Investigating Sex-Related Moderation Effects and Mediation Effects of Self-Control on Delinquency Among Portuguese Youth

Abstract

Self-control refers to the ability to override impulses and behave in accordance with societal norms. Deficits in self-control are strongly associated with conduct problems, externalizing disorders, crime, and violence. The main aim of the present study is to investigate possible moderation and mediation effects related to self-control. A school sample of male (n = 257, M = 15.97 years, SD = .98 years) and female (n = 213, M = 15.79 years, SD = 1.03 years) youth from Portugal agreed to participate. Moderation analysis revealed that sex moderates the relationship between self-control and aggression, conduct disorder symptoms, and self-reported delinquency. Mediation analysis revealed that self-control mediates the relations between both triarchic psychopathic traits and dark triad traits, and the self-reported juvenile delinquency outcome. The findings suggest that self-control exerts significant effects on the criminal/antisocial-related variables examined among Portuguese youth.

Keywords

delinquency dark triad mediation moderation psychopathy self-control

Introduction

Self-control is one of the most important constructs in the social and behavioral sciences due to the essential roles that emotional and behavioral regulation plays in behavioral functioning. Whereas those with moderate to high self-control are more likely to benefit from greater socioeconomic status, higher achievement, more harmonious relationships, better psychiatric and physical health and broad prosocial conduct (Clinkinbeard et al., 2018; DeLisi, 2013; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Mischel et al., 1989; Tangney et al., 2004), those with significant deficits in self-control are more likely to suffer from aversive and challenging relationships, reduced socioeconomic status and less wealth, more psychiatric and medical problems, substance use, and involvement in numerous forms of antisocial behavior (Beaver et al., 2009; Caspi et al., 2016; DeLisi, 2011; Moffitt et al., 2011; Venables et al., 2018; Zemel et al., 2018). Several systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and monographs (e.g., de Ridder et al., 2012; Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; Hay & Meldrum, 2015; Tehrani & Yamini, 2020; Vazsonyi et al., 2017; Walters, 2016) support the critical role of self-control in understanding conduct problems, delinquency, violence, and related maladaptive behaviors.

Moderation and Mediation Mechanisms, Sex, and Self-Control

While the main effects of self-control on antisocial behavior are unequivocal, there is less clarity about mediation and moderation relationships between self-control, allied psychological constructs, and deviant behavior. This is especially true in regard to sex as a moderator between self-control and antisocial conduct where there are competing viewpoints about the role of sex vis-à-vis self-regulation and offending.

In their influential theory, Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) argued that all criminal behavior can be easily explained by the levels of self-control, and that the influence of self-control is invariant across different age, ethnicity/race, and gender groups. More specifically, the authors postulated that self-control was associated with imprudent and antisocial behaviors and this effect was similar in magnitude among female and male offenders. Due to the powerful and cross-situational effects of self-control on conduct problems, it was believed that self-control would transcend any developmental differences that exist across sex. Moreover, the sex gap in delinquency is mainly accounted for substantial differences across sex in self-control. According to Gottfredson and Hirschi, (1990, p. 149, italics in original), “It seems to us to follow that the impact of gender on crime is largely a result of crime differences and differences in self-control that are not produced by direct external control.”

Empirical research supports Gottfredson and Hirschi’s contentions. To illustrate, Muftić and Updegrove (2018) examined linkages between self-control and delinquency among more than 35,000 adolescents selected from 31 nations from the International Self-Report Delinquenc 2 Study. They found the associations between parenting problems, self-control and delinquency operated similarly for females and males. However, males had significantly lower levels of self-control and commensurately higher delinquent involvement than females. Overall support for the generality of the influence of the self-control among males and females is evident for offending (cf., Burton et al., 1998; Higgins, 2004; Ivert et al., 2018; Jo, 2015; Keane et al., 1993; Rima et al., 2019) and victimization (cf., Boccio & Beaver, 2020; Rima et al., 2019; Turanovic et al., 2015).

However, some conflicting evidence was also found. For instance, de Ridder et al. (2012) reported a greater relationship between self-control and undesirable behaviors for males than for females. Shekarkhar and Gibson (2011) found that low self-control predicted violent offending for males and females separately, but it predicted property offending only for males whereas DeLisi et al. (2010) showed that self-control only can predict male misconduct but is unrelated to institutional misconduct among females. Thus there is discordant evidence about the interrelations between sex, self-control, and various forms of offending, and relatively consistent evidence that sex moderates the association between self-control and deviance.

In terms of mediation, self-control is such a formidable empirical construct that it potentially mediates the associations between other criminological risk factors and involvement in crime (Alvarez-Rivera, 2016; Fix et al., 2018; Janssen et al., 2016; Li et al., 2013; Schwartz et al., 2017; Xie et al., 2020). Prior research has shown that self-control mediates the association between psychopathy and various forms of serious delinquency and violence. For instance, a recent study of institutionalized delinquents reported that self-control was more consistently associated with delinquent outcomes than psychopathy, and even reduced psychopathy from significance in some models (DeLisi et al., 2018). In their study of 585 male delinquents from China, Xie et al. (2020) examined the associations between childhood maltreatment and delinquency and found that both self-control and callous-unemotional traits mediated the association between maltreatment and delinquency.

This speaks to broader questions about the associations between self-control, sex, and antisocial conduct amid other cognate psychological features, including psychopathy and other personality facets related to the “dark core” of personality (Moshagen et al., 2018), that have significant linkages with antisocial conduct. This is especially true for more recent and promising approaches to these constructs, such as the triarchic model of psychopathy (Paiva et al., 2020) and the dark triad (Flexon et al., 2016). Considerably more work is needed to fully understand these more recent approaches, especially how well they translate into criminal/forensic-related practice (Pechorro, Quintas, et al., 2020). A possible explanation for the disparate findings in the self-control literature regarding sex and deviance outcomes likely relates to self-control being highly correlated with other forms of psychopathology.

Current Study

Prior research revealed multitudinous evidence of sex moderation and mediation between self-control and other antisocial features in the prediction of crime. Additional research is needed among different cultures/ethnicities to examine whether and to what degree sex moderates the effects of self-control on criminal/antisocial-related variables and to examine whether and to what degree self-control mediates the relations between such variables and juvenile delinquency. As far as we are aware the current study is the first to investigate possible sex-related moderation effects and mediation effects of self-control on delinquency among southern-European youth, more specifically male and female Portuguese youth. We hypothesize that: (a) sex moderates the relationship between self-control and aggression, conduct disorder symptoms, and juvenile delinquency; and (b) self-control mediates the relations between both triarchic psychopathic traits and dark triad traits, and the self-reported juvenile delinquency outcome.

Method

Participants

A sample of 470 school youth (M = 15.89 years, SD = 1.00 years, age range = 14–18 years), subdivided into males (n = 257, M = 15.97 years, SD = .98 years, age range = 14–18 years) and females (n = 213, M = 15.79 years, SD = 1.03 years, age range = 14–18 years) participated in the study. The participants were mostly Portuguese nationals (88.3%) coming from an urban background that completed 9 years of education on average (M = 8.96, SD = .95). No significant differences were found between the female and male youth with regard to age (F = 7.786, p = .052), years of education (F = .534, p = .47, and socioeconomic status (U = 26336, p = .45).

Measures

The Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS; Tangney et al., 2004) is a brief self-report measure of self-control. Subsequently created from the original Self-Control Scale (SCS), the BSCS is a 13-item unidimensional measure of self-control that taps the same range of content as the SCS by including items from the original five factors. After reversing the appropriate items (e.g., 1. “I have a hard time breaking bad habits”; 2. “I am lazy”; 3. “I say inappropriate things”), the total score can be obtained by adding the items rated on a 5-point scale, anchored from 1 = Not at all like me, to 5 = Very much like me. Higher scores reflect higher levels of self-control. The Portuguese version of the BSCS was used in the current study (Pechorro, DeLisi, et al., 2021). The internal consistency for the current study was BSCS total = .94.

The Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory—Triarchic—Short (YPI-Tri-S; Pechorro, DeLisi, et al., 2019) is a 21-item brief measure with a distinct relevance to constructs of the Triarchic model of psychopathy (Patrick et al., 2009). The YPI-Tri-S consists of three scales with seven items each, namely: Boldness (e.g., “I like to do things just for the thrill of it.”), Disinhibition (e.g., “It often happens that I talk first and think later.”), and Meanness (e.g., “When other people have problems, it is often their own fault, therefore, one should not help them.”). Each item is scored on an ordinal 4-point Likert scale (ranging from 0 = Does not apply at all, to 3 = Applies very well). Scores for each seven-item group are summed to create the three subscales of the YPI-Tri-S and a total score can also be used. Higher scores reflect an increased presence of triarchic psychopathic-like traits. The recent validation of the YPI-Tri-S in China found support for the utility of the YPI-Tri-S in assessing psychopathy among Chinese male juvenile offenders (Luo et al., 2020). The internal consistency for the current study, estimated by Cronbach’s alpha, was: TPI-Tri-S total = .95, Boldness = .83, Disinhibition = .87, and Meanness = .91.

The Dirty Dozen (DD; Jonason & Webster, 2010) is a short 12-item measure of the Dark Triad construct of personality, describing a cluster of independent but related undesirable personality traits commonly associated with socially malevolent character and nefarious behaviors (e.g., manipulation, self-promotion). The DD is composed of Machiavellianism (e.g., 1. “I tend to manipulate others to get my way”), Psychopathy (6. “I tend to be unconcerned with the morality of my actions”), and Narcissism (12. “I tend to expect special favors from others”) factors. The DD is scored by adding the items of each of the three factors on an ordinal Likert scale (ranging from Strongly Disagree, to Strongly Agree), and a total score can also be used. Higher scores indicate higher levels of dark triad traits of personality. The Portuguese version of the DD, especially adapted to be used with the adolescent population, was used in the current study (Pechorro, Jonason, et al., 2019) with a 5-point ordinal scale. The internal consistency for the current study was DD total = .93, Machiavellianism = .86, Psychopathy = .94, and Narcissism = .86.

The Peer Conflict Scale-20 (PCS-20; Marsee et al., 2011) is a brief version of the original PCS. The PCS-20 consists of four subscales that assess forms and functions of aggression. Proactive aggression contains five proactive relational items (e.g., “I gossip about others to become popular.”) and five proactive overt items (e.g., “I start fights to get what I want”), reactive aggression contains five reactive relational items (e.g., “If others make me mad, I tell their secrets”) and five reactive overt items (e.g., “When someone hurts me, I end up getting into a fight.”). Responses are made along a 4-point Likert ordinal scale (0 = Not at all true, 1 = Somewhat true, 2 = Very true, 3 = Definitely true). Scores are summed to create the four subscales. Previous studies found that the PCS-20 total score and its subscales have good internal consistency (e.g., Scott et al., 2014). The Portuguese version of the PCS-20 was used in the current study (Pechorro et al., 2018). The internal consistency for the current study, estimated by Cronbach’s alpha, was: PCS-20 total = .96, Reactive Relational = .82, Proactive Relational = .87, Reactive Overt = .95, and Proactive Overt = .95.

The Add Health Self-Report Delinquency (AHSRD) is a self-report measure that was created for the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) (Udry, 2003). The 17-item version has two factors: nonviolent delinquency (ten items; e.g., 1. “Paint graffiti or signs on someone else’s property or in a public place,” 7. “Sell marijuana or other drugs”) and violent delinquency (seven items; e.g., 11. “Get into a serious physical fight,” 16. “Shot or stabbed someone”), occurring during the last 12 months before the assessment. For both factors, the items range from low to high seriousness. The AHSRD is scored by adding the items of the two factors on a 4-point ordinal scale (ranging from 0 = None, to 3 = Five or more times), and the total score can also be used. Higher scores indicate higher levels of self-reported delinquency. The Portuguese version of the AHSRD was used in the current study (Pechorro, Moreira, et al., 2019). The internal consistency for the current study was AHSRD total = .97, Nonviolent = .93, and Violent = .97.

The Conduct Disorder Screener of the Oregon Adolescent Depression Project (CDS; Lewinsohn et al., 2000) is a brief self-report screener created to identify adolescents with conduct disorder and predict future cases of antisocial personality disorder in young adulthood. The CDS consists of 6 items representative of a diagnosis of Conduct Disorder according to the DSM-IV (APA, 1994). It includes items such as “I broke rules at school,” “I got into fights,” “I got in trouble for lying or stealing.” The CDS can be scored by adding the six items on a 4-point ordinal Likert scale (ranging from 1 = Rarely or none of the time, to 4 = Most or all of the time). Higher scores indicate higher levels of conduct disorder. The Portuguese version of the CDS was used in the current study (Palma et al., submitted). The internal consistency for the current study was CDS total = .85.

A demographics questionnaire was constructed in order to describe the participants’ sociodemographic characteristics, including sex, age, nationality, education, and parents’ socioeconomic status (SES; estimated by considering the parents’ level of education and respective professional activities, following the social context in Portugal).

Procedures

The General Directorate of Education of the Portuguese Ministry of Education (DGE-ME) authorized the assessment of participants from public schools (i.e., State schools) of the Lisbon, Alentejo, and Algarve regions of southern Portugal. This was a convenience sample not originally intended to be representative of the national student population. However, the sample purposely contained male and female youth from urban (the city of Lisbon), and rural backgrounds (Alentejo and Algarve regions) to make it more diverse. Parental authorization was obtained according to the DGE-ME ethics committee guidelines. Participants from five schools were asked to voluntarily collaborate after being informed about the nature of the present study. Some youth did not agree to participate or were not able to participate (e.g., some youth did not want to participate, some youth were not given permission from their respective legal tutors). The participation rate was 92%. No monetary compensation or other form of compensation was given. Small group settings were used to administer the different measures included in the present study.

IBM SPSS Statistics v26 (IBM Corp, 2019) and PROCESS macro for SPSS v3.3 (Hayes, 2017) were used to analyze the data. PROCESS macro’s Model 1 was used to test for moderation: X is the independent variable, Y is the dependent variable, and W is the moderator. PROCESS macro’s Model 4 was used to test for mediation: X is the independent variable, Y is the dependent variable, and M is the mediator; the paths from X → M (path a), M → Y (path b), and X → Y (path c) were also examined. We used the scales’ scores as manifest variables to use PROCESS, although the variables of our study are latent. Since the reliability of the measures is quite high, underestimation of the regression coefficients by using PROCESS as compared to SEM is meaningless (Marôco, 2014). Variables were standardized before being used to test for moderation and mediation. Pearson correlations were used to analyze associations between the variables, being considered low if below .20, moderate if between .20 and .50, and high if above .50 (Ferguson, 2009). Cronbach’s alpha was used to estimate the reliability of the measures (Field, 2013).

Results

We began our analysis by examining the correlations between the main variables used in the present investigation (ranging from −.78 to .87). Table 1 shows that the intercorrelations among the variables were in the expected directions. Self-control presented negative significant correlations with the rest of the variables (the strongest correlation was with the Psychopathy factor of the Dirty Dozen). VIF values were examined and were not considered problematic because the values were below the 10 cutoff rule-of-thumb (O’Brien, 2007).

Table 1.

Pearson Correlation Matrix of the Main Variables.

	BSCS	Boldness YPI-Tri-S	Disinhibition YPI-Tri-S	Meanness YPI-Tri-S	Machiavellianism DD	Psychopathy DD	Narcissism DD	PCS-20	CDS	AHSRD
BSCS	1
Boldness	−.73***	1
Disinhibition	−.74***	.84***	1
Meanness	−.77***	.81***	.85***	1
Machiavellianism	−.69***	.70***	.75***	.72***	1
Psychopathy	−.78***	.77***	.81***	.87***	.72***	1
Narcissism	−.45***	.52***	.56***	.51***	.58***	.54***	1
PCS-20	−.62***	.60***	.63***	.62***	.59***	.63***	.53***	1
CDS	−.71***	.71***	.73***	.74***	.65***	.77***	.51***	.70***	1
AHSRD	−.69***	.69***	.70***	.72***	.61***	.76***	.49***	.75***	.82***	1

Note. BSCS = Brief Self-Control Scale; YPI-Tri-S = Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory—Triarchic—Short; DD = Dirty Dozen; PCS-20 = Brief Peer Conflict Scale; CDS = Conduct Disorder Screener; AHSRD = Add Health Self-Report Delinquency.

***

p < .001.

Next, we examined statistical moderation hypothesis. We aimed to ascertain if sex (coded male = 0, female = 1) moderates the relationship between self-control (predictor) and outcomes such as aggression (PCS-20), conduct disorder symptoms (CDS), and self-reported delinquency (AHSRD). The following results were obtained: aggression (F = 100.42, p < .001, R² = .39), conduct disorder symptoms (F = 175.43, p < .001, R² = .53), and self-reported delinquency (F = 174.17, p < .001, R² = .53). Table 2 summarizes the interactions (between self-control and sex) and conditional effects of self-control (BSCS) at values of the moderator (sex) when the interaction was significant.

Table 2.

Interactions and Conditional Effects of the Self-Control (BSCS) Predictor at Values of the Moderator (Sex).

	b	SE	95% CI	t	p value
PCS-20
BSCS	−.68	.04	−.77, −.59	−15.26	<.001
Sex	−.10	.07	−.24, .04	−1.36	.172
Interaction	.24	.07	.09, .40	3.15	.002
Male	−.68	.04	−.77, −.59	−15.26	<.001
Female	−.44	.06	−.56, −.31	−6.82	<.001
CDS
BSCS	−.79	.03	−.86, −.71	−19.94	<.001
Sex	−.20	.06	−.33, −.07	−3.08	.002
Interaction	.30	.06	.16, .43	4.38	<.001
Male	−.79	.03	−.86, −.71	−19.94	<.001
Female	−.48	.05	−.59, −.37	−8.60	<.001
AHSRD
BSCS	−.80	.03	−.88, −.72	−20.25	<.001
Sex	−.33	.06	−.46, −.20	−5.10	<.001
Interaction	.47	.06	.34, .61	6.89	<.001
Male	−.80	.03	−.88, −.72	−20.25	<.001
Female	−.32	.05	−.43, −.21	−5.75	<.001

Note. BSCS = Brief Self-Control Scale; PCS-20 = Brief Peer Conflict Scale; CDS = Conduct Disorder Screener; AHSRD = Add Health Self-Report Delinquency.

We then examined statistical mediation hypothesis. First, we aimed to analyze whether self-control mediates the relationship between the triarchic psychopathic traits factors predictors (.i.e., boldness, disinhibition, and meanness) and the self-reported delinquency outcome. The following results were obtained: boldness (F = 520.73, p < .001, R² = .53, β path a = −.73***; F = 274.65, p < .001, R² = .54, β path b = −.38***, β path c = .41***), disinhibition (F = 517.59, p < .001, R² = .53, β path a = −.73***; F = 290.77, p < .001, R² = .56, β path b = −.36***, β path c = .45***), and meanness (F = 630.06, p < .001, R² = .57, β path a = −.76***; F = 293.95, p < .001, R² = .56, β path b = −.32***, β path c = .48***). Presented in Table 3 are the total, direct and indirect effects for each model.

Table 3.

Total, Direct and Indirect Effects for Each Model using Self-Control (BSCS) as the Mediator and Triarchic Psychopathic Traits as Predictors (YPI-Tri-S).

	b	SE	95% CI	t	p value
Boldness
Total	.69	.03	.62, .75	20.46	<.001
Direct	.41	.05	.32, .50	9.03	<.001
Indirect	.28	.03	.22, .34
Disinhibition
Total	.70	.03	.64, .77	21.39	<.001
Direct	.45	.05	.36, .53	9.93	<.001
Indirect	.26	.03	.21, .31
Meanness
Total	.72	.03	.65, .78	22.26	<.001
Direct	.48	.05	.38, .57	10.11	<.001
Indirect	.24	.03	.18, .30

Note. BSCS = Brief Self-Control Scale; YPI-Tri-S = Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory—Triarchic—Short.

Finally, we examined whether self-control mediates the relationship between the dark triad traits of personality factors predictors (i.e., Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism) and the self-reported delinquency outcome. The following results were obtained: Machiavellianism (F = 417.20, p < .001, R² = .47, β path a = −.69***; F = 230.10, p < .001, R² = .50, β path b = −.50***, β path c = .26***), psychopathy (F = 687.04, p < .001, R² = .60, β path a = −.77***; F = 353.22, p < .001, R² = .60, β path b = −.22***, β path c = .59***), and narcissism (F = 116.94, p < .001, R² = .20, β path a = −.45***; F = 237.64, p < .001, R² = .50, β path b = −.57***, β path c = .23***). Presented in Table 4 are the total, direct and indirect effects for each model.

Table 4.

Total, Direct, and Indirect Effects for Each Model using Self-Control (BSCS) as the Mediator and Dark Triad Traits as Predictors (DD).

	b	SE	95% CI	t	p value
Machiavellianism
Total	.61	.04	.53, .68	16.43	<.001
Direct	.26	.05	.18, .35	5.83	<.001
Indirect	.34	.03	.29, .40
Psychopathy
Total	.76	.03	.70, .82	25.52	<.001
Direct	.59	.05	.50, .68	12.89	<.001
Indirect	.17	.03	.11, .23
Narcissism
Total	.49	.04	.41, .57	12.19	<.001
Direct	.23	.04	.16, .31	6.43	<.001
Indirect	.26	.02	.21, .31

Note. BSCS = Brief Self-Control Scale; DD = Dirty Dozen.

Discussion

The primary aim of the present study was to investigate possible sex-related moderation effects and mediation effects of self-control on delinquency among southern-European youth. Our results among Portuguese youth do corroborate previous findings that the influence of self-control among male and female youth is significant for offending (e.g., Gibson et al., 2010; Higgins, 2004; Ivert et al., 2018; Morris et al., 2007; Vazsonyi & Belliston, 2007; Vazsonyi et al., 2001), supporting Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) argument that self-control theory is cross-cultural/national, that is, invariant across different ethnicity/race. However, its effect among youth is not similar in magnitude across sex, contrary to Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990, p. 148) argument that “variables related to differences in criminality among boys are the same as those for girls.”

Findings regarding the bivariate associations of the variables used in the present study indicated that self-control as measured by the BSCS was particularly strongly negatively correlated with the psychopathy factor of the dark triad and with the boldness, disinhibition, and meanness factors of the triarchic model of psychopathy. Such associations are suggestive of the strong role that self-control can play in counteracting the psychopathic personality traits-antisocial/criminal outcomes link (e.g., Connolly et al., 2017; Corrado et al., 2015; Pechorro et al., 2014).

Addressing our first hypothesis, findings revealed that sex does indeed moderate the relationship between self-control and aggression, conduct disorder symptoms, and self-reported juvenile delinquency. Males demonstrated a stronger association between self-control and aggression, conduct disorder symptoms, and juvenile delinquency. Our results are consistent with the results of previous investigations that found that low self-control and delinquency differed between males and females (Gibbs et al., 1998; Higgins & Tewksbury, 2006; Jo & Zhang, 2014; LaGrange & Silverman, 1999).

Regarding our second hypothesis, findings revealed that self-control does mediate the relations between triarchic psychopathic traits, dark triad traits, and the self-reported juvenile delinquency outcome. This is in line with previous research (e.g., DeLisi et al., 2018) and both supports and conflicts with other recent research (e.g., Xie et al., 2020) indicating the important role that self-control plays in mediating the associations between psychopathy and various forms of delinquency and antisocial conduct. For example, different levels of self-control can decrease or increase the antisocial tendencies that characterize psychopathic and other “dark traits” of personality making these individuals “successful” or “unsuccessful” (Lasko & Chester, in press).

We suspect that whether self-control mediates the effects of other dark personality features on delinquency depends in large part on the overall antisociality and age of the sample (Billen et al., 2019; Chan, 2019; DeLisi et al., 2018). In the current study, the participants are students in Portugal for whom the various problematic self-regulation features are more salient than psychopathic features for understanding delinquency. The participants are also young and the deleterious influence of low self-control is potentially more habituated and intact compared to psychopathic features which have historically been studied among adults (Hare, 1993). In contrast, more behaviorally severe samples, such as adult homicide offenders, likely similarly present impairments in self-regulation and pronounced psychopathic features, but the remorseless, calculating, and impulsive features of psychopathy likely play a greater role in their offending than mundane self-control deficits. There is no question that self-control and dark personality features are germane to the study of crime, but additional research using diverse data sources of varying criminality are needed to fully articulate to what degree self-control and psychopathy matter for understanding offending outcomes.

We must mention some relevant limitations of our study. Because we only used self-report measures our results might be affected by a common method or shared variance bias. Additionally, because our study was correlational we did not experimentally investigate the real causal relationships between variables. Another important limitation was that our investigation was conducted among a school sample that does not allow us to generalize our findings to other kinds of samples such as at-risk for delinquency youth or justice-involved youth. Future studies should be conducted among forensic samples (e.g., detained male and female youth). Of course, it is important to note that the primacy of self-control over psychopathy is consistent with research that did examine justice-system involved juveniles (DeLisi et al., 2018).

Conclusion

A central goal in criminology is to produce findings that can inform early intervention and preventive strategies among male and female youth that can deter future delinquent and antisocial behavior. One of the central targets in the intervention literature is self-control, a construct that has been shown to be modifiable to produce significant improvements in behavior (Hay & Meldrum, 2015; Piquero et al., 2016). We hope our study contributes to incentivize further research on the self-control construct among southern-European youth to forestall the development of conduct problems and related social problems.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Pedro Pechorro is also affiliated with University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was partially conducted at the Psychology Research Center (PSI/01662), School of Psychology, University of Minho, and supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology and the Portuguese Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education (UID/PSI/01662/2019), through national funds (PIDDAC).

ORCID iDs

Pedro Pechorro

Matt DeLisi

References

Alvarez-Rivera

L. L.

(2016). Maternal attachment, self-control, and offending among college students. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 14(1), 58–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377938.2015.1052171

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.) (DSM-IV). American Psychiatric Association.

Beaver

K. M.

DeLisi

Mears

D. P.

Stewart

(2009). Low self-control and contact with the criminal justice system in a nationally representative sample of males. Justice Quarterly, 26, 695–715. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820802593352

Billen

Garofalo

Vermunt

J. K.

Bogaerts

(2019). Trajectories of self-control in a forensic psychiatric sample: Stability and association with psychopathology, criminal history, and recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(9), 1255–1275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854819856051

Boccio

C. M.

Beaver

K. M.

(2020). Low self-control, victimization, and financial hardship: Does low self-control moderate the relationship between strain and criminal involvement? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20909211

Burton

Cullen

Evans

Alarid

Dunaway

(1998). Gender, self-control, and crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35, 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427898035002001

Caspi

Houts

R. M.

Belsky

D. W.

Harrington

Hogan

Ramrakha

Poulton

Moffitt

T. E.

(2016). Childhood forecasting of a small segment of the population with large economic burden. Nature Human Behaviour, 1, 0005. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0005

Chan

H. C.

(2019). Violent offending, nonviolent offending, and general delinquency: Exploring the criminogenic risk factors of Hong Kong male and female adolescents. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19881917

Clinkinbeard

S. S.

Barnum

T. C.

Rhodes

T. N.

(2018). The other side of the coin: Exploring the effects of adolescent delinquency on young adult self-control. Journal of Criminal Justice, 56, 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.08.001

10.

Connolly

Al-Ghamdi

Kobeisy

Alqurashi

Schwartz

Beaver

(2017). Identifying latent classes of antisocial behavior among youth from Saudi Arabia: An assessment of the co-occurrence between aggression, psychopathy, low self-control, and delinquent behavior. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 15, 219–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204016639349

11.

Corrado

McCuish

Hart

DeLisi

(2015). The role of psychopathic traits and developmental risk factors on offending trajectories from early adolescence to adulthood: A prospective study of incarcerated youth. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43, 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crimjus.2015.04.007

12.

de Ridder

D. T. D.

Lensvelt-Mulders

Finkenauer

Stok

F. M.

Baumeister

R. F

. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 76–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311418749

13.

DeLisi

(2011). Self-control theory: The tyrannosaurus rex of criminology is poised to devour criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 103–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crimjus.2011.02.012

14.

DeLisi

(2013). Pandora’s box: The consequences of low self-control into adulthood. In Gibson

Krohn

M. D.

(Eds.), Handbook of life-course criminology: Emerging trends and directions for future research (pp. 261–273). Springer.

15.

DeLisi

Beaver

Vaughn

Trulson

Kosloski

Drury

Wright

(2010). Personality, gender, and self-control theory revisited: Results from a sample of institutionalized juvenile delinquents. Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice, 6, 31–46.

16.

DeLisi

Tostlebe

Burgason

Heirigs

Vaughn

(2018). Self-control versus psychopathy: A head-to-head test of general theories of antisociality. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 16(1), 53–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204016682998

17.

Duckworth

A. L.

Seligman

M. E.

(2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01641.x

18.

Ferguson

(2009). An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 532–538. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015808

19.

Field

(2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Sage.

20.

Fix

R. L.

Alexander

A. A.

Burkhart

B. R.

(2018). From family violence exposure to violent offending: Examining effects of race and mental health in a moderated mediation model among confined male juveniles. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(9), 2567–2585. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x17731101

21.

Flexon

J. L.

Meldrum

R. C.

Young

J. T.

Lehmann

P. S.

(2016). Low self-control and the Dark Triad: Disentangling the predictive power of personality traits on young adult substance use, offending and victimization. Journal of Criminal Justice, 46, 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.05.006

22.

Gibbs

J. J.

Giever

Martin

J. S.

(1998). Parental management and self-control: An empirical test of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 35, 40–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427898035001002

23.

Gibson

C. L.

Ward

J. T.

Wright

J. P.

Beaver

K. M.

DeLisi

(2010). Where does gender fit in the measurement of self-control? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 883–903. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810369082

24.

Gottfredson

Hirschi

(1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press.

25.

Hare

R. D.

(1993). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. The Guilford Press.

26.

Hay

Meldrum

(2015). Self-control and crime over the life course. Sage.

27.

Hayes

(2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

28.

Higgins

G. E.

(2004). Can low self-control help with the understanding of the software piracy problem? Deviant Behavior, 26(1), 1–24.

29.

Higgins

G. E.

Tewksbury

(2006). Sex and self-control theory: The measures and causal model may be different. Youth & Society, 37, 479–503. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X05283423

30.

IBM Corp. (2019). IBM SPSS statistics for windows (version 26). IBM Corp.

31.

Ivert

A-K.

Andersson

Svensson

Pauwels

Levander

(2018). An examination of the interaction between morality and self-control in offending: A study of differences between girls and boys. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 28, 282–294. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2065

32.

Janssen

H. J.

Eichelsheim

V. I.

Deković

Bruinsma

G. J.

(2016). How is parenting related to adolescent delinquency? A between-and within-person analysis of the mediating role of self-control, delinquent attitudes, peer delinquency, and time spent in criminogenic settings. European Journal of Criminology, 13(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370815608881

33.

(2015). Stability of self-control: Hirschi’s redefined self-control. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x13501839

34.

Zhang

(2014). Parenting, self-control, and delinquency: Examining the applicability of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime to South Korean youth. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58(11), 1340–1363. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X13494670

35.

Jonason

P. K.

Webster

G. D.

(2010). The Dirty Dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 22, 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019265

36.

Keane

Maxim

Teevan

(1993). Drinking and driving, self-control, and gender: Testing a general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 30–46.

37.

LaGrange

T. C.

Silverman

R. A.

(1999). Low self-control and opportunity: Testing the general theory of gender differences in delinquency. Criminology, 37, 41–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1999.tb00479.x

38.

Lasko

Chester

(in press). What makes a successful psychopath? Longitudinal trajectories of offenders antisocial behavior and impulse control as a function of psychopathy. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research and Treatment. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/rjg3q

39.

Lewinsohn

P. M.

Rohde

Farrington

D. P.

(2000). The OADP-CDS: A brief screener for adolescent condut disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 888–895. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200007000-00018

40.

Wang

Zhao

Bao

Wen

(2013). School connectedness and problematic Internet use in adolescents: A moderated mediation model of deviant peer affiliation and self-control. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41, 1231–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-013-9761-9

41.

Luo

Wang

M.-C.

Zhang

Deng

Huang

Zhou

(2020). Psychometric properties of the youth psychopathic traits inventory triarchic scales and its short version in Chinese male juvenile offenders. Journal of Personality Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2020.1752700

42.

Marôco

(2014). Análise de Equações Estruturais: Fundamentos teóricos, software & aplicações [Structural Equations Analysis: Theoretical foundations, software and applications]. Pero Pinheiro: Report Number, Lda.

43.

Marsee

M. A.

Barry

C. T.

Childs

K. K.

Frick

P. J.

Kimonis

E. R.

Muñoz

L. C.

Lau

K. S.

(2011). Assessing the forms and functions of aggression using self-report: Factor structure and invariance of the Peer Conflict Scale in youths. Psychological Assessment, 23, 792–804. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023369

44.

Mischel

Shoda

Rodriguez

M. I.

(1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244(4907), 933–938. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2658056

45.

Moffitt

T. E.

Arseneault

Belsky

Dickson

Hancox

R. J.

Harrington

Houts

Poulton

Roberts

B. W.

Ross

Sears

M. R.

Thomson

W. M.

Caspi

(2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(7), 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108

46.

Morris

G. D.

Wood

P. B.

Dunaway

R. G.

(2007). Testing the cultural invariance of parenting and self-control as predictors of American Indian delinquency. Western Criminology Review, 8, 32–47.

47.

Moshagen

Hilbig

Zettler

(2018). The dark core of personality. Psychological Review, 125, 656–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000111

48.

Muftić

L. R.

Updegrove

A. H.

(2018). The mediating effect of self-control on parenting and delinquency: A gendered approach with a multinational sample. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(10), 3058–3076. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x17725732

49.

O’Brien

(2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41, 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6

50.

Paiva

T. O.

Pasion

Patrick

C. J.

Moreira

Almeida

P. R.

Barbosa

(2020). Further evaluation of the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure: Evidence from community adult and prisoner samples from Portugal. Psychological Assessment, 32(3), e1–e14. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000797

51.

Palma

Pechorro

Jesus

Nunes

. (submitted). Psychometric properties of the Conduct Disorder Screener among Portuguese youths.

52.

Patrick

C. J.

Fowles

D. C.

Krueger

R. F.

(2009). Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 913–938. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579409000492

53.

Pechorro

DeLisi

Alberto

Ray

Simões

(2019). The triarchic model of psychopathy among incarcerated male youths: A psychometric study. In DeLisi

(Ed.), Routledge international handbook of psychopathy and crime (pp. 265–275). Routledge.

54.

Pechorro

DeLisi

Gonçalves

Quintas

Palma

(2021). The Brief Self-Control Scale and its refined version among incarcerated and community youths: Psychometrics and measurement invariance. Deviant Behavior, 42(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2019.1684942

55.

Pechorro

Gonçalves

Maroco

Gama

Neves

Nunes

(2014). Juvenile delinquency and psychopathic traits: An empirical study with Portuguese adolescents. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58, 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X12465584

56.

Pechorro

Jonason

Raposo

Maroco

(2019). Dirty Dozen: A concise measure of Dark Triad traits among at-risk youths. Current Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00288-9

57.

Pechorro

Moreira

Basto-Pereira

Oliveira

J. P.

Ray

(2019). The self-report delinquency scale from the national longitudinal study of adolescent to adult health among at-risk for delinquency youths. Violence & Victims, 34(1), 120–135. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-17-00165

58.

Pechorro

Quintas

DeLisi

Gonçalves

(2020). Can the triarchic model of psychopathy predict youth offender recidivism? Psychology, Crime & Law. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2020.1818237

59.

Pechorro

Russell

Ayala-Nunes

Gonçalves

R. A.

Nunes

(2018). The Brief Peer Conflict Scale: Psychometric properties among a sample of incarcerated male juvenile offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62, 2414–2429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X17719299

60.

Piquero

A. R.

Jennings

W. G.

Farrington

D. P.

Diamond

Gonzalez

J. M. R.

(2016). A meta-analysis update on the effectiveness of early self-control improvement programs to improve self-control and reduce delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 12(2), 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9257-z

61.

Rima

Gulnar

Batyrbek

Orynbassar

Beaver

K. M.

(2019). Examining the association between personal victimization in adolescence and intimate partner victimization in adulthood. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63(12), 2171–2193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x19845781

62.

Schwartz

J. A.

Connolly

E. J.

Brauer

J. R.

(2017). Head injuries and changes in delinquency from adolescence to emerging adulthood: The importance of self-control as a mediating influence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(6), 869–901. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427817710287

63.

Scott

B. G.

Lapré

G. E.

Marsee

M. A.

Weems

C. F.

(2014). Aggressive behavior and its associations with posttraumatic stress and academic achievement following a natural disaster. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 43, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.807733

64.

Shekarkhar

Gibson

(2011). Gender, self-control, and offending behaviors among Latino youth. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 27, 63–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986211402224

65.

Tangney

J. P.

Baumeister

R. F.

Boone

A. L.

(2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72, 271–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x

66.

Tehrani

H. D.

Yamini

(2020). Parenting practices, self-control and anti-social behaviors: Meta-analytic structural equation modeling. Journal of Criminal Justice, 68, 101687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crimjus.2020.101687

67.

Turanovic

Reisig

Pratt

(2015). Risky lifestyles, low self-control, and violent victimization across gendered pathways to crime. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 31, 183–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-014-9230-9

68.

Udry

(2003). The national longitudinal study of adolescent health (Add Health), waves I and II, 1994–1996; wave III, 2001–2002. Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

69.

Vazsonyi

A. T.

Belliston

A. M.

(2007). The family → low self-control → deviance: A cross-cultural and cross-national test of self-control theory. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 505–530. https://doi.org//10.1177/0093854806292299

70.

Vazsonyi

A. T.

Mikuška

Kelley

E. L.

(2017). It’s time: A meta-analysis on the self-control-deviance link. Journal of Criminal Justice, 48, 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.10.001

71.

Vazsonyi

A. T.

Pickering

L. E.

Junger

Hessing

(2001). An empirical test of a general theory of crime: A four-nation comparative study of self-control and the prediction of deviance. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 38, 91–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427801038002001

72.

Venables

N. C.

Foell

Yancey

J. R.

Beaver

K. M.

Iacono

W. G.

Patrick

C. J.

(2018). Integrating criminological and mental health perspectives on low self-control: A multi-domain analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 56, 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.10.004

73.

Walters

G. D.

(2016). Are behavioral measures of self-control and the Grasmick self-control scale measuring the same construct? A meta-analysis. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-015-9317-3

74.

Xie

Kou

Yang

(2020). Childhood maltreatment is associated with aggression among male juvenile delinquents in China: The mediating effects of callous-unemotional traits and self-control. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1373. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01373

75.

Zemel

Einat

Ronel

(2018). Criminal spin, self-control, and desistance from crime among juvenile delinquents: Determinism versus free will in a qualitative perspective. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(15), 4739–4757. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x18781208