Juvenile Delinquency
Autor: Sharon • January 30, 2018 • 5,021 Words (21 Pages) • 587 Views
...
We will run the model over times to test different government controls in order to help our client to find out the most effective control to reduce the juvenile delinquent rate and create a better community.
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
Method
Our model aims to find the best investment option for government in order to reducing juvenile delinquency according by using the theories from sociology. Users can allocation money on four options, which are the independent variables: proportion-‐of-‐family-‐subsidy, proportion-‐of-‐ police-‐control, proportion-‐of-‐small-‐medium-‐business, and proportion-‐of-‐educational-‐programs. Each option has different effect on community status, which are dependent variables: direct-‐control-‐ parents, direct-‐control-‐police, community-‐unemployment, community-‐norm, domestic-‐violence-‐ rate, school-‐violence, school-‐involvement, government-‐total-‐income, government-‐total-‐income, business index, the number of crimes, quarterly family income, quarterly crime rate and quarterly unemployment rate. The community status then will affect the attributes of agents. Each agent has a score to measure its delinquent potential, which is represented by the scale color of blue. The darker the color, the higher the crime potential. White means that agent has zero potential of crime. Red means that agent is delinquent. Our simulation is a discrete time simulation and has total 40 ticks, means counts 10 years and one tick means one quarter. Users can also choose different investment method, community-‐attitude, and additional funding. By selecting the allocating the investment options, users can use the total number of crimes, which is cumulative, and quarterly number of crimes to see whether the option is effective or not.
Please refer to Table 1. “parameters and values” for more details.
Table 1. Parameters and values
Parameter definition
Value/range
Coefficient that family subsidy influence direct parents control
0.1
Coefficient that businesses influence direct parents control
0.1
Coefficient that family subsidy influence domestic violence
-‐0.2
Coefficient that family subsidy influence school involvement
0.1
Coefficient that educational program influence school involvement
0.5
Coefficient that police control influence direct police control
0.5
Coefficient that police control influence school violence
-‐0.15
Coefficient educational program influence school violence
-‐0.1
Coefficient that business influence community unemployment
-‐0.1
Coefficient that educational program influence community norm
0.2
Coefficient that businesses influence business index
0.15
Coefficient that direct parents control influence personal stress
0.1
Coefficient that domestic violence rate influence personal stress
0.5
Coefficient that school violence influence personal stress
0.6
Coefficient that direct parents control influence exposure to delinquent peers
-‐0.25
Coefficient that direct police control influence exposure to delinquent peers
-‐0.25
Coefficient that school violence influence exposure to delinquent peers
0.5
---------------------------------------------------------------
Coefficient that community unemployment influence personal goal
0.15
Coefficient that school involvement influence personal goal
0.1
Coefficient that domestic violence rate influence attachment to parents
-‐0.23
Coefficient that school violence influence relations with peers
0.3
Coefficient that school involvement influence relations with peers
0.2
Coefficient that community norm influence personal belief
0.25
Coefficient that propensity to aggression influence delinquent likelihood
0.5
Coefficient that personal stress influence delinquent likelihood
0.23
Coefficient that self-‐control influence delinquent likelihood
-‐0.165
Coefficient that exposure to delinquent peers influence delinquent likelihood
0.556
Coefficient that attachment to parents influence delinquent likelihood
-‐0.155
...