490762

research-article2013
YASXXX10.1177/0044118X13490762Youth & Society X(XX)Lee et al.

Article
Youth & Society
2016, Vol. 48(2) 242­–264
Effects of Self-Control, © The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions:
Social Control, and sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0044118X13490762
Social Learning on yas.sagepub.com

Sexting Behavior Among

South Korean Youths

Chang-Hun Lee1, Stacy Moak2,

and Jeffery T. Walker2

Abstract
Despite the emerging phenomenon of sexting, scientific investigation
with criminological perspectives has been limited. Utilizing data collected
from 1,612 randomly selected youth in South Korea, this study begins the
investigation into which criminological theory best explains sexting behaviors.
Theories considered include self-control, social control, and social learning
theories. Some variables of each of those theories were tested. Findings
showed that peer pressure was the most important factor for two types of
sexting behaviors (sexting own picture/video and sexting others’ picture/
video), and that prior delinquency and positive attitude toward sexting were
also significantly and positively related to both types of sexting behaviors.
But social control was negatively related to only the second type of sexting
behavior, and self-control was not related to both types of behaviors. As
sexting has only recently begun to be studied, we recommend that future
research studies examine the phenomena within the framework of social
learning theory.

1Hannam University, Daejeon City, South Korea

2University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, AR, USA

Corresponding Author:
Chang-Hun Lee, Department of Police Administration, Hannam University, 133 Ojeong-dong,
Daeduck-gu, Daejeon City, South Korea.
Email: drcriminals@hnu.kr

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 243

Keywords
delinquency, peers, sexual behavior/risk, cross-cultural analysis

Introduction
Sexting has become a common word in a short period of time, appearing in
newspaper articles, news accounts, and as the subject of legally oriented tele-
vision shows. Public focus on sexting is heightened by several high-profile
cases of both adult and youth sexting (refer to the following reports: Hill,
2009; Montopoli & Daly, 2011; Stone, 2009). In the very first report on sex-
ting in 2009 by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned
Pregnancy, it was found that 20% of teens had sent or posted nude or semi-
nude photos or videos of them via cell phones or the Internet, and 33% had
sent sexually suggestive messages (“Sex and Tech: Results from a survey of
teens and young adults,” 2009). More recent studies found that about 33% of
youths engaged in some kinds of sexting activities (Wolak, Finkelhor, &
Mitchell, 2011), and about 20% of young Hispanic women were involved
with sexting activities (Ferguson, 2011).
Furthermore, the seriousness of the issue at hand stems from the fact that
contents of the sexting materials youths transmit can be abused with criminal
intent, such as sexual predation. Finkelhorn, Mitchel, and Wolak’s (2000)
study found that one in five teen Internet users had received sexual solicita-
tions via the Internet; 48% of which were made by other juveniles. That study
found that most of the incidents, even those that caused emotional stress to
the receiver, were not reported to anyone. The results of that study lend cred-
ibility to the concern that technology is being used to sexually exploit teens,
and support the need for further examination of the topic.
Although legal studies on sexting have focused on determining what
behaviors are actionable and the proper penalties for those actions, the true
scope and causes of sexting are still unknown. As a result, prior studies failed
to address several limitations. First and potentially most important, previous
studies made no attempt to incorporate criminological theory in determining
possible causes of sexting behaviors, and second, empirical studies on sex-
ting investigating prevalence and causes of sexting in different social con-
texts outside the Western countries have not been carried out. Theoretical
understandings of sexting will assist in the study of it, as well as the design of
interventions to address it both before and after it occurs. To address the limi-
tations, the current study attempts to test criminological theories applicable to
the Korean context with data on sexting activities collected from 1,612 youths
in South Korea. To better understand the depth of the issues at play, at first,
the current study discusses a definition of sexting.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

244 Youth & Society 48(2)

Defintion of Sexting
The term sexting is formed by combining “sex” and “texting.” There is no
clear information regarding the origin of the term, but there are two asser-
tions; one is that a blogger of the “GranDiva” coined the term and another is
that Yvonne Roberts first used the term in his news article for Sunday
Telegraph in 2005 (Parker, 2009; Roberts, 2005). Whoever coined the term,
sexting currently refers to electronically transmitting sexually explicit texts
and materials to others (more specifically involving a cell phone).
According to prior studies on sexting, definitions can be categorized into
two based on media used for sexting; a broad definition that includes many
activities, and a narrow one focused on sexting.1 A broad definition of sex-
ting refers to youth writing sexually explicit messages, taking sexually
explicit photos of themselves or others in their peer group, and transmitting
those photos and/or messages to their peers without regard to the media used
(“Sex and Tech: Results from a survey of teens and young adults,” 2009).
This definition was used in Miller v. Skumanick (2009). Similarly, Humbach
(2009) suggested that sexting is “‘teenagers” taking sexually explicit pic-
tures of themselves and sending them to friends by cell phone and other digi-
tal gadgets” (p. 3). This definition specifies the age of those engaged in
sexting activity, and somewhat narrows the electronic media used for sex-
ting; but it is still a broad definition of the types of media involved (see also,
Katzman, 2010).
By contrast, a narrow definition of sexting refers to youth transmitting
sexually explicit texts and materials (including photos and videos) to others
via cell phone devices (e.g., Ahmend, 2009; Albury, Funnell, & Noonan,
2010; Brunker, 2009; Kazdin & Ibanga, 2009). This definition differentiates
sexting via a cell phone from online, cybersexual activity, or self-exploita-
tion. In this study, sexting has been given this narrow definition, referring to
youth producing and transmitting sexually explicit texts, photos, and videos
of themselves or others using cell phones.

Sexting in Korean Context and Criminology

Culturally, displaying one’s body part, particularly legs, hips, or breast, in
public is currently punishable with fines in South Korea. According to
Confucian tradition, women were not allowed to wear short shirts and pants
until the middle of the 20th Century. However, since the Korean War, and the
prevalence of Western culture during the 1950s, Korean culture quickly
opened up to sexuality. As a result, sexual material, for example, pornogra-
phy, became too easily available to youths, particularly through the Internet

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 245

websites. Young students feature in self-made pornographic movie clips, and

intentionally or sometimes eventually, the movie clips are uploaded and
become available on the Internet. A government agency operates to screen
and eliminate websites (particularly, P2P websites containing such porno-
graphic video clips), and the Korean National Police Agency also maintains
cyber investigation teams to control such activities among youths.
Although the younger generation perceives sexually explicit materials as
being based on freedom of expression, these sexual materials are still illegal
by law (i.e., Youth Protection Law and Law on Protection and Prevention of
Sexual Violence against Youth in South Korea). The term “sexting” is not
legally recognized yet in South Korea, but producing and disseminating
sexually explicit materials displaying one’s body or that of others is prohib-
ited by the law even if consent has been taken. According to the laws, pro-
ducing and disseminating sexual materials involving youths below 18 are
illegal and punishable by incarceration for multiple years. Even sexual inter-
course with a child aged below 13 is illegal whether consent has been taken
from the child or not.
Despite a short academic history of criminology in South Korea, a number
of studies have empirically tested all of the criminological theories available
within the Korean context. Results of the studies have shown that all crimi-
nological theories were applicable to the Korean context, and particularly
control and learning theories have been prevailing theoretical explanations
for juvenile delinquency in South Korea (e.g., Hwang & Akers, 2003). Thus,
the current exploratory study attempted to apply and test self-control, social
control, and social learning theories to explain sexting behaviors in the South
Korean context.

Theoretical Explanations
Social Learning Theory
Much of social learning theory involves a description of the mechanisms by
which juveniles learn to engage in delinquency from others. According to the
theory, juveniles learn to engage in delinquency when others (a) differentially
reinforce their delinquent behavior, (b) teach them beliefs favorable to delin-
quency, and (c) provide delinquent models for them to imitate (Akers, 1998;
Southerland, 1947). Southerland’s (1947) theory of differential association
asserted that juveniles become delinquent because of an excess of definitions
(contact) favorable to law violation over definitions favorable to law abiding.
Extending this idea, Burgess and Akers (1966) proposed that individuals
engaged in crime not only when they associated with criminals but also when

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

246 Youth & Society 48(2)

crime provided reinforcing rewards in the absence of punishment. Principles

of differential association have been tested across a wide variety of delin-
quent behaviors including substance abuse (Akers, Krohn, Lanza-Kaduce, &
Radosevich, 1979; Hawg & Akers, 2003; Miller, Jennings, Alverez-Rivera,
& Miller, 2008); property crimes (Akers, 1998); computer crimes (Skinner &
Fream, 1997); and violent crimes (Mihalic & Elliott, 1997). In all of these
tests, differential association has proved to be a stable predictor of deviance.
One of the explanations for delinquency within learning theory that offers
possible explanations for sexting behavior comes from peer pressure. The
role of delinquent peers has been widely documented in the criminological
literature and is considered a salient predictor across many types of delin-
quent behavior (Akers & Jensen, 2006). Social learning theories contend that
association with delinquent peer group impacts individual behavior through
reinforcement for certain kinds of behavior. These associations also provide
the context for imitation of delinquent behavior. Actual and anticipated con-
sequences dictate reinforcement which ultimately influences the likelihood
of repeated behavior. Conformity to peers is often considered one of the hall-
marks of adolescent behavior (Brown, Clasen, & Eicher, 1986). Early adoles-
cent’s need for affiliation with a group of peers is manifested by conformity
to group norms (Brown et al., 1986). According to social learning, if juve-
niles associate with others who engage in delinquency and hold beliefs favor-
able to delinquency, they are likely to learn to participate in delinquency.
Furthermore, delinquent behavior might provide benefits to a delinquent’s
peers during adolescence (Rebellon, 2006). It may provide entertainment for
peers via activities such as pranks, fights, and drinking games to name a few.
Social rewards may ensue from an adolescent culture that entices peers to
participate in risky or delinquent behavior. Peer culture often provides a host
of delinquent models and is often tolerant of delinquent or deviant acts
(Bernburg & Thorlindsson, 1999). Therefore, adolescents are more likely to
engage in deviant behavior as they become more deeply involved in peer
culture (Bjarnason & Thorlindsson, 1998; Hagan, 1991; Krohn, Skinner,
Massey, & Akers, 1985). Peer pressure thus contributes to a lifestyle directed
toward deviance in general, such as drug use or vandalism. Considering the
wide range of delinquent behaviors influenced by peer pressure and other
social learning variables, sexting is likely to also be influenced by similar
variables.

Social Control/Self-Control Theories

Theories based on control or individual-propensity perspectives assert that
delinquency is not learned from significant others, but rather the motivation

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 247

or propensity to participate in delinquency exists in equal amounts in each

member of society. The focus of control theorist is not on why adolescents
engage in delinquency, but, instead, on why they do not. Control theorists
assert that social bonds prevent some juveniles from deviating. One of the
first theorists to identify bonds was Hirschi (1969). He examined four com-
ponents of social bonds: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief
(Hirschi, 1969). When social bonds are weakened, individuals are free to
deviate. In contrast, strong bonds with conventional society dissuade indi-
viduals from acting on their natural deviant dispositions, and also dissuade
them from associating with delinquent companions (Hirschi, 1969).
Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) more recent version of control theory
emphasized the individual trait of low self-control, and provides another
interpretation of the structure underlying delinquent peers and delinquent
behavior. Seeking to explain the stability of delinquency over time and the
lack of specialization in offenses, Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) concluded
that delinquency was the result of low self-control. Low self-control was
characterized by impulsivity, risk-seeking behavior, lack of skills, seeking
immediate gratification, absence of planning, no regard for the pain of others,
and meager long-term rewards. According to the theory, low self-control is
attributed to early socialization processes when parents fail to punish unde-
sirable, impulsive, self-interested behaviors. Thus, experiences in early child-
hood fail to socialize children to delay gratification, consider the pain of
others, and maintain control over their impulses and emotions. As a result,
Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) argued that people acquire the propensity for
delinquency because of low self-control, then find delinquent friends with
whom they identify, and then commit delinquent acts (Gottfredson & Hirschi,
1990).

Research Questions
Based on the review of social learning and social control/self-control theories
discussed above, several connections to sexting are indicated. For example, if
association with delinquent peers is predictive of delinquent behavior, we
would expect that there would be an association between involvement with
delinquent peer groups and involvement in sexting behaviors. Further, we
would expect peer pressure to be one of the predictor variables of why ado-
lescents choose to participate in sexting.
Alternatively, if weak social bonds allow adolescents to act on inherent
deviant ideas, peers should not have an influence on their decisions to partici-
pate in sexting. In that case, we would expect to see weak bond to parents,
teachers, or peers who are not delinquent. Furthermore, adolescents who do

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

248 Youth & Society 48(2)

have high levels of self-control would not be influenced by peers who engage
in sexting behaviors to take and send explicit pictures and videos of them-
selves or others.

Method
The data for the study were collected from 1,612 South Korean middle and
high school students in November 2009. The study was financially supported
by the Korean Institute of Criminology (KIC) and examined prevalence and
correlates of sexting behaviors in South Korea. An anonymous, self-adminis-
tered survey was utilized for minimizing measurement error.2
The sample students were selected through a multistage cluster sampling
method using a list of middle and high schools in the national capital region.3
Specifically, the list was subdivided into two groups (middle and high
schools) and each group was divided into three categories (male-only, female-
only, and coed schools). From these sampling frames, eight middle schools
were randomly selected from the categories (two from male-only, three from
female-only, and three from coed middle schools). The same procedure was
taken for high schools. Among those 16 schools, nine schools agreed to par-
ticipate in the survey. The participating schools consisted of one male-only
middle school, two female-only middle schools, two coed middle schools,
one female-only high school, and three coed high schools. From five middle
schools, two classes from each grade were randomly selected and two classes
from first and second grades in high schools were randomly selected (a total
of 30 classes from middle schools and 16 classes from high schools).
The total number of the potential research participants was 1,840 (30
classes × 40 middle school students + 16 classes × 40 high school students).
Five data collectors were hired and trained to ensure that the study was anon-
ymous and voluntary. They first visited the schools and distributed informed
parental consent and youth assent forms. On the second visit, they collected
the consents and the assent forms from the students within the 46 classes. The
total number of the participants who provided consent for participation was
1,612 (1,110 middle school students and 502 high school students), and the
response rate was 87.6% (92.5% for middle schools and 78.4% for high
schools). Participants received a pen worth US$2 for agreeing to participate
in the study.

Measures
The measures included in the survey were drawn from a prior study carried
out in the United States. The report from the study, Sex and Tech: Results

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 249

from a survey of teens and young adults, was published by the National
Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy in 2008. Based on the
items in the report, the Korean version of the questionnaire was developed
with some modifications (adding or dropping some items based on relevance
to the Korean context). Specifically, items, such as “Have a profile on a dat-
ing or single site (like Match, Cupid, or eHarmony)?,” were dropped from the
Korean version of the survey, but items measuring sexting behaviors were
added to the survey, for example, taking pictures or videos of leg, hips, and
so forth. During the translation step, two bilingual translators were asked to
translate the English survey into Korean, and they were asked to back trans-
late each other’s Korean translation into English. After developing the Korean
version of the survey, two focus groups were conducted, which provided fur-
ther modifications to clarify survey items.
Dependent variable: The outcome variable is sexting behavior, which was
measured by 15 items. These items consist of two parts; sexting activities of
oneself and sexting activities of others. Sexting activities of oneself measured
taking picture/video of one’s own legs, hips, breasts, masturbation, sexual
intercourse, and underwear, and sending those pictures/videos to others.
Sexting activities of others measured taking picture/video of others’ legs,
hips, breasts, masturbation, sexual intercourse, underwear, and dressing/
shower room, and sending those to others. It is worth noting that sexually
explicit activities involving computers and the Internet, such as posting one’s
sexual image to dating websites, were excluded from the current study. Since
those activities were not different from sexual activities online, the current
study focused on activities involving cell phones. All items used Likert-type
response options ranging from “never,” “1 to 2 times,” “3 to 4 times,” “5 to 6
times,” to “more than 6 times” within the past 6 months (i.e., in the last
semester). These abovementioned items were combined into two different
scales; sexting of self and sexting of others (see Table 1 and 2).
Independent variables: Based on the literature of peer influence, social
bond, and self-control theories, five variables were drawn and selected as
independent variables to be examined in the study: positive attitudes toward
sexting behavior, peer pressure, prior delinquency, levels of self-control, and
levels of social bond to parents, friends, and teachers. The variables of posi-
tive attitude toward sexting, peer pressure, and prior delinquency were parts
of social learning theories. The variables of levels of self-control and social
bond to parents, friends, and teachers stem from control theories. Each of the
variables is discussed more fully below. It is worth noting at this point that the
current study is not fully testing each of those theories mentioned, but this
study is testing important variables of each theory in regard to sexting
behavior.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

250 Youth & Society 48(2)

Table 1.  Experiences of Sexting Behaviors Reported (n = 1,612).

1-2 3-4 5-6 6 or
Never times times times more n %*

Taking pic/video of own legs** 1530 56 6 1 12 75 4.7

Taking pic/video of own hips** 1591 4 1 1 4 10 .6
Taking pic/video of own breasts 1593 6 0 1 6 13 .8
Taking pic/video of own 1596 4 0 1 4 9 .6
masturbation
Taking pic/video of own sexual 1590 7 1 1 6 15 .9
intercourse
Taking pic/video of own 1537 27 8 4 28 67 4.2
underwear**
Sending above pic/video of self 1583 5 2 2 6 15 .9
to other
Taking pic/video of friends’ 1523 45 10 2 21 78 4.8
legs**
Taking pic/video of friends’ 1576 12 2 3 9 26 1.6
hips**
Taking pic/video of friends’ 1586 7 3 1 6 17 1.1
breasts
Taking pic/video of friends’ 1595 6 0 0 6 12 .7
masturbation
Taking pic/video of friends 1594 3 3 1 3 10 .6
having sex
Taking pic/video of friends’ 1576 19 1 1 9 30 1.9
underwear**
Taking pic/video of dressing/ 1568 21 5 0 10 36 2.2
shower room
Sending above friend’s pic/video 1523 55 16 3 6 80 5.0
to other

Note. *Percentage calculated: n/1,612×100.

**In South Korea, it is commonly perceived that pictures of one’s legs, hip, and underwear are sexually
explicit. This perception, which considers these kind of pictures as sexually intended and inappropriate for
adolescents, has been developed due to the long history of governmental censorship on adult materials.
Thus, this study includes those types of pictures and videos as sexually explicit materials.

First, social learning theory asserts that attitudes favorable to certain types
of delinquent behavior will promote that behavior and lead to positive social
rewards to juveniles who participate in that behavior. Thus, understanding atti-
tudes toward sexting may aid in understanding the association between learn-
ing processes and sexting. In this study, it is hypothesized that adolescents
who have positive attitudes toward sexting are more likely to engage in sex-
ting behaviors. Attitudes were measured by six items used in the prior U.S.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 251

Table 2.  Factor Analyses and Reliability Tests.

Loading α
Sexting behavior—Self (7~35, Mean = 7.28, SD = 1.61)
  Taking pic/video of own legs .53 .79
  Taking pic/video of own hips .83
  Taking pic/video of own breast .89
  Taking pic/video of own masturbation .87
  Taking pic/video of own sexual intercourse .80
  Taking pic/video of own underwear .44
  Sending above pic/video of self to other .87
Sexting behavior—Other (8~40, Mean = 8.35, SD = 2.08)
  Taking pic/video of friends’ legs .53 .90
  Taking pic/video of friends’ hips .85
  Taking pic/video of friends’ breast .94
  Taking pic/video of friends’ masturbation .92
  Taking pic/video of friends having sex .92
  Taking pic/video of friends’ underwear .88
  Taking pic/video of dressing/shower room .84
  Sending above friend’s pic/video to other .59
Attitudes toward sexting (6~30, Mean = 10.21, SD = 4.82)
  I think my friends who are sexting look sexy. .79 .83
  I think my friends who are sexting look hot. .77
  I think my friends who are sexting look brave. .70
  I think my friends who are sexting believe they have good .72
body fit.
  I think my friends who are sexting believe sexting is cool. .79
  I think my friends who are sexting believe sexting is fun. .71
Self-control (3~15, Mean = 9.95, SD = 2.69)
  I can control myself very well. .79 .77
  I tend to behave according to plans. .84
  I tend to calmly solve problems I encounter. .85
Social bond (7~35, Mean = 24.63, SD = 5.08)
  I care about my parents’ feeling. .74 .84
  I try to do what my parents want me to do. .78
  Having conversation with parents is important to me. .76
  I believe my parents love me. .67
  I care about my friends’ feeling. .74
  I try to do what my friends want me to do. .71
  I believe I need to follow what my teachers said. .62

(continued)

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

252 Youth & Society 48(2)

Table 2. (continued)

Loading α
Peer pressure (9~40, Mean = 9.33, SD = 2.32)
  My friends talked to me about taking sexy pic./video with .81 .94
cell phones.
  My friends talked to me about sending sexy pic./video .80
with cell phones.
  My friends talked to me about seeing sexy pic./video by .80
cell phones.
  My friends told me taking & sending sexy pic./video with .91
cell phones were fun.
  My friends asked me to take and send sexy pic./video with .81
cell phones.
  My friends proudly told me he/she took/sent sexy pic./ .90
video with cell phones.
  My friends proudly showed me sexy pic./video he/she .84
received through cell phones.
  My friends excluded me from conversations because I .65
have not taken or sent sexy pic./video with cell phone.
  My friends coaxed me to send sexy pic./video to him/her. .86
Prior delinquency (9~45, Mean = 11.14, SD = 4.37)
  Stealing money and/or materials .47 .81
  Hitting friends .47
 Drinking .87
 Smoking .81
  Having sex .78
  Running away from home .74
  Absence to schools without permission .48
  Patronizing stores prohibited to underage (e.g., clubs, .70
bars, etc.)
  Having sex for money .86

national study in response to a question, “What do you think of friends who do

sexting?” The six items were presented in Table 2. The response options for all
items were a Likert-type scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly
agree (5). These six items are combined into a scale of attitudes towards sex-
ting behaviors, ranging between 5 and 25. The higher the scale is, the more
adolescents have positive attitudes toward sexting behavior.
Peer pressure is another of the prominent measures of social learning the-
ory. Conformity to peer pressure has been associated with delinquency in

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 253

previous tests of social learning theory. Thus, it is hypothesized that adoles-

cents who feel more peer pressure for sexting are more likely to involve in
sexting behaviors. In this study, peer pressure was measured by nine items
that were used in the previous studies but were modified to fit sexting behav-
ior. Those items were presented in Table 2. The response options for all items
were a Likert-type scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree
(5). These items were combined into a scale of peer pressure, ranging between
9 and 45. The higher the score, the greater the peer pressure on the adoles-
cents for sexting.
Finally, prior delinquency was included in the model because youths who
had participated in other types of delinquency were hypothesized to already
hold views favorable to delinquent activities. According to social learning
theory (Akers, 1998) those who participate in delinquency become more
deeply involved with delinquent peers and continue to reinforce delinquency
as a permissible norm. In this study, prior delinquency was measured by nine
items about status offenses and minor delinquency. The items were presented
in Table 2. All items used Likert-type scale response options ranging from
“never,” “1 to 2 times,” “3 to 4 times,” “5 to 6 times,” to “more than 6 times”
within the past year. These items were combined into a scale of prior delin-
quency, ranging between 9 and 45. The higher score indicates more prior
delinquency.
The second theoretical foundation in the present study for explaining sex-
ting behavior is that of social bond. Social bond contains four elements:
attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief (Hirschi, 1969). Among
those four components, in the study, attachment to family, school, and proso-
cial peers was primarily investigated, hypothesizing that the stronger the
attachment of the adolescents, the less they are involved in sexting behaviors.
Attachment was measured by seven items on three aspects: attachment to
parents, friends, and teachers (see Table 2). The response options for all items
were a Likert-type scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree
(5). For each aspect of attachment, the items were combined in to scales.
In expansions of social bond theory, Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) iden-
tified low levels of self-control as a factor in delinquency. Accordingly, self-
control was included in our model to examine the potential influence it might
have on sexting behavior. Levels of self-control were measured by three
items (see Table 2). The response options for all items were a Likert-type
scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). These items
were recorded into a scale of self-control, ranging from 3 to 15. The higher
score indicates higher levels of self-control.
Control variables: Age, sex, family’s socioeconomic status (SES), and
types of school were included as control variables. Age and sex were included

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

254 Youth & Society 48(2)

since the prior U.S. study found that younger girls were more likely than
older girls to take and send sexual photos of themselves. SES was included in
the study under the assumption that taking and sending such photos requires
better and sometimes more expensive cell phones and services. Family SES
was computed by combining items measuring father’s job status, educational
level, and monthly income, and mother’s educational level. Cronbach’s α for
the family SES was .77.
In this study, types of school variable was included to investigate any dif-
ference in sexting behaviors across boy-only, girl-only, or coed schools.
Types of school were coded into three categories (male-only = 1, female-only
= 2, coed schools = 3). This variable was transformed into two dummy vari-
ables using coed school as a reference group. For male-only school, the vari-
able was recoded into yes = 1 and no = 0. Similarly, female-only school was
recoded into yes = 1 and no = 0. These two dummy variables were used for
multivariable regression to investigate variation in sexting behaviors across
different types of schools.

Results
There were 576 male students (35.7% of the total), and 1,036 female students
(64.3% of the total). Age of the participants ranged from 13 to 19. The bulk
of participants were 14 to 18 years old, with only nineteen 13-year-olds and
three 19-year-olds. The mean age of participants was 16. Tenth grade stu-
dents represented the largest segment of the total (612, 38% of the total), with
almost twice as many students as any other grade (ninth grade was second
with 355 participants). About 40% of the respondents’ fathers had graduated
from a 4-year university and more than 10% of the total reported that their
fathers earned graduate degrees. The second largest percentage of fathers had
a high school degree (34.9%); while only 2% of fathers had no education. In
contrast, almost 50% of the respondents’ mothers had high school diplomas,
and about 30% of the respondents reported that their mothers were 4-year
university graduates. However, only a slightly higher percentage (4%) of
mothers had no education. The descriptive information indicates that the data
are representative to the general population in South Korea (“City of Seoul:
White Paper 2010,”).4
Table 1 shows the types and prevalence of sexting behaviors among
respondents. Most of the participants reported they have not engaged in any
sexting behaviors. About 5% of participants reported they had taken pictures/
videos of their legs, and about 4% of them reported they had taken pictures/
videos of their underwear. It seems that students are more likely to take
and send more sexually explicit pictures/videos of others. Since taking

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

 Table 3.  Bivariate Correlations.

DV1 DV2 V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10

DV1: Sexting behaviors—self 1  
DV2: Sexting behaviors—other .81** 1  
V1: Age .04 .07** 1  
V2: Sex (female = 0, male = 1) .03 .02 –.04 1  
V3: Male school (no = 0, yes = 1) .03 .04 .31** .25** 1  
V4: Female school (no = 0, yes = 1) –.01 –.02 .05* –.49** –.12** 1  
V5: Family SES .04 .04 –.01 .03 .00 –.15** 1  
V6: Positive attitudes on sexting .17** .19** .12** .04 .07** –.01 .02 1  
V7: Self-control .01 .01 .07** –.07** .05* .04 .08** –.01 1  
V8: Attachment .00 –.02 .04 –.12** –.01 .05 .05 .06* .34** 1  
V9: Peer pressure .43** .49** .04 .06* –.01 –.03 .03 .16** –.02 –.00 1  
V10: Prior delinquency .29** .34** .11** .15** .18** –.03 –.02 .10** .03 –.07* .30** 1

Note. *p < .05. **p < .01.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

255
256 Youth & Society 48(2)

Table 4.  Multivariate OLS Regressions.

Sexting—Self Sexting—Other

  B SE β B SE β
Constant 5.92 .49 4.14 .57  
Demographics
 Age .01 .03 –.01 .07* .03 .06
  Sex (female = 0, male = 1) –.12 .08 –.06 –.21* .09 –.08
  Male school (no = 0, yes = 1) –.20 .17 –.04 –.48* .20 –.07
  Female school (no = 0, yes = 1) .01 .07 .00 –.03 .09 –.01
  Family SES .00 .01 .02 .01 .01 .04
Factors
  Positive attitudes toward .01* .01 .07 .02* .01 .06
sexting
 Self-control –.01 .01 –.03 –.01 .01 –.01
 Attachment –.01 .01 –.05 –.02** .01 –.09
  Peer pressure .12*** .02 .23 .28*** .02 .43
  Prior delinquency .04*** .01 .17 .06*** .01 .20
Adjust R2 .11 .29
Tolerance/VIF ranges .67~.97/1.04~1.50 .66~.96/1.04~1.51

pictures/videos of others’ masturbation or sexual intercourse would not be

easy compared to taking pictures/videos of others’ legs, hips, and underwear,
the prevalence of taking pictures/videos of their own masturbation or sexual
intercourse remains relatively same. Prevalence of taking pictures/videos of
others’ hips and breasts almost doubled, and about 2% of students suggested
that they had taken pictures/videos of dressing/shower room. Overall, 5% of
the total showed that they had sent sexually explicit pictures/videos of others
to others.
Table 2 presents the results of factor analyses and reliability tests. For the
first dependent variable (sexting images of self), factor loadings for two items
were not high, but those were retained due to the general perception on sexu-
ally explicit materials including pictures of one’s legs, hip, and underwear.
The Cronbach’s α of all those items was .79. Similarly, two items having low
factor loading scores were retained for the second dependent variable (sex-
ting images of others), but they were also retained (Cronbach’s α =.90). The
Cronbach’s α for the attitude towards sexting behaviors was .83, and for the
self-control .77. The alpha for the social bond was .84, for the peer pressure
.94, and for the prior delinquency, the alpha level was .81.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 257

Bivariate Correlations
Bivariate correlations results (see Table 3) show that youths who participate
in sexting of images of themselves were more likely to also sext images of
others (r = .81). Sexting of one’s own sexual images was also significantly
and positively correlated with positive attitudes toward sexting (r = .17), peer
pressure (r = .43), and prior delinquency (r = .29). Unlike prior results from
the national survey in the United States (“Sex and Tech: Results from a sur-
vey of teens and young adults,” 2009), there is no significant difference in
sexting behaviors of self across age and gender groups or within different
types of schools. Also, correlations of self-control and attachment with sex-
ting behaviors of self were almost nonexistent.
Regarding sexting of other’s sexual images, age was positively and sig-
nificantly related to sexting behavior (r = .07). Similar to the prior type of
sexting behavior, positive attitudes toward sexting (r = .19), peer pressure
(r = .49), and prior delinquency (r = .34) were positively correlated with the
sexting of images of others. Also, the correlations with those variables were
higher for the sexting of others than the sexting of self, indicating that youths
who possess positive attitudes toward sexting and prior delinquency and who
are pressured more by peers are more likely to take and send sexual images
of others. This may be because those adolescents are more comfortable send-
ing pictures of someone else because it is likely to cause them less problems
than sending sexual images of themselves.
Positive correlations of age with positive attitudes toward sexting (r =
.12), and prior delinquency (r = .11) indicate a greater chance that they will
engage in those behaviors because they are older. The results also indicate
that male youths are less likely to have higher levels of self-control (r = –.07)
and social bond (r = –.12), but to have higher peer pressure (r = .06) and prior
delinquency (r = .15).
Correlations of male-only school with attitudes, self-control, and prior
delinquency suggest that youths in male schools are more likely to have posi-
tive attitudes toward sexting behaviors (r = .07), slightly higher levels of
self-control (r = .05), and higher levels of prior delinquency (r = .18), com-
pared to male youths in coed schools. For youths in female-only schools,
there was no significant difference from those in coed schools, except levels
of family SES (r = –.15). The correlation indicates that female youths with
higher levels of family SES are more likely to attend coed schools.
Youth’s positive attitude toward sexting was significantly and positively
correlated with attachment (r = .06), peer pressure (r = .16), and prior delin-
quency (r = .10). The positive correlation between positive attachment and
positive attitude is unexpected, but it might be possible that two items mea-
suring attachment with peers in social bond scale may be related to

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

258 Youth & Society 48(2)

activities and attitudes of sexting behaviors. However, the correlation is

negligible. It seems that youths who have higher levels of peer pressure and
prior involvements of delinquency are more likely to develop positive atti-
tudes toward sexting behaviors,
Self-control was only significantly associated with attachment. While
conclusion about the relationship between these two variables is beyond the
scope of this study, it may be that attachment to parents means that they adopt
more adult attitudes of self-control. Attachment was positively related with
self-control (r = .34), but negatively related with prior delinquency (r = –.07).
Also, there is strong, positive interaction between peer pressure and prior
delinquency (r = .30).

Multivariate Regressions
Regarding sexting behaviors of self, the results from the bivariate correlations
are sustained (see Table 4). Specifically, youth’s demographic traits were not
significantly related with the behaviors. Positive attitudes toward sexting (β =
.07), peer pressure (β = .23), and prior delinquency (β = .17) were significantly
and positively related to sexting of self. Among them, peer pressure has the
strongest relationship with the sexting behaviors. Overall, the model explained
11% of variance in sexting behaviors of self sexual images (F = 14.39).
Regarding sexting of other’s sexual images, it seems there is a different
dynamic among the variables. First, age was positively related to the sexting
behaviors (β = .06), indicating that the older the youths are, the more likely
they are to be involved in sexting behaviors involving others. In terms of sex,
male youths were less likely to involve with sexting of others (β = –.08), and
youths in male-only schools were significantly less likely to do sexting of
others (β = –.07), compared to males in coed schools.
For sexting behaviors of others, positive attitudes toward sexting (β = .06),
peer pressure (β = .43) and prior delinquency (β = .20) were significantly
positively related to the behaviors. Unlike for sexting of self, Attachment was
significantly and negatively related to sexting of others (β = –.09). Again, the
strongest factor for sexting of others was peer pressure (β = .28). Overall, the
model explained 29% of variance in sexting behaviors of others’ sexual
images (F = 45.10).

Discussions and Conclusion

Summary of Findings
This study examined effects of factors derived from criminological theories
using sexting behaviors as an outcome variable. Analysis of the data

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 259

produced a finding that peer pressure was the most important influence on
sexting behaviors. Specifically, within the social learning framework, the
results provide support for an argument that peer pressure was the most
important factor affecting both types of sexting behaviors: sexting of self and
sexting of others. Regardless of sexting contents (whether it is about oneself
or others), youths in South Korea seem to sext due to pressure from friends.
Future research, however, should continue to explore sexting within the con-
text of social learning theory since much is left unknown. For example, from
the findings of this study, we cannot clearly understand the processes that
teach attitudes favorable to sexting. Likewise, we cannot test what types of
interventions might work toward interrupting sexting behaviors. Some states
have attempted to intervene by charging sexters as child pornographers and
having them register as sex offenders. Such bootstrapping of the laws of child
pornography to activities largely guided by peer pressure seems overzealous.
A better avenue might be to develop interventions designed to educate juve-
niles about the dangers of sexting and about the potential harm that comes
from it instead of taking a law enforcement approach. Further, interventions
could be designed to change the peer culture that pressures young people into
this type of behavior.
The current study also found that prior delinquency was a strong factor
affecting sexting behaviors. Since the prior delinquency scale measured gen-
eral delinquency rather than specific types (such as delinquent behaviors
involving sexual activities), it seems that youths who are more likely to par-
ticipate in delinquent behaviors are also more likely to participate in sexting
behaviors (Albury et al., 2010). In addition, the finding also indicated that the
tendency to participate in sexting may be facilitated by possession of positive
attitudes toward sexting behaviors. Compared to the bivariate correlations,
positive attitude became weaker attributes for sexting behaviors in the multi-
variate regressions. This implies that there may be possible interactions
among attitude, peer pressure, and prior delinquency. Further investigation
on this aspect is strongly advised.
Unexpectedly, this study found that age and sex of youths were signifi-
cantly related to only sexting of others. Regarding age, it seems that, as
youths mature physically (or sexually), they become more prone to sexting
activities. This tendency is dependent upon gender however. The results from
the bivariate correlations showed that sex was not significantly related to
both types of sexting behaviors; however, in the multivariate regressions, sex
(particularly, youths in male-only school) became a significant factor for the
sexting of others. This finding suggests that male youths who were attending
male-only schools were less likely to participate in sexting of others, con-
firming prior findings in the United States. Although the prior survey of

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

260 Youth & Society 48(2)

sexting behaviors in the United States did not differentiate types of school,
the national survey found that male youths were less likely to participate in
sexting compared to their female counterparts (“Sex and Tech: Results from
a survey of teens and young adults,” 2009). One possibility is that youths who
were attending male-only schools were not able to do sexting of others due to
the absence of female counterparts as targets of sexting behaviors. In con-
trast, there is no significant difference between youths in female-only schools
and female youths in coed schools. This finding also implies that girls are the
main features in most sexting contents, so that there is no significant differ-
ence across different types of female schools.

Limitations and Recommendations

Although the current study empirically and quantitatively investigated preva-
lence and correlates of sexting behaviors among youths in South Korea, it is
recommended that researchers also use qualitative methods to investigate the
true nature of sexting behaviors in the Korean context. Since a quantitative
study cannot adequately address contextual aspects of delinquency, under-
standing youth sexting behavior through rich narrative information from
youths is necessary.
In addition, sexting has become a relatively common type of delinquent
behavior in recent times. It has received quite a lot of public attention, but
limited scholarly investigation has been carried out to understand the causes
of sexting behaviors. Furthermore, there is an emerging body of literature on
the sexting phenomenon, but there is a lack of study testing theory with sex-
ting behavior. Thus, future studies should focus and expand more crimino-
logical variables to examine their relationship with sexting behaviors.

Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank to the Korean Institute of Criminology (KIC) for use
of the data.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: The data utilized for the current study
were collected from a government funded study of sexting behaviors in South Korea.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 261

The grant was provided by the Korean Institute of Criminology (KIC) and the project
was carried out by Chang-Hun Lee between October and December 2009.

Notes
1. Since producing and disseminating sexually explicit materials of youths is illegal
(by child pornography law), differentiation of sexting based on consent (i.e.,
consensual sexting vs. non-consensual sexting) is not a major topic of crimino-
logical study. Particularly in South Korea, sexual activities including intercourse
by youths aged below 13 is illegal (i.e., status offense), the current study focused
on differentiation of sexting based on media used, rather than differentiation of
sexting based on consent. For a discussion on typology of sexting based on exis-
tence of consent and other circumstances, please review the article by Wolak,
Finkelhor, & Mitchell (2011).
2. Prior studies suggested that self-report surveys could produce valid information
compared to other types of observations when youths were asked about their
delinquency (Ahmad & Smith, 1990; Cornell & Brockenbrough, 2004; Huizinga
& Elliott, 1986; Thornberry & Krohn, 2000).
3. The national capital region includes Seoul, a capital city of South Korea, and its
satellite cities. Satellite cities are defined as cities which can be reached from
Seoul within an hour by public transportation (taxi, bus, and subways).
4. Due to the page limit, the table containing demographic statistics was excluded,
and it is available upon request.

References
Ahmad, Y., & Smith, P. K. (1990). Behavioural measures: Bullying in schools. Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 12, 26-27.
Ahmend, M. (2009). Teen “sexting” craze leading to child porn arrests in U.S., Times.
Retrieved from http://technology,timesonline.co.uk
Akers, R. L. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime
and deviance. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
Akers, R. L., & Jensen, G. F. (2006). The empirical status of social learning the-
ory of crime and deviance: The past, present and future. In F. T. Cullen, J. P.
Wright & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory
(pp. 37-76). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Akers, R. L., Krohn, M., Lanza-Kaduce, L., & Radosevich, M. (1979). Social learning
and deviant behavior: A specific test of general theory. American Sociological
Review, 44, 636-655.
Albury, K., Funnell, N., & Noonan, E. (2010). The politics of sexting: Young people,
self-representation and citizenship. Paper presented at the Australian and New
Zealand Communication Association Conference, Canberra, Australia.
Bernburg, J. G., & Thorlindsson, T. (1999). Adolescent violence, social control, and
the subculture of delinquency factors related to violent behavior and nonviolent
delinquency. Youth and Society, 30, 445-460.

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

262 Youth & Society 48(2)

Bjarnason, T., & Thorlindsson, T. (1998). Modeling Durkheim on the micro level: A
study of youth suicidality. American Sociological Review, 63(1), 94-110.
Brown, B., Clasen, D. R., & Eicher, S. A. (1986). A. Perceptions of peer pressure,
peer conformity dispositions, and self-reported behavior among adolescents.
Developmental Psychology, 22, 521-530.
Brunker, M. (2009). Sexting surprise: Teens face child porn charges, MSNBC.
Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28679588
Burgess, R. L., & Akers, R. L. (1966). A differential association—Reinforcement
teory of criminal behavior. Social Problems, 14(2), 128-147.
City of Seoul. (2010). White Paper 2010. Retrieved from http://stat.seoul.go.kr
Cornell, D. G., & Brockenbrough, K. (2004). Identification of bullies and victims: A
comparison of methods. Journal of School Violence, 3(2/3), 63.
Ferguson, C. J. (2011). Sexting behaviors among young Hispanic women: Incidence
and association with other high-risk sexaul behaviors. Psychiatry Quarterly, 82,
239-243.
Finkelhorn, D., Mitchel, K., & Wolak, J. (2000). Online victimization: a report on
the nation’s youth. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children.
Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990). a general theory of crime. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Hagan, J. (1991). Destiny and drift: Subcultural preferences, status attainments, and
the risks and rewards of youth. American Sociological Review, 56, 567-582.
Hawg, S., & Akers, R. L. (2003). Adolescent substance use in South Korea: A cross-
cultural test of three theories. In R. L. Akers & G. F. Jensen (Eds.), Social learn-
ing theory and the explanation of crime: A guide for the new century (pp. 39-64).
New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Hill, C. (2009). Sexting: Spotsylvania, VA teens solicit nude images, charged with
child porn. Retrieved from http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-03-12/
news/17919253_1_sexting-child-porn-charges-distribution-of-child-pornogra-
phy
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Huizinga, D., & Elliott, D. S. (1986). Reassessing the reliability and validity of self-
report delinquency measures. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2, 293-327.
Humbach, J. A. (2009). Sexting and the first amendment. Retrieved from http://ssrn.
com/abstract=1470819
Hwang, S., & Akers, R. L. (2003). Substance use by Korean adolescents: A cross-
cultural test of social learning, social bonding, and self-control theories. In R. L.
Akers & G. F. Jensen (Eds.), Social learning theory and the explanation of crime
(pp. 39-64). New Burnswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Katzman, D. (2010). Sexting: Keeping teens safe and responsible in a technologically
savvy world. Paediatric Child Health, 15(1), 41-42.
Kazdin, C., & Ibanga, I. (2009). The truth about teens sexting. ABC News. Retrieved
from http://abcnews.go.com

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

Lee et al. 263

Krohn, M., Skinner, W. F., Massey, J. L., & Akers, R. L. (1985). Social learning
theory and adolescent cigarette smoking: A longitudinal study. Social Problems,
32, 455-473.
Mihalic, S. W., & Elliott, D. (1997). A social learning theory model of marital vio-
lence. Journal of Family Violence, 12, 21-36.
Miller, H. V., Jennings, W. G., Alverez-Rivera, L., & Miller, J. M. (2008). Explaining
substance use among Puerto Rican adolescents: A partial test of social learning
theory. Journal of Drug Issues, 38(1), 261-284.
Miller v. Skumanick, No. 3:09cv540, 2009 WL 838233, at *1(M.D.Pa.Mar.30, 2009)
(2009).
Montopoli, B., & Daly, C. B. (2011). Anthony Weiner admits to online relationships,
sending explicit photo; says he will not step down. CBSNews. Retrieved from
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20069435-503544.html
Parker, M. R. (2009). Kids these days: Teenage sexting and how the law should deal
with it. Retrieved from http://www.works.bepress.com/michael_parker/1/
Rebellon, C. J. (2006). Do adolescents engage in delinquency to attract the social
attention of peers? An extension and longitudinal test of the social reinforcement
hypothesis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43, 387-411.
Roberts, Y. (2005, July 31). The one and only, Sunday Telegraph, p. 22.
Sex and Tech: Results from a survey of teens and young adults. (2009). Sex and tech:
Results from a survey of teens and young adults. In The National Campaign to
Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. Retrieved from http://www.thenation-
alcampaign.org/sextech/PDF/SexTech_Summary.pdf
Skinner, W. F., & Fream, A. M. (1997). A social learning theory analysis of computer
crime among college students. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,
34, 495-518.
Southerland, E. H. (1947). Principles of criminology (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: J.
B. Lippincott.
Stone, G. (2009). “Sexting” teens can go too far. ABC News.Retrieved from http://
abcnews.go.com/Technology/WorldNews/sexting-teens/story?id=6456834
Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2000). The self-report method for measuring
delinquency and crime. In D. Duffee (Ed.), Measurement and analysis of crime
and justice (pp. 33-83). Rockville, MD: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS.
Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K. J. (2011). How often are teens arrested
for sexting? Data from a national sample of police cases. Pediatrics, 129,
2011-2242.

Author Biographies
Chang-Hun Lee, PhD, is an associate professor at the Department of Police
Administration, Hannam University. He earned his PhD in criminal justice from the
School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. His primary research interests
include testing criminological theories in different social contexts, integrating theories,
investigating causes of juvenile delinquency, and examining effect of justice adminis-
trations. Contact information: 133 Ojeong-dong, Daeduk-gu, Daejeon City, South
Korea. Tel: 82-42-629-7531, FAX: 82-42-629-8144, Email: drcriminals@hnu.kr

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016

264 Youth & Society 48(2)

Stacy Moak, PhD, is professor at the Department of Criminal Justice, University

Arkansas at Little Rock. She earned her PhD in urban studies from the University of
New Orleans. Currently she is the graduate coordinator at the department, and on the
editorial boards for Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice and The American Journal of
Criminal Justice. Her active research agenda includes juvenile law and justice, and
environmental criminology. Contact information: Tel: 501-569-8591, Email: sxmoak@
ualr.edu
Jeffery T. Walker, PhD, is director and professor at the Department of Criminal
Justice, University of Arkansas at Little Rock. He earned his PhD in criminal justice
from the College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University. He is the past
president of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, and he has numerous editorial
experience. His areas of interest are social/environmental factors of crime and the
study of non-linear dynamics as they relate to crime. Contact information: Tel: 501-
569-3083, Email: jtwalker@ualr.edu

Downloaded from yas.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on March 5, 2016