Trajectories of Offending

  • Rolf Loeber
  • Wesley G. Jennings
  • Lia Ahonen
  • Alex R. Piquero
  • David P. Farrington
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Criminology book series (BRIEFSCRIMINOL)


This chapter reports on group-based trajectories of offending from ages 11–19 for the PGS females. Specific attention is devoted to the prevalence of the offending trajectory groups, and their developmental patterns of offending during that period. The results from the trajectory analysis identified three trajectories for the girls: non-offenders (72.5 %), low-rate offenders (21.4 %), and high-rate offenders (6.1 %). In addition, while the overall shape and offending pattern of the low-rate and high-rate offender trajectories were similar, there were demonstrable differences in their mean frequencies of offending from ages 11–19. Theoretical and policy implications are discussed.


Trajectories Developmental Life-course Offending Self-report 


  1. Ahonen, L., Jennings, W. G., Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (2016). The relationship between developmental trajectories of girls’ offending and police charges: Results from the Pittsburgh Girls Study. Journal of Developmental and Life Course Criminology. doi: 10.1007/s40865-016-0036-3.Google Scholar
  2. Broidy, L. M., Nagin, D. S., Tremblay, R. E., Bates, J. E., Brame, B., Dodge, K. A., et al. (2003). Developmental trajectories of childhood disruptive behaviors and adolescent delinquency: A six-site, cross-national study. Developmental Psychology, 39, 222–245.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, M., Piquero, A. R., & Jennings, W. G. (2010). Monetary costs of gender and ethnicity disaggregated group-based offending. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Unger, A. V., Land, K. C., & McCall, P. L. (2002). Sex differences in age patterns of delinquent/criminal careers: Results from Poisson latent class analyses of the Philadelphia Cohort Study. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 349–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eggleston, E., Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2004). Methodological sensitivities to latent class analysis of long-term criminal trajectories. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 20, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Farrington, D. P., Piquero, A. R., & Jennings, W. G. (2013). Offending from childhood to late middle age: Recent results from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fontaine, N., Carbonneau, R., Vitaro, F., Barker, E. D., & Tremblay, R. E. (2009). Research review: A critical review of studies on the developmental trajectories of antisocial behavior in females. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 363–385.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Jennings, W. G. (2011). Sex disaggregated trajectories of status offenders: Does CINS/FINS status prevent male and female youth from becoming labeled delinquent? American Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 177–187.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jennings, W. G., Loeber, R., Pardini, D., Piquero, A., & Farrington, D. P. (2016). Offending from childhood to young adulthood: Recent results from the Pittsburgh Youth Study. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jennings, W. G., Maldonado-Molina, M., Piquero, A. R., Odgers, C., Bird, H., & Canino, G. (2010). Sex differences in trajectories of offending among Puerto Rican youth. Crime and Delinquency, 56, 327–357.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Jennings, W. G., & Reingle, J. (2012). On the number and shape of developmental/life-course violence, aggression, and delinquency trajectories: A state-of-the-art review. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40, 472–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jones, B. L., Nagin, D. S., & Roeder, K. (2001). A SAS procedure based on mixture models for estimating developmental trajectories. Sociological Methods & Research, 29, 374–393.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Harrington, H., & Milne, B. J. (2002). Males on the life-course-persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years. Development and Psychopathology, 14, 179–207.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Nagin, D. S. (2005). Group-based modeling of development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nagin, D. S. (2010). Group-based trajectory modeling: An overview. In A. R. Piquero & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative criminology (pp. 53–67). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Piquero, A. R. (2008). Taking stock of developmental trajectories of criminal activity over the life course. In A. M. Lieberman (Ed.), The long view of crime: A synthesis of longitudinal research (pp. 23–78). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Piquero, A. R., Brame, R., & Moffitt, T. E. (2005). Extending the study of continuity and change: Gender differences in the linkage between adolescent and adult offending. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21, 219–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolf Loeber
    • 1
  • Wesley G. Jennings
    • 2
  • Lia Ahonen
    • 1
    • 3
  • Alex R. Piquero
    • 4
  • David P. Farrington
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Department of CriminologyUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  3. 3.Örebro UniversityÖrebroSweden
  4. 4.University of Texas at Dallas Criminology ProgramRichardsonUSA
  5. 5.Institute of CriminologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations