JDevLifeCourseCriminology(2016)2:442–465 DOI10.1007/s40865-016-0044-3 Parents, Identities, and Trajectories of Antisocial Behavior from Adolescence to Young Adulthood WendiL.Johnson1&PeggyC.Giordano2& MonicaA.Longmore2&WendyD.Manning2 Received:29February2016/Revised:15July2016/Accepted:9September2016/ Publishedonline:12October2016 #SpringerInternationalPublishingAG2016 Abstract Purpose Assessments ofyoungadult well-beingoftenfocus onfamilyformationand employment experiences, and ignore the potentially important, continuing role of parents. We consider whether and how parental influence reaches beyond the adoles- centyears. Methods Drawing on longitudinal data from the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) (N=1242) and multilevel modeling, analyses examine direct and indirect ways that traditional parenting practices, as well as parental histories of problematicbehaviorinfluencetrajectoriesofoffspringantisocialbehavior. Results Parentalantisocialexperiencesinfluencedyoungadultoutcomesandoperated throughyouths’owndevelopingidentities.Youthswhoseparentsscoredhigheronan index of antisocial behavior were more likely to agree with partier and troublemaker labels.Traditionalparentingfactors,suchasparentalsupportandharshparentingalso influenced respondents’ own trajectories of antisocial behavior. Thus, parental influ- ence persisted net of young adult gainful activity (school, employment), parenthood, andintimateinvolvement. Conclusions The results of the current study highlight that parent-child relationships and their association with antisocial behavior remains fluid and dynamic well into adolescence and young adulthood. Parents are also implicated in the adoption of problematic identities which in turn are associated with antisocial behavior. Taken together, greater attention should be given to how parents shape and influence the trajectoriesofbehavioramongtheiradolescentandyoungadultoffspring. * WendiL.Johnson [email protected] 1 DepartmentofSociology,Anthropology,SocialWorkandCriminalJustice,OaklandUniversity, Rochester,MI48302,USA 2 DepartmentofSociology,BowlingGreenStateUniversity,BowlingGreen,OH43403,USA Parents,Identities,andTrajectoriesofAntisocialBehavior 443 Keywords Delinquency.Emergingadulthood.Parenting.Longitudinal Introduction It is well accepted that parents provide a critical foundation for their children’s behavior. Parents who effectively establish a strong bond with their children early in life foster children’s capacities to develop strong, healthy, and prosocial bonds with others across adolescence and into adulthood [13, 30]. In contrast to the prosocial benefits provided by attachment, harsh parenting has been linked to a host of deleterious outcomes including antisocial behavior [62]. Thus, attachment and harsh parenting represent distinct forces (support and coercive control) that exemplify the quality of the parent-child social bond and independently influence antisocialbehavior.Althoughparent-childbondslikelydemonstrateagreatdealof continuity over time, variations in the quality of the parent-child relationship may occur [7]. Erosion or improvement in the parent-child bond, as well as changes overtimeinparentingpracticesthemselvesmaydifferentiallyinfluencethechild’s behavior. Parents’ antisocial histories are also important to consider, and current theoretical treatments have suggested further that traditional parenting measures, such as those described above (e.g., attachment), may condition the effects of parents’ antisocial tendencies on offspring behavior [11]. However, given that identitydevelopmentisakeyadolescentdevelopmentaltask,anotherpossibilityis that parents’ antisocial histories influence identity formation in their offspring, which in turn influences antisocial behavior. In the current study we draw on longitudinal data from the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) to focus on how parental factors influence their chil- dren’s trajectories of antisocial behavior from adolescence through to the less well- researched period of young adulthood. Specifically, we examine the influence of parents’ own early involvement in delinquency, level of attachment to children, and harsh parenting practices on their children’s trajectories of antisocial behavior. We alsoassesswhether parents’ delinquency influencestrajectoriesofantisocial behavior directly or indirectly through identity processes. Parents’ self-reported delinquency during adolescence is assessed at wave 1, while respondents’ reports of attachment, harsh parenting, and their endorsement of specific identities such as “partier” and “troublemaker” are time-varying measures assessed at each of the five waves. Our analyses consider the following: (1) Does parents’ delinquency distinguish between offspring’strajectoriesofantisocialbehavior;(2)Doimprovementsinattachmentand declines in harsh parenting correspond to within-person change in trajectories of antisocial behavior, controlling for unmeasured heterogeneity among youths; and (3) Do parents’ own early involvement in delinquency influence antisocial behavior indirectly through children’s adoption of antisocial identities (troublemaker, partier)? As noted by Loeber and Farrington [39], longitudinal designs offer advantages, such as tracing developmental sequences and examining processes of continuity and discontinuity in deviant behaviors. Furthermore, TARS’ accelerated cohort design is anasset here, in thatitenables ustoexamine the fullspanofadolescence and young adulthood (13–28years ofage)acrossa periodof11 years withonlya fewwaves of data ([59], p. 139). 444 WendiL.Johnsonetal. Background TheParent-ChildBondandAntisocialBehavior Numerousstudieshaveexaminedtheinfluenceofparentsduringearlychildhoodand adolescence on their children’s emotional and behavioral outcomes, including antiso- cial behavior. Particularlynotable within criminology isHirschi’s [30] control theory, whichpositsthatstrongfeelingsofattachmenttoparentscreateameaningfulbondthat the child would not wish to jeopardize by engaging in delinquent or other problem behaviors. Furthermore, the parent-child bond is seen as predictive of the ability to establish attachment to other prosocial relationships (e.g., peers, school, intimate partners) as the child moves into adolescence and young adulthood [14, 26]. Such prosocialrelationshipsareviewedasprotectiveagainstantisocialbehavior. Additionalworkfocusesontheassociationbetweenfamilystructureanddelinquency and suggests that parents’ primary role during adolescence is controlling access to deviantpeernetworksthroughsupervision[5,43].However,DemuthandBrown[18] found thatparenting factors mediate theinfluence offamilystructure ondelinquency, withparentalattachmentoperating asa strongerprotectorthansupervision.Similarly, Warr [67] found that adolescents who are close to parents are less likely to acquire delinquentfriends. Coercive parenting practices are theorized to be associated with increased anti- social behavior in several ways. First, social learning perspectives suggest that parenting practices that include physical punishment may serve as a model for subsequentaggressionin children [16]. Additionally,discipline thatisinconsistent and overly punitive may inhibit parental efforts to instill sufficient self-control thereby compromising efforts to promote conforming and prosocial behaviors [26]. Other theoretical perspectives have highlighted the potential of coercive exchanges to escalate and become entrenched [61], thereby producing negative emotions including anger [3]. In summary, attachment and harsh parenting (i.e., support and coercion) are often viewedascornerstonesofparenting,withattachmentpullingyouthawayfromcrime, and harsh parenting pushing them towards crime [15]. Thus, high levels of support accompanied by low levels of coercion are viewed as the optimal scenario and least likely to be associated with antisocial behavior. There are two limitations to this approach. First, this tradition has focused primarily on parents’ early, formative role, anemphasisthatdoesnottakeintoaccountthedegreetowhichparent-childrelation- ships and parenting practices may change over time. Second, this exclusive focus on support and control fails to account for parents’ own antisocial history, which may directly influence child behavior, and in turn may shape social interactions between parent and child. Such social interactions may either directly or indirectly influence antisocialbehavioramongoffspring[22]. BuildingontheFoundationofEarlyParent-ChildBonds:Parenting andAntisocialBehavioroverTime Although extensive studies have examined crime and delinquency during the adolescent period, considerably less work has focused on the transition from Parents,Identities,andTrajectoriesofAntisocialBehavior 445 adolescence to young adulthood [12]. Thus, there is a need to examine the devel- opmentalpatternsassociatedwiththisperiod,howtheyshapeparent-childinterac- tion,andultimatelyinfluencetrajectoriesofantisocialbehavior.Thedevelopmental tasks associated with early adulthood have typically included completing formal education,launchingacareer,andestablishinganindependentresidenceandfamily of one’s own [54]. Criminology has focused almost exclusively on marriage and employment as positive influences on desistance from crime. Laub and Sampson [35, 36] have argued that the institution of marriage provides informal social controls that promote prosocial behaviors and work against continued adult crim- inality. Specifically, these informal controls provide turning points and work in concert with available social capital to explain declines in criminality that occur withintheadultlifecourse.LaubandSampsonfoundthatassocialcapitalaccrues through investment in prosocial activities and relationships associated with work andmarriage,themoreindividualshavetolosebyengaginginantisocialbehaviors. Thus, the theoretical emphasis is similar to Hirschi’s early depiction of the role of informalsocialcontrol,butthereferentshiftsawayfromearlyfamilialdynamicsto the more adult concerns of marriage and ties to the economic system. Whileacknowledgingthecontributionsofthescholarlyworkdescribedabovetoour understandingofadolescentdelinquencyandoffendingversusdesistanceinadulthood, agapremainswithrespecttoexplainingthemechanismsassociatedwithtransitioning from adolescence to early adulthood and patterns of offending during this stage of the life course. Although criminologists have focused on the benefits of marriage, parenthood,andemploymentaspredictorsofdesistancethroughtheacquisitionof socialcapital,themedianageoffirstmarriageintheUSAis29formenand27for women (United States Census Bureau 2016). Additionally, recent work has highlighted selection processes into marriage suggesting that those with the most resources and least debt are more likely to marry relative to their more socioeco- nomically disadvantaged peers [1, 2]. Thus, marriage as a form of social capital associated with deterrence from crime is not a universally experienced transition eventformanyyoungadults.Evenasmanyyoungpeoplechoosecohabitationasa preludeorreplacementtomarriage,recentworksuggeststhatcohabitationmaynot offer the same protective effects as marriage [55]. Similar to marriage, the age for first birth among mothers in 2013 was 26, representing an all-time national high [44]. Meanwhile, the number of births to teenage mothers has seen a long-term decline over the last seven decades [41]. Consequently, parenthood is an event that is increasingly reserved for later in the life course. Finally, unemployment rates for those aged 20–24 hover around 10 %, with young people of color disproportionately affected (United States Department of Labor 2016). Hamilton and Hamilton [27] note that young people tend to display highratesofmobilityintheiremploymentendeavors,butitisnotclearwhetherthis representsdeliberateexplorationorunintentionalfloundering.Arnett[8]arguesthat employment during adolescence is primarily a means of earning extra money to spend in pursuit of leisure activities, but as young people transition to adulthood, work takes on greater meaning as they consider howit will impact their lives long term. Delays in marriage and childbirth may result in young adults feeling less pressure to commit early to careers, favoring instead an exploration of a variety of 446 WendiL.Johnsonetal. occupational pursuits in an effort to find a good match to their individual interests andskills[9].Consequently,employmentmaynotoperateasasignificantsourceof socialcapitalinwaysthatcharacterizedearliereraswhenthetransitiontoadulthood was more straightforward. The trends outlined above highlight that variations exist in acquiring the social capital associated with traditional sources of informal social control. Against this backdrop, it is intuitive to consider the potential of parents as continuing sources of reference and influence. While the parent-child bond established in early childhood servesasanimportantfoundationalbase,parent-childrelationshipscontinuetodevelop andarealsosubjecttochangeasindividualsmatureintoadulthood[7].Consequently, parentsmayservetofillthegapandcontinuetobeinfluentialasoffspringnavigatethis key and increasingly uncertain transition period. Emotional, identity, and material supportfromparents mayoperate asa specificsetofresourcesthatdecreaseinvolve- ment in antisocial behavior across adolescence and into adulthood. Prior work has arguedthatdelinquencyincreasesinadolescenceasparentalinfluencewanesandpeer influenceincreases[32].However,alessconsiderednotionisthatadditionalchangesin parental influence may affect the nature of the adolescent to adult transition, or that thesevariationsarerelatedtoparents’ownbehavioralbackgroundsororientations. Aquilino’s [7] prospective study showed that while parent-child relationships show some dependence on previous patterns of interaction, they also continue to develop over time. Consistent with developmental theories of individuation, Aquilino argues that parents respond to shifting expectations regarding their off- spring’s need for autonomy and independence. Thus, from this perspective, while parental monitoring of children’s movements and peer relations are paramount during early adolescence, this becomes less salient as children move closer and into young adulthood. Furthermore, consistent with Moffitt’s [47] theorizing of adolescence-limited delinquency, peer influence is likely to wane post-graduation. Whilesomeyouthmaysufferlimitationsintermsofaccessingthetraditionaladult status roles thathelp foster movementawayfrom delinquency,reaching the ageof majority still brings with it increased opportunities and experiences not available during the high-school years [23]. Meanwhile, relationships between parents and their children become more peer-like, defined by mutual respect, affection, and humor[7].Evenamongyouthwhopreviouslyengagedindelinquentbehaviorsand experienced strained relationships with parents during adolescence, adulthood brings greater perspective as youth gain greater appreciation for their parents’ own experiences and the importance of familial ties in general [23]. While prior research has highlighted the importance of harsh parenting as a predictorofantisocialbehavior[51,57],mostoftheresearchhasfocusedonearly childhoodexperienceandhasnotconsideredthepossibilitythatcoerciveparenting maycontinueorabateaschildrenbegintomature.Thisisunfortunatesincethereis evidence to suggest that harsh parenting and its deleterious effects continue into adolescence. Specifically, researchers have found that harsh parenting experienced during adolescence exerts stronger effects on outcomes of delinquency and offendingmeasuredinadolescenceandyoungadulthoodrelativetoharshparenting experienced solely during early childhood [64, 65]. This reinforces the need for examining harsh parenting and its association with antisocial behavior during the developmental periods of adolescence and young adulthood. Parents,Identities,andTrajectoriesofAntisocialBehavior 447 Further, aspreviouslynoted,asoffspring age,moveout ofthe parentalhome, and gainfirsthandexperienceofadultlife,someperspectivemaybegainedthatallowsfora “mellowing”inhowadultchildrenviewchildhoodexperiences,andparentsthemselves [24]. Thus, a direct “hook” for change (e.g., employment, marriage) may not be a prerequisitefordesistancefromantisocialbehavior.Instead,theevolutionoftheparent- childrelationshipitselfmayexertapositiveinfluenceontheindividual’strajectory.As children move through adolescence and into young adulthood, there is increased demand for autonomy and independence from parents. How parents respond tothese shiftsintheparent-childrelationshipwilllargelyinformfuturerelationshipquality[56]. Youthwhohaveexperiencedapatternofnegativeinteractionswithparentsmaydraw ontheirincreasedadultagencytocreatedistancebetweenthemselvesandtheirfamily oforigin(Padilla-Walker etal. 2014).Thismay reduce conflict, but alsomeans there arelikelytobereducedopportunitiesforaccessingparentalsupport. Accordingly, we expect that shifting levels of attachment will be associated with variationsininvolvementinantisocialbehavior,as(1)increasedattachmentreducesthe negativeemotionalitythatmayhavebeenassociatedwithsome“rebellious”acts,and (2) improved relationships (i.e., less harsh parenting) provide a path to tangible and emotionalsupports.Incontrast,parents’continuingorescalatingpatternofrelianceon harshparentinganddeterioratingparent-childrelationshipsmaybeimplicatedintheir children’scontinuedantisocialbehaviorinvolvementacrossthetransitionperiod. Parenting,Identity,andAntisocialBehavior Supportandcontrolareimportantdimensionsofparenting,butsociallearningtheories have also underscored that the parent’s own behavior profile “matters.” Numerous studieshaveshownevidenceofintergenerationalcontinuityinantisocialbehavior,and thus a comprehensive treatment of parenting effects requires attention to the parent’s behavior and orientation [20, 22]. Parents serve as key models, and also continually communicate attitudes and worldviews thatmayincreasethe likelihood thatthe child will exhibit aggressivetendencies or becomeinvolved in other forms of delinquency. Yet situating social learning processes within a symbolic interactionist framework allows for consideration of how parents influence child behavior through processes related to self and identity. This adds an important dimension to a straightforward learning framework, as research has demonstrated that intergenerational continuity is not inevitable [63]. Thus, variations in developing identities are potentially important mediatorsandsourcesofvariation,evenwhereparentalantisocialbehaviorisafeature ofthechild’sbackgroundandexperience. Althoughmodelingandspecific“definitionsfavorabletotheviolationoflaw”may befeaturesofthefamilyenvironment[60,68],andthelearningofdefinitions[28,43], symbolicinteractionismstressesthat(1)learningcontinuesthroughoutthelifecourse, (2) individuals are not passive recipientsofthese experiences and definitions,and (3) over time, identities take shape that give greater coherence to these definitions or alternativelydevelopincontrasttothem[45]. Thus,identitiesmayserveasanimportantmechanismthatlinksparentalinfluence tobehavioraloutcomessuchasantisocialbehavior,orthatanchorapaththatdiverges fromthatoftheparent.Inaddition,consistentwithCooley’s[17]notionofthe“looking glass self,” children who perceive parents as warm and supportive are more likely to 448 WendiL.Johnsonetal. developpositiveviewsofthemselves.Consequently,identitiesshapedthroughparent- child interaction may serve as a cognitive filter as the child encounters contextual changesassociatedwithmovingintonewadultroles.Howanindividual“seesoneself” has the potential to influence not only the adoption and expression of these roles but also receptivity to antisocial companions and opportunities, all of which ultimately provide shape and form to an individual’s trajectory of antisocial behavior over time. Thus, while traditional parenting factors such as closeness, support, and monitoring mayservetoshapechildren’sperceptionsofthemselves,parentsmayinfluenceidentity formationdirectlythroughtheirownbehaviorsthatincludenotonlycoercivepractices butalsotheirantisocialbehaviorprofiles.Forexample,Simonsetal.[58]arguedthat parents are uniquely positioned to influence child attitudes, emotions, and beliefs through both deliberate and unintentional means. They found that parents who are hostile and rejecting, and are antisocial themselves are more likely to have children involvedindelinquentbehavior. Matsueda [42] has argued that parents potentially play a central role in which negativeandpositiveself-attributionsareadoptedbyoffspring.Becauseparentsthem- selvesmayendorseconventionalstereotypesofwhocommitsdeviantacts,parentswho havepasthistoriesofproblematicbehaviormaybemorepronetocommunicatenegative information to offspring relative to more prosocial parents. Such negative infor- mation may not only consist of problematic labels such as the “troublemaker” identity described by Matsueda, but also involve communications that convey the degree of importance that parents assign relationships with their child. Qualitative work by Giordano [22] has highlighted some of these indirect transmission pro- cesses, with parents often unintentionally conveying negative messages to off- spring in an effort to avoid history repeating itself. Unfortunately, irrespective of parents’ best efforts, youth often adopt identities they directly associate with the parents’ own deviant history. This is illustrated in the quote below from a respon- dent in the Giordano study. “‘Causewe’resomuchalike.Idon’tknow.‘CauseI’mexactlyhowshewaswhen she was myage.Partying and…Neither one ofusliked togotoschool. I don’t know.We’rejustexactlythesame.Justthewayweact.[LaVonda]”([22],p.152). Prior work by Matsueda and Heimer [43] has highlighted how identities crafted through social interaction with others, such as that of a troublemaker, are positively associatedwithdelinquentbehaviorandcontributetodelinquencyinvolvement,netof traditional risk factors. However, identities such as “partier” also vary and may influence behavioral trajectories. For example, numerous studies have documented strong connections between crime and substance use, and thus the party orientation, while not specifically criminal, may be linked to increased receptivity to routine activities and affiliations that make delinquency and crime more likely. To date, researchers havenot yet consideredthe role ofparents inrelationto the development of identities such as troublemaker and partier, nor explored the impact of variations over time in adoption of these self-views. Thus, we determine whether parents’ own early antisocial behavior and parenting practices is associated with increases in off- spring’s negative identities and delinquent behavior over time and whether these associationsoperateindirectlythroughidentities. Parents,Identities,andTrajectoriesofAntisocialBehavior 449 TheCurrentStudy This study will build on developmental and life course criminology perspectives to examine the ways that parents shape trajectories of antisocial behavior from adoles- cencetoyoungadulthood.Inthecurrentstudy,weexaminebothbetween-personand within-personvariationsinantisocialbehavior.Thisworkmovesbeyondpriorstudies byfocusingontheantisocialbehaviorofparentsandtheirchildren,butalsoconsiders the pathways through which parents influence their children. We hypothesize the following: (1) the average trajectory among youth whose parents report a history of delinquency during adolescence will be higher than the average trajectory of those youth whose parents do not report any adolescent delinquency; (2) attachment and harsh parenting will not only distinguish between trajectories, but improvements and declinesinthequalityofattachmentandharshparentingwillcorrespondtochangein antisocial behavior trajectories (within-person variation), controlling for unmeasured heterogeneity;and(3)parent’shistoryofadolescentdelinquencywillinfluencetrajec- tories of antisocial behavior indirectly through the child’s adoption of an antisocial identity(troublemaker,partier). Methods We analyze data from the TARS, using self-reports of antisocial behavior from more than 1300 respondents collected at five time points over an 11-year period that spans the life course stages of adolescence and young adulthood. We rely on multilevel models using HLM 7.01 [52] for our analyses. Time-varying parenting variables are drawn from respondents’ self-reports, while time-stable variables, including parents’ early antisocial behavior and some background demographic measures, are drawn from the parent questionnaire administered at the first inter- view (separately from the child interview). Measures relating to identity, changes tosocialcontextassociatedwiththetransitiontoadulthood,andadditionaldemo- graphic measures are from respondents’ self-reported data. Our longitudinal analyses are aimed at tracing the developmental patterns associated with the parent-child relationship and how these are related to patterns of antisocial beha- vior across adolescence and into early adulthood. This will provide additional information on the continuing influence of parents even as new sources of influ- ence enter the picture. TARSData ThisresearchdrawsondatafromtheTARS,whichisbasedonastratifiedrandomsample of1321adolescentsandtheirparents/guardians.Acentralaimofthestudyistoexamine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g., family, peers, and datingpartners),andhowtheseexperiencesassociatedwithageinfluencethemeaningof datingrelationships.TheTARSdatawerecollectedintheyears2001,2002,2004,2006, and2011.Analysesforthecurrentstudyrelyonstructuredinterviewsconductedatwaves1 through5.ThesamplingframeoftheTARSstudyencompassed62schoolsacrossseven school districts. The initial sample was drawn from enrollmentrecords for 7th, 9th, and 450 WendiL.Johnsonetal. 11thgrades,butschoolattendancewasnotarequirementforinclusioninthestudy,and most interviews were conducted in the respondent’s home using preloaded laptops to administer the interview. This is a significant advantage of using TARS in that youth engagedinantisocialbehavioraremorelikelytonotattendschool[29,33].Thestratified, randomsamplewasdevisedbytheNationalOpinionResearchCenterandincludesover- samples of Black and Hispanic adolescents. Based on 2000 Census data, the sociodemographiccharacteristicsofLucasCountycloselyparallelthoseofthenationin termsofrace(13%inToledoand12%intheUSAareBlack),education(80%inToledo and84%intheUSAarehighschoolgraduates),medianincome($50,046inToledoand $50,287 in the USA), and maritalstatus(73.5 %in Toledoand 75.9 % in the USAare married couple families). The initial sample included 1316 respondents. Retention rates from the first interview were 89.1 % for the second interview, 84.4 % for the third interview,82.8%forthefourthinterview,and77.8%forthefifthinterview.Respondents’ agesrangedfrom12to19yearsofageatwave1,13to20yearsofageatwave2,15to 22yearsofageatwave3,17to24yearsofageatwave4,and22to29yearsofageatwave 5.Sixty-twopercentofrespondentsidentifyasnon-HispanicWhite,25%asnon-Hispanic Black,11%asHispanic,and2%assomeotherrace/ethnicity.Respondentswhoidentify assomethingotherthanWhite,Black,orHispanic(n=26)were12yearsofageatwave1 (n=20) or 29 years of age (n=16), and otherwise had insufficient data (n=12), were deletedfromtheanalyticsample.Thus,forthecurrentanalyses,thedatareflectsan11-year longitudinaldesignacrossfivetimeperiods,spanningtheagesof13to28yearsofage (n=1242subjects,5198observations). Additionally, parents were administered a paper questionnaire at wave 1. The majorityofthosecompletingthequestionnairewerefemale(90%)and/orthebiolog- ical mother of the respondent (82 %). Early analyses that included dichotomous variables of the gender and relation of the parent filling out the questionnaire to the respondent revealed that neither of these factors emerged as a significant predictor of the outcomes of interest. Consequently, these items were dropped from the present analyses. MissingData HLM is able to use any available data at the within-person level; however, data at the between-personlevelmustbecomplete.Giventhesmallnumberofmissingdataatthe between-personlevel(n=12),andthatthisconstitutedlessthan1%ofthesample,we deletedthesecasesfromtheanalyticsample.Attritionanalysesrevealedthatrespondents whowerefemale,White,reportedlessstructuraldisadvantage,andgrowingupinatwo biological parent home were more likely to have participated in all five waves. Wave participationrates,however,werenotrelatedtowave1measuresofdelinquency,parental support,harshparenting,parent’searlyantisocialbehavior,oridentityendorsement. Measures DependentVariable(Time-Varying) Antisocial behavior is measured using nine items adapted from the 26-item inven- tory by Elliot and Ageton [19]. Items assess how frequently the respondents Parents,Identities,andTrajectoriesofAntisocialBehavior 451 engagedinvariousantisocialbehaviorsincludingdruguse,theft(minorandmajor), breaking and entering, assault and battery, property damage, selling drugs, public drunkenness, and carrying a hidden weapon. The responses for each item range from 0 for never, to 8 for more than once a day. Alpha scores assessing internal reliability as a latent construct for each wave ranged from 0.74 to 0.88. However, scalesconstructedfromthemeanorsumofinventoriesofdelinquentitemsproduce ameasurethatis“limited,discrete,andskewedratherthanunbounded,continuous, and symmetric” ([49], p. 270). Additionally, such scales assign equal weight to all items.Thus,frequentpositiveresponsestominoroffensessuchaspublicdrunken- ness are treated the same as more serious and less frequent offenses such as breaking and entering. This may obscure effects of certain causal factors relevant to more antisocial respondents because their estimates are swamped by the high frequencyofreportsofminoroffensesbylessantisocialoffenders[12].Toaddress these problems, we use a multivariate, multilevel Rasch model that employs a measurementmodelofself-reportedantisocialbehavior.Thisisdescribedingreater detail in the section on analytic strategy. ParentalBehavior(Time-Stable) Parent’s early antisocial history is assessed using a four-item scale (alpha=0.62).1 Parents were asked if the following occurred during their teen years: (1) “I was suspended or expelled from school,” (2) “I was arrested by the police,” (3) “I drank alcohol,”and(4)“Iuseddrugs.”Becausemotherscompletedtheparentquestionnaire 90%ofthetime,thescaleisskewedtotheright.Additionally,fathersreportedhigher ratesonallfouritems.Amongmothers,13.6%reportedbeingsuspendedorexpelled, 4.2%beingarrested,37.4%drinkingalcohol,and22.6%usingdrugsduringtheirteen years. Rates for fathers were 24.2 % for suspension or expulsion, 12.5 % for arrest, 59.4 % for alcohol use, and 31.2 % for drug use. Given the skewed nature of the variable, wecreated a dichotomousmeasure coded as1 forparents who reportedany delinquentbehavior(47%)and0otherwise. Identity(Time-Varying) Respondentswereasked ateachwaveaboutanumberofidentitystatuses(e.g.,sexy, popular)andtowhatextentotherswoulddescribetheminthismanner(seeespecially [42]). Troublemaker identity is assessed at each wave from an item, which asked respondentstowhatextentotherswoulddescribethemas:“atroublemaker.”Similarly, partier identityisa time-varyingmeasure derived from anitem, which asked respon- dents to what extent others would describe them as “a partier.” Responses for both measuresrangefrom1forstronglydisagreeto5forstronglyagree.Thetroublemaker identityhasameanof2.23,withastandarddeviationof1.03,andthepartieridentity hasameanof2.95andastandarddeviationof1.18. 1While parent’s early antisocial history displays a low alpha, it should be noted that Cronbach’s alpha representsthelowerboundoftruereliability(Cortina1993).Additionally,Cortinanotesthatlowalphascores maysimplyreflectthelownumberofitemsused.Giventhatthecurrentscaleonlyemploysfouritems,the additionofmoreitemswouldlikelyincreaseitscoefficientalphabringingitwithinthetraditionallyaccepted rangeof>0.70.