semi-structured interviews: Problems of unitization and inter-coder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods and Research, 42(3), 294–320.

14.

Caspi

Moffitt

T. E.

(1993). When do individual differences matter? A paradoxical theory of personality coherence. Psychological Inquiry, 4(4), 247–271.

15.

Charmaz

(2014). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. SAGE.

16.

Choo

K. S.

(2007). Gangs and immigrant youth. LFB Scholarly.

17.

Cohen

A. K.

(1990). Forward and overview. In Huff

C. R.

(Ed.), Gangs in America (1st ed., pp. 7–21). SAGE.

18.

Cureton

S. R.

(2009). Something wicked this way comes: A historical account of black gangsterism offers wisdom and warning for African American leadership. Journal of Black Studies, 40(2), 347–361.

19.

Curry

G. D.

Decker

S. H.

Pyrooz

D. C.

(2014). Confronting gangs: Crime and community. Oxford University Press.

20.

Decker

S. H.

(1996). Collective and normative features of gang violence. Justice Quarterly, 13(2), 243–264.

21.

Decker

S. H.

Lauritsen

(2002). Leaving the gang. In Huff

C. R.

(Ed.), Gangs in America (3rd ed., pp. 51–67). SAGE.

22.

Decker

S. H.

Pyrooz

D. C.

Moule

R. K.

(2014). Disengagement from gangs as role transitions. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 24(2), 268–283.

23.

Decker

S. H.

Pyrooz

D. C.

Sweeten

Moule

R. K.

(2014). Validating self-nomination in gang research: Assessing differences in gang embeddedness across non-, current, and former gang members. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30(4), 577–598.

24.

Decker

S. H.

Van Winkle

B. V.

(1996). Life in the gang: Family, friends, and violence. Cambridge University Press.

25.

Densley

J. A.

(2012). Street gang recruitment: Signaling, screening, and selection. Social Problems, 59(3), 301–321.

26.

Densley

J. A.

Pyrooz

D. C.

(2019). A signaling perspective on disengagement from gangs. Justice Quarterly, 36(1), 31–58.

27.

Descormiers

Corrado

R. R.

(2016). The right to belong: Individual motives and youth gang initiation rites. Deviant Behavior, 37(11), 1341–1359.

28.

Deuchar

Weide

R. D.

(2019). Journeys in gang masculinity: Insights from international case studies of interventions. Deviant Behavior, 40(7), 851–865.

29.

Diamond

A. J.

(2009). Mean streets: Chicago youths and the everyday struggle for empowerment in the multiracial city, 1908-1969. University of California Press.

30.

Drahota

J. A. T.

Eitzen

D. S.

(2004). The role exit of professional athletes. Sociology of Sport Journal, 15(3), 263–278.

31.

Ebaugh

H. R. F.

(1988). Becoming an ex: The process of role exit. The University of Chicago Press.

32.

Erikson

E. H.

(1977). Childhood and society. Paladin Books.

33.

Esbensen

F. A.

Winfree

L. T.

Taylor

T. J.

(2001). Youth gang definitional issues: When is a gang a gang, and why does it matter? Crime & Delinquency, 47(1), 105–130.

34.

Fine

G. A.

Kleinman

(1979). Rethinking subculture: An interactionist analysis. American Journal of Sociology, 85(1), 1–20.

35.

Fleisher

M. S.

(2000). Dead end kids: Gang girls and the boys they know. University of Wisconsin Press.

36.

Gilfus

(1992). From victims to survivors to offenders: Women’s routes of entry and immersion into street crime. Women & Criminal Justice, 4(1), 63–89.

37.

Giordano

P. C.

(2010). Legacies of crime: A follow-up of the children of highly delinquent boys and girls. Cambridge University Press.

38.

Glaser

Strauss

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.

39.

Harris

A. A.

Prentice

M. K.

(2004). The role exit process of community college faculty: A study of faculty retirement. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 28(9), 729–743.

40.

Heimer

Matsueda

R. L.

(1994). Role-taking, role commitment, and delinquency: A theory of differential social control. American Sociological Review, 59(3), 365–390.

41.

Horowitz

(1983). Honor and the American dream. Rutgers University Press.

42.

Howell

J. C.

(2012). Gangs in America’s communities. SAGE.

43.

Howell

J. C.

(2015). The history of street gangs in the United States: Their origins and transformation. Lexington Books.

44.

Hughes

L. A.

Short

J. F.

(2005). Disputes involving youth street gang members: Micro-social contexts. Criminology, 43(1), 43–76.

45.

Jankowski

M. S.

(1991). Islands in the street: Gangs and American urban society. University of California Press.

46.

Johnson

B. R.

Pagano

M. E.

Lee

M. T.

Post

S. G.

(2018). Alone on the inside: The impact of social isolation and helping others on AOD use and criminal activity. Youth and Society, 50(4), 529–550.

47.

Keiser

R. L.

(1969). The vice lords: Warriors of the street. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

48.

Klein

M. W.

(2007). Chasing after street gangs: A forty-year journey. Pearson Education.

49.

Lauger

T. R.

(2012). Real gangstas: Legitimacy, reputation, and violence in the intergang environment. Rutgers University Press.

50.

Lee

Bubolz

B. F.

(2020). The gang member stands out: Stigma as a residual consequence of gang involvement. Criminal Justice Review, 45(1), 64–83.

51.

Leverso

Matsueda

R. L.

(2019). Gang organization and gang identity: An investigation of enduring gang membership. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 35, 797–829.

52.

Leyton

(2003). The new blacklists: The threat to civil liberties posed by gang databases. In Hawkins

D.F.

Meyers

S. L.

Stone

R. N.

(Eds.), Crime control and social justice: The delicate balance (pp. 109–172). Greenwood Publishing Group.

53.

Mallett

C. A.

Dare

P. S.

Seck

(2009). Predicting juvenile delinquency: The nexus of childhood maltreatment, depression and bipolar disorder. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 19, 235–246.

54.

Mead

G. H.

(1934). Mind, self, and society. University of Chicago Press.

55.

Miller

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

56.

Miller

W. B.

(1958). Lower class culture as a generating milieu of gang delinquency. Journal of Social Issues, 14(3), 5–19.

57.

Mitchell

M. M.

Fahmy

Pyrooz

D. C.

Decker

S. H.

(2017). Criminal crews, codes, and contexts: Differences and similarities across the code of the street, convict code, street gangs, and prison gangs. Deviant Behavior, 38(10), 1197–1222.

58.

Moore

K. E.

Stuewig

J. B.

Tangney

J. P.

(2016). The effect of stigma on criminal offenders’ functioning: A longitudinal mediational model. Deviant Behavior, 37(2), 196–218.

59.

Moore

K. E.

Tangney

J. P.

(2017). Managing the concealable stigma of criminal justice system involvement: A longitudinal examination of anticipated stigma, social withdrawal, and post-release adjustment. Journal of Social Issues, 73(2), 322–340.

60.

Patillo

M. E.

(1998). Sweet mothers and gangbangers: Managing crime in a black middle-class neighborhood. Social Forces, 76(3), 747–774.

61.

Pyrooz

D. C.

Decker

S. H.

(2011). Motives and methods for leaving the gang: Understanding the process of gang desistance. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(5), 417–425.

62.

Pyrooz

D. C.

Decker

S. H.

Webb

V. J.

(2014). The ties that bind: Desistance from gangs. Crime & Delinquency, 60(4), 491–516.

63.

Rosen

J. D.

Cruz

J. M.

(2018). Overcoming stigma and discrimination: Challenges for reinsertion of gang members in developing countries. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(15), 4758–4775.

64.

Shaw

C. R.

(1930). The jack-roller: A delinquent boy’s own story. University of Chicago Press.

65.

Shaw

C. R.

(1931). The natural history of a delinquent career. University of Chicago Press.

66.

Sheldon

R. G.

Tracy

S. K.

Brown

W. B.

(2013). Youth gangs in American society (4th Ed.). Wadsworth/Thomson.

67.

Short

Strodtbeck

(1965). Group processes and gang delinquency. University of Chicago Press.

68.

Shover

(1996). Great pretenders: Pursuits and careers of persistent thieves. Westview Press.

69.

Siennick

S.E.

(2007). The timing and mechanisms of the offending-depression link. Criminology, 45(3), 583–615.

70.

Simi

Blee

DeMichele

Windisch

(2017). Addicted to hate: Identity residual among former white supremacists. American Sociological Review, 82(6), 1167–1187.

71.

Simi

Bubolz

B. F.

Hardman

(2013). Military experience, identity discrepancies, and far right terrorism: An exploratory analysis. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 36(8), 654–671.

72.

Simi

Futrell

(2015). American swastika: Inside the white power movement’s hidden spaces of hate (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.

73.

Simi

Futrell

Bubolz

B. F.

(2016). Parenting as activism: Identity alignment and activist persistence in the white power movement. The Sociological Quarterly, 57(3), 491–519.

74.

Simi

Hoffman

(2012). 2011—2012 Omaha gang assessment. University of Nebraska at Omaha School of Criminology and Criminal Justice.

75.

Stretesky

P. B.

Pogrebin

M. R.

(2007). Gang-related gun violence: Socialization, identity, and self. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 36(1), 85–114.

76.

Stryker

Macke

A. S.

(1978). Status inconsistency and role conflict. Annual Review of Sociology, 4, 57–90.

77.

Tannenbaum

(1938). Crime and the community. Columbia University Press

78.

Thrasher

F. M.

(1927). The gang: A study of 1,313 gangs in Chicago. University of Chicago Press.

79.

Vigil

J. D.

(1988). Barrio gangs: Street life and identity in Southern California. University of Texas Press.

80.

Vigil

J. D.

Yun

S. C.

(1990). Vietnamese youth gangs in Southern California. In Huff

C.R.

(ed.), Gangs in America (pp. 146–162). SAGE.

81.

Whyte

W. F.

(1943). Street corner society: The social structure of an Italian slum. University of Chicago Press.