Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds Delinquent Behavior Among Boys Is "Contagious"
According to a new study, if everyone else was committing a crime, you would too, at least if you are a boy. The 20-year study showed what every grandmother could tell you; children from poor families, with inadequate supervision and bad friends were more likely to end up in juvenile court. What was more surprising is that exposure to the juvenile justice system seemed to increase the chance that the boy would engage in criminal activity as a young adult. "For boys who had been through the juvenile justice system, compared to boys with similar histories without judicial involvement, the odds of adult judicial interventions increased almost seven-fold," says study co-author Richard E. Tremblay.
There's money in prisons, pointless drug laws etc. It's not an accident things work out this way.
"Boys more likely to do what the other boys in their peer group are doing. Juvenile delinquents teach juveniles to be delinquents."
Another amazing result by the Maximegallion Institute for Slowly and Painfully Working Out the Surprisingly Obvious.
The enemies of Democracy are
Was this study conducted by the ministry of cliched motherhood fears? Next on their agenda: if all of your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?
They imply that this environment causes this behaviour, which might be true. Just like living under a Power-line, Cell phone tower, and beside a nuclear power plant, MIGHT cause some cancerous effects.
However, that doesn't make it CONTAGIOUS.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Contagious
This may be true: sticking the bad kids in with the good kids may improve the behavior of the bad kids. BUT BE WARNED! I was part of an educational experiment in which honors students (such as myself) were placed in an 6th-grade English class with, well, the criminal class.
I LEARNED NOTHING IN THAT CLASS! The teacher spent the whole time playing cop to stop the delinquents. Furthermore, sticking us in with them actually encouraged the good students to out-bad the bad students. It was a complete disaster.
For the good of this country, we need to concentrate on making sure our best students get the best education. This should be a higher priority than trying to make scientists out of juvenile criminals and bullies. Society doesn't need, and will never get 100% genius-status for all students, anyway. Attempts to make this happen will likely drag us all down.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Most people don't think they're doing something wrong. They just were hanging out with their friends, or having fun, and don't deserve getting dragged through the courts for it. The ones who prosecuted them are just a bunch of jerks, and if they don't respect me why should I respect them?
Another possible factor is that when this happens once, the people involved probably start getting watched more and treated with more suspicion. If people are watching you more, you're more likely to get caught. And if everybody assumes you're going to steal, some people come to the conclusion they might as well go and do that, since they're being assumed to anyway.
My grandfather used to say that "One boy is a boy, two boys are half a boy, and three boys are no boy at all." Meaning that when boys get together they have less good sense than one boy by himself does.
Atheism is a religion to the same extent that not collecting stamps is a hobby.
How is this anything new? When I was growing up the teachers always told us about peer pressure, and that is all this article is really about.
Contributing to the delinquency of deliquents since 1997.
Seriously, any first year sociology student in community college could tell you this. Also, there IS a causation in this relationship.
And always the same expression of disbelief from the parent/grandparent/guardian:
"But hes such a good boy!"
*Cough* *Cough*
"C'here PIGGY!!!"
There's an old saying which says "birds of a feather fly together." (Or, "You can tell a man by the company he keeps.") This study implies that the behavior is being shaped by peers, instead of people associating with others who have similar behavior. This is somewhat obvious, but it doesn't seem as dumb as some people are making it out to be.
"Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
controlled by oligarchs.
Yours In Psychology,
K. Trout
I've always maintained that the IQ of a group of boys is calculated by taking the lowest IQ in the group and dividing it by the number of boys in the group. When my son was growing up, he and his friends demonstrated this over and over. My parents maintain that when I was growing up that my friends and I did too. (They are still a little pissed about me and my friends building and testing a very, very small thermite bomb in the basement.)
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
I love the correlationisnotcausation tag every single time an article on any study is posted. Correlation means nothing! Nothing causes anything! There is no order in the universe! It's all chaos! :)
Something else to consider from just reading the summery is that it may not be that these boys are coping the 'bad' boys but just realize the justice system doesn't do squat. For the sake of argument, image that by selling weed you can make a couple grand a month but the only thing that is stopping you is fear of getting punished. Once it is realized that if the punishment and risk of getting caught is less then that of selling the weed, why stop? Hell since there are essentially breakpoints, why not expand to maximize the profit with the same risks? Not saying this is the only reason, but I'm sure lack of sufficient deterrent and lack of fear of getting caught probably plays a role.
Or put as a car analogy: Once you realize your car will run off the cheep gasoline without harm, why pay for the more expensive stuff?
I'd rather see "yougottakeepemseparated"
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
It's a surprise to researchers that if you put a group of adolescent criminals together that they will reinforce their own sense of community among themselves, and share their accumlated knowledge of criminal actions among themselves as well as brainstorm for new ideas? It also shouldn't be any surprise that you can't teach morality and ethics to people who have no desire to learn or live their lives in accordance to those concepts.
Sometimes it just amazes me how little people in what are supposed to be rehabilitation programs understand basic human nature.
So does this mean we should be putting more juveniles on house arrest? It seems like the juvenile detention centers breed more crime than they prevent.
matta
Is this surprising? Boys, especially, fall victim to any peer pressure they feel makes them seem "cool." Troublemaking and breaking the law, especially in young adolescents, is seen as cool. Also, if others are breaking the law and getting away with it, a normally good boy might think he can become more cool without risk of being caught - economically, a great decision.
"Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
Find young criminals who *have not* been caught and find out over twenty years how many crimes they committed well enough not to be caught at. Perhaps, the data might suggest, the groups studied were taught by incompetent leaders. We might be better served by studying successful criminals, who might behave differently. Or who might have been taught better work habits and techniques.
Or mebbe the youths in the study got caught "in a game" at first, but found dealing with the police, courts, other inmates, and the jail system itself emotionally satisfying in some way. This is called "institutionalisation."
Every year we pay for more and more police, and we get more and more crime.
Let's try something else. But, please, not another study like this one.
So you are telling me that boys from a bad background that manage to stay out of juvie are also more likely to stay out of jail? Amazing!
love is just extroverted narcissism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_association
Come on! That is really money well spend in a study. 20 years to tell the obvious, and they even limited to only boys! I can complete their study in 5 seconds: "and girls too". Every behaviour is "contagious", people do it to fit in. That's no news.
Say what you will, when it comes to instilling righteous behaviour in boys the power of the 11 Commandments pays off. 11? Ya, it's the 11th Commandment that's crucial, 11th Commandment: Don't get Caught. Current theories on development have taken on as commonplace the idea that we abstract morals, or, social conventions from our environment much as we abstract a subset of language universals and we do so more or less concurrently during the window we have for developing language skills. Studies have shown increases in learning ability can be garnered from placing slower students in with quicker students and that social status plays a significant part in learning. Poorer, lower status students will perform better if placed with more socially advantaged students, but, if initially disadvantaged students are returned to their milieu, their performance gains disappear. mit open course ware has a recent set of lectures on introductory psychology by Professor Wolfe that addresses some of these issues.
ideopath @ play
So basically, boys(n) = 1 - (n - 1) / 2 for all natural numbers? So 100 boys are actually -48.5 boys?
No, wait... if one boy is a boy, and two boys are half a boy, and three boys are zero, then the value of a boy must be zero! Reminds me about that nursery rhyme about sticks and snails and puppy dog tails...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If you mix kids with too much variety in intelligence then you either teach at a level for the smart kids and leave the stupid kids behind because they can't possibly keep up or you teach at a level for the stupid kids and the smart kids get bored and quit learning.
It's much better to split kids up into classes that are suited to their strengths and weaknesses rather than be PC and stick 'em all together.
This reminds me of the "Broken Windows" theory. (Please, don't make the OS joke that is begging to be said.) A good explanation is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixing_Broken_Windows Whatever the original root cause, of course, the effect is the same once it takes hold: The lowest common denominator often is the expression of the group as a whole. (Barring a really great leader of some sort.) This is expressed most succinctly in the following: http://despair.com/teamwork.html So bad behavior (or making poor decisions) is virus-like. The question to be answered is: can good behavior (making good decisions) also be formed to be virus-like?
Most important is the comment that the kids exposed to the legal system, were more likely to come back to it.
Exposing children to the ugliness, simplicity, and experience of a system engenders them to it by removing the mystery, stigma, and fear associated with it. These feelings are replaced by familiarity. This is particularly true of technology as well.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
They go into the juvie system, and wind up criminals? The article did not say that, but it was implied.
Well, let's see: you are enough of a thug to get sent to juvie, and dumb enough that you got caught and sent to juvie. In juvie, your hand was lightly slapped, and you were turned loose. Get caught again, get lightly slapped again. While there, hang out with more thugs.
Later, you turn 18, and SURPRISE, you get sent to REAL JAIL. Where you become "bubba's bitch".
Point is, if you weren't a dumbass thug to begin with, you would not be sent to juvie.
No person send to the chair ever re-offended. 0% recidivism compared to 70% and higher for all other forms of punishment.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The summary would seem to indicate a classic methodology error: A selected sample.
Were kids who were in the juvenile justice system more likely to be young-adult crooks because of peer pressure in the system? Or were they in the system because they were young crooks on their way to becoming old crooks.
Of course to do a controlled experiment you'd have to randomly select some kids and put them into juvenile detention whether they committed any crime or not. Not particularly practical (and definitely not legal OR fair).
And doing so would (rightly) give the condemned innocent a belief that the justice system was a joke. Expect him to believe that, if he's going to be treated as a criminal anyway, he might as well enjoy some swag. (Which brings up the issue of how many innocent people condemned by criminal justice system error go on to become actual criminals.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Here's a better headline: Study Finds Behavior Among Boys Is "Contagious". Note the missing descriptor. I've seen any behavior, from good to bad, be contagious among groups of boys, and hey guess what, girls too. Whatever seems "Alpha" "must" be the thing to do. I certainly don't want to be the last kid on the block to do (fill in the blank.)
Correlation != Causation
According to a new study, if everyone else was committing a crime you would too, at least if you are a Democrat.
There, fixed that for you.
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
What's that line from GATTICA, "there's no gene for the human spirit". Or the old saying, "experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other". Human nature rewards the majority that follows the pack. Childhood is a wonderful time to test social boundaries and explore behavioral limits. You've seen the classroom success formula: if 90% of the kids get the material, the program is generally regarded as a success. Those that don't have to make it up by repetition or worse case, expulsion. Even in social settings where problem kids tend to accumulate (youth authority, detention, alternative schools) there are measured degrees of success where the kids tend to get the message. In situations where a choice is presented, people tend to migrate by and large to the reward versus the pushishment. There are those kids that will fight tooth and nail to the bitter end, spending years learning the same mistakes and lessons again and again which is unfortunate. Kids with potential for good and bad behavior eventually reach a point - they can change their ways and correct the course. Barring some chemical defenciency or dependancy, most kids choose thankfully make the right choice. Bad kids do not necessarily beget bad kids. At some point, the child makes a choice to continue being a bad kid.
I put myself through college working as a night counselor at a school for boys --- one needs to remove the perceived glamour of the ``gangsta'' lifestyle, demonstrate the consequences of poor decisions and provide the rewards of mature and responsible behaviour.
Most importantly this needs to be done regardless of the child's intellectual level --- at one meeting a fellow counselor argued that one of the students should be released because he wasn't particularly bright and was ``simply going to be a janitor when he grows up anyway'' to which another added, ``one who swipes small pilferables which won't be missed.'' --- my rejoinder was that if we kept him in the program and continued working w/ him until he successfully graduated that while he might be a janitor when he grew up, he'd be an honest one who wouldn't steal and that that was a worthwhile goal, and maybe he could be something else, but that he would never get that chance if he didn't graduate.
He stayed in the program and I actually ran into him a couple of years later --- he was just completing an apprenticeship in the building trades and had been out of trouble since graduation.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Everything you need to know about young boys, you can learn by reading Lord of the Flies.
According to a new study, if everyone else was committing a crime you would too, at least if you are a boy.
However, the article says nothing about that. The research study only involved boys:
The research team sought out boys from kindergarten who were at risk for delinquent behavior and who were enrolled at 53 schools from the poorest neighbourhoods in Montreal. Some 779 participants were interviewed annually from the age of 10 until 17 years. By their mid-20s, some 17.6 percent of participants ended up with adult criminal records for infractions that included homicide (17.9 percent); arson (31.2 percent); prostitution (25.5 percent); drug possession (16.4 percent) and impaired driving (8.8 percent).
And the conclusion has nothing to do with gender:
"For boys who had been through the juvenile justice system, compared to boys with similar histories without judicial involvement, the odds of adult judicial interventions increased almost seven-fold,"
First, the parent is correct,
Second, education should be about equality of opportunity, not equal achievement for all, that means that the BAD and the STUPID need to be controlled, to enable that equality to the brightest and hard working.
You in the US are caught up in an orgy of political correctness and confusion which helps nobody and disadvantages all, and MUCH WORSE, it is second time around as Ms. Shirley Williams did exactly that in the UK in the late 60s and 70s (so the Educational Elite and teachers unions can not claim they dont know). And as Obama said "lipstick on a pig" is exactly like assuming you can make all children academic, which is the assumption (WRONG) of the academic elites.
In Switzerland, education is streamed, and bad behavior is punished quickly, firmly and effectively, which is very likely to get the delinquent child punished physically by their own parents. The result is that we have very little crime and antisocial behavior, well educated kids who are employable, and very low taxes because people take pride in being a "Good Swiss".
People laugh at the rediculous hi-junks in the US, where the parents (are allowed to) oppose the authorities correcting children, and except for incomers from some parts of Europe, who stand to be expelled, the native Swiss would not think of it.
The result of this is that 4 year olds can walk to kindergarten safely, and all adults expect to stand in "loco parentis" of any child in need without phobia about paedophilia, as was the case in the rural US 40 years ago.
Put very simply, you have very arrogantly lost your own way, and the rest of the world is now FULLY wised up to you.
Your court system, and law, is in a complete mess vide the games SCOX have played for so many years.
At our small rural school, a junior one day threw a pop bottle at the car of a senior as the senior was driving away. The senior got out, roughed up the junior a little bit, and put him in his place.
But, the junior got pissed, got two of his buddies, and went over to the senior's house and vandalized the guy's car to the tune of about $1,500, plus did another $1,000 to his mother's car.
When the three stooges appeared in court, one of the three was a minor. (An accomplice, not the junior...he was 18...yea, what a shocker.) They got the minor to testify that he did all the dirty work, and the other two were just accomplices. Rather than the junior getting 90 days in jail and a $2,500 fine, he made off with just a small fine, and the minor got 40 hours of community service.
They don't just learn how to be a criminal by their friends...they are groomed.
Stop the presses!
People With Criminal History More Likely to Commit Crimes
Last I checked, people who are delinquent/criminal are not very easy to change, and have always been known to have a higher chance of committing a crime in the future. How is this new?
So...
If your boy is a penny-stealing, wanna-be criminal [dramatic pause] man who spends five years in a federal pound-me-in-the-ass penitentiary... ... he's more likely to grow up to be a Bad Person?
Fuckin' A, man!
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
Locking kids up because they want more attention and freedom doesn't seem to be the solution, particularly since they come out with a higher probability of worse crimes against society.
Why is this listed surprising? It's already well known that our prisons are training grounds for committing future crimes, not places for rehabilitation or punishment.
The same largely holds true for girls, it's just that girls don't tend to do the same "Delinquent" things that guys do in order to prevent becoming an outcast. Girls are less likely to cause fistfights, see how well something burns, or jump off a roof onto a trampoline. Girls are more about interacting with the people around them, rather than the world around them. As such, some of the equivalent girl activities would be doing something at odds with their 'genuine loner friend' to get into the more popular group (i.e. help the group post derogatory posters about the loner friend), be manipulative towards others (both guys and girls), and spread rumors. Since the damage that boys can cause setting fire near a shed is much easier to quantify than, say, the spread of a rumor, guys tend to get more attention from authority. That's the way I figure it anyway.
There's a very old Portuguese proverb about this:
"Diz-me com quem andas, que eu digo-te quem tu és"
Tell me about your friends, and I will tell you who you are.
New series on BBC which seems apropos: on iPlayer
A few years ago here in Germany, a study was conducted by a leading business consultancy company for a measly six or seven figure number to explain the big success of discount stores over here.
After half a year of mulling over the data, they announced they were pretty sure it had something to do with the prices.
If you understand German, here's the German cabaret artist Volker Pispers talking about it. If not, it still might be interesting to see how political entertainment looks like over here when it's good.
Look ma, no sources, +5 Insightful! Nice how experimental findings can be negated by "feel-so". The fact is that if a group is split up, the performance of both halves goes down. A case study: The PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) study found that Finland's education produces 15-year-olds that are consistently 1st or 2st in the world in the categories of Mathematics, Reading literacy, Science and Problem solving. Finland's educational policy is explicitly designed to be maximally inclusive up to the ninth grade (15-year-olds). Only the mentally disabled are given special education, and there are no "honor students" or such, let alone "gifted classes". Others in the top 3 of the ranking are Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea and Canada.
... to explain the recent flurry of stories about US Senators that can't seem to keep their pants zipped when in the company of women they're not married to?
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
I'd prefer "nukefromorbit".
Of course the Finns define "mentally disabled" as not being able to do calculus by age 15. :P
BUT BE WARNED! I was part of an educational experiment in which honors students (such as myself) were placed in an 6th-grade English class with, well, the criminal class.
Phew! Thanks for warning me about your participation! (j/k...)
At my elementary school the parents of the "stupid" kids started whining that their kids were being labeled and placed in the "stupid" class. They raised a fuss and had the classes all mixed together the next year.
In 2nd grade I got straight As in the smart class.
In 3rd grade I got straight As in the mixed class without having to do ANY work, and while being completely bored to death for 90% of the school day. I even got in trouble by trying to make things challenging for myself because I was so bored.
After that 1 year the students were re-segregated into smart and stupid classes again. Why? Because the stupid kids' parents were upset that their kids were now surrounded by kids who could run circles around them in class. They were being given the same material and grading scale as the smart kids, and the result was their kids felt even stupider and hopeless.
In 4th grade I got my first C. I had been broken of thinking school was fun and challenging, and started doing the bare minimum to get by. I managed to stay in the gifted classes for the rest of school, but always getting Bs and Cs, sometimes worse.
I have to wonder what my work ethic would be like (and indeed, my whole persona) if I hadn't been taught in 3rd grade that I was smarter than everyone else and could get by without any effort.
One boy = one boy
Two boys = 1/2 boy
Three or more boys = no help at all
I raise you the third reich, politicians in general, religions/cults, movements, and just about any other event of a strong reality of a loud person dragging half the country with him.
I wonder how often that was re-discovered already...
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I hope not. "Do-gooders" in the US, Canada, and Britain spent two hundred years of experiments building "penitentiaries," often with disastrous results. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison) The original thesis was that solitary confinement would not be punishment but rather an opportunity for reflection.
For most, the experience proved to be brutal as the pain and psychosis of communal prisons was LESS damaging than the damage resulting from trying to isolate mammals who have spent millions of years of evolution in social settings. We are social animals, like it or not.
That is not to say that most prisons, especially US state prisons are not often brutal and inhumane. It is to say that isolation appears to produce even worse results.
I hope I never go to prison. Conceptually, I like the IDEA of solitary confinement and think that I would personally do better in that environment. Even if it were my own choice, it would still not surprise any psychological professional when I went psychotic in the process.
Be careful of what you wish for.
Live Long and Prosper - Thanks Leonard. You are missed.
Of course if you get screwed over by law enforcement, the courts and the correctional system, all of which is designed to PUNISH people, you're going to have a bad attitude, even if you didn't start out with a bad attitude.
Read my lips: punishment does not work.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"For boys who had been through the juvenile justice system, compared to boys with similar histories without judicial involvement, the odds of adult judicial interventions increased almost seven-fold,"
Well, duh. If they're smart enough to not get caught when they're young, they're probably smart enough to not get caught when they're older.
My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
Observational learning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_learning
According to a new study, if everyone else has arrived at a certain conclusion, you should too. According to a new study, using the phrase "a new study" will get it noticed in the popular science media who count on you failing to differentiate that from "a new result". According to a new study, they will continue to print such misleading non-news not because they're ignorant, but because they don't care whether something is worthy of note as long as they can fill their white space.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
I dont want to learn to be a better criminal and I dont want to catch "the gay".
Winkey shortcut mapping for 64bit windows. WinKeyPlus
This sucks to have happened to you, but you seem to be targeting the effect, not the cause. Who made money off of your "diagnosis" for "ADHD"? A search with the term ADHD in it fetches tonnes of advertising.
Schools have an economic incentive to declare people "retarded" and keep them that way. I couldn't find an article about the issue, but this post seems to tell the story I have heard many times.
Then there is the experiment which showed once psychologists declare someone with a mental illness, they stay with that diagnosis. If the patient stopped showing signs of the disorder, the psychologist would claim to have "cured" the illness. I can't remember the name of the guy who did it, but it had to do with mental institutions and schizophrenia.
It just shows once you are diagnosed with a mental disorder, whether it is true or not, you have to prove you don't have it. This is a difficult thing, as it relates to what is going on inside your head, and no one else can directly see it.
However, really I think this whole thing started with the baby boomers. Teachers in the 1980s were too lazy to properly discipline children, so anyone who misbehaved too much was "diagnosed" with "ADHD".
That said, I think ADHD is probably a real disorder, but most people who are diagnosed with it these days probably don't have it. In fact, the drugs they are made to take most likely cause serious psychological problems.
According to a broadcast I've watched by Prof. Spitzer*, it seems that observing the law being broken in some place, makes people break it too.
Say someone see a sign saying "no graffiti allowed" and behind it a wall with graffiti on it, and say someone else has put an advert on the first's windshield - he will more likely throw it on the ground right away than dispose of it in a trashcan. I suppose it is something to do with "Status-Quo", it signals that the law is a joke around that area and so you will act accordingly.
Now, back to the topic - when your peers misbehave, you will more likely misbehave. This seems to be in direct relation to the graffiti example.
I have also read, in a book by Steven Pinker (The Black Slate), that youngsters learn to behave from their environment and not their parents.
What their parents are able to do however is to be careful about who they let their children hang out with.
Yes, it seems that bad behavior is contagious - this is another expression of what seems to be in the human nature; When in Rome...
*link, in German: http://www.br-online.de/br-alpha/geist-und-gehirn/geist-und-gehirn-manfred-spitzer-gehirnforschung-ID1240404245825.xml
Sage point... I don't believe that word applies to behavioral factors one bit.
The expression “laughter is contagious” is only a metaphor, which everyone seems to accept. To apply it in a clinical context is just ludicrous; is there an antibiotic that would eliminate laughter? Does laughter pass from one person to another through contagions or microbes? NO! It's behavioral, it’s a function of the mind and physiology, but it is not a pathogen.
None of that is to say that the phenomenon isn't worth study. Another cliché says, “boys will be boys,” a glib justification to allow young males to pursue their reckless endeavors. I believe the propensity for young males to mimic each others’ mis-adventures is an oft-neglected factor in juvenile discipline, parenting and in general society.
Spinning the phenomenon as "contagious" is like finding a cure for yawning. They're barking up the wrong tree, that isn't even a tree, because it's a signpost, and they didn't read the signpost because they're dogs... unless they're really just humans who happen to be barking mad.
This post © Copyrite Duggeek, all rights reversed.
I took a sociology class 20 years ago where a guest speaker posited that criminals are educated by other criminals in prison on how to be better criminals. So none of this is really huge news but it is always good to get proof of such ideas.