Clemens Kroneberg

University of Cologne

The post-pandemic increase in police-recorded child and juvenile delinquency in Germany has sparked scientific, public, and political debate (Bliesener et al. 2024; Nägel & Kroneberg 2023; Pöge & Bredow 2023; Prätor & Baier 2024). Both the existence and extent of this increase—as well as its potential causes—remain unclear, particularly due to the lack of comparable dark-field studies capable of capturing the underlying mechanisms. Against this background, the state parliament of North Rhine-Westphalia requested that the government commission a scientific study to fill this gap. The talk will present main findings from this study and reflect on the public role of empirical-analytical social science. The study consisted of a large-scale school survey conducted between September and December 2024, in which we interviewed students at secondary schools that already participated in a longitudinal study between 2013 and 2016 (“Friendship and Violence in Adolescence”). We thereby contribute to the literature that uses cohort comparisons to gain insights into the general determinants of juvenile delinquency (Dinovitzer et al. 2009; Neil & Sampson 2021; Piquero et al. 2003).

Andreas Diekmann¹; Heinz Leitgöb²

¹ Universities Konstanz and Leipzig; ² University of Leipzig

In many social processes, one finds monotonically decreasing risk functions as a function of time. For example, geographical mobility becomes less frequent with length of residence, accidents become less likely with time, and the risk of recidivism among offenders decreases with the length of time since their release from prison. Often, conclusions are then drawn from the aggregated risk curve regarding a similarly monotonically decreasing risk at the micro-level of individual behavior. As has long been known from risk analysis, this may be a fallacy (e.g. Chiang 1968). Unfortunately, the possibility of a fallacy does not always go unnoticed. Using models, we show that the monotonically decreasing risk in aggregated data can also be explained by alternative assumptions. We show these relationships using the example of a study on the recidivism intervals of offenders.

Pay Laurin Jessen¹; Johannes Huinink²; Ulrich Kühnen³; Klaus Boehnke³

¹ University of Hamburg; ² Universität Bremen; ³ Constructor University

Moral deviance is not the same as moral conformity! However, neither in theory nor in operationalization do the Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) and the Morality as Cooperation Theory (MaC) distinguish between morally deviant and morally conform behavior. In a series of three studies, the Morality as Cooperation-Deviance Relevance Scale (MaC-DRS) was developed as a new instrument that overcomes this shortcoming. MaC-DRS is based on a synthesis of MFT and MaC and focuses consistently on moral deviance. Findings from two studies in Germany (Study 1: student sample, N = 792; Study 2: nationwide non-student sample, N = 2326) show that MaC-DRS measures 8 moral domains as first-order factors in a valid and reliable way. In terms of all psychometric properties tested, MaC-DRS is superior to the moral relevance scales that emerged from MFT and MaC. A third cross-cultural study (Study 3: N = 2982, samples from Egypt, Germany, Japan and the USA) provided further evidence for the 8-dimensional factor structure across different cultural contexts. In addition, evidence for different culturally mediated moral systems was found. In my presentation, I will discuss the synthesis of MFT and MaC and the focus on moral deviance. Furthermore, I will present empirical findings regarding the psychometric properties of MaC-DRS.

Annika Beier

Georg-August Universität Göttingen

Using a quantitative online questionnaire survey, this study examines the phenomenon catcalling – a form of sexual harassment that involves (unsolicited) behavior with sexually suggestive connotations between strangers in public spaces, typically without physical contact.

Following debates in the media all over the world, catcalling is viewed in different ways by society. On the one hand, catcalling is tolerated, normalized and equated with compliments; on the other hand, it is seen as a form of sexual harassment. It seems, that the distinction between catcalling and (misguided) compliments or acceptable attempts to strike up a conversation is unclear. What is socially acceptable and what is not (anymore)?

Research on the perception of this phenomenon can provide important insights for an upcoming criminal policy discussion and can be used to create preventive measures.

Addressing this research gap, the data were collected through an online questionnaire using a factorial survey design (n=3150). The data allows to examine how the public perceives and evaluates various forms of contact, including catcalling and what aspects influence the evaluation. At the same time, it aims to expand the state of research with regard to the (including male) victimization and the motives of catcallers.

The prevalence and incidence of experienced and perpetrated catcalling as well as stated motives will be analyzed. In addition it is planned to employ regression models with adjusted standard errors and the vignette variables and respondent-level variables used as independent variables. The initial results will be presented at the conference.