ORIGINAL ARTICLE
ADOLESCENT SELF-CONTROL AND ITS EFFECT ON
DEVIANT BEHAVIOR: A QUANTITATIVE STUDY
Elis Karina Febriyani1*.
Randwitya Ayu Ganis Hemasti2.
Anggun Pertiwi3 Universitas Buana Perjuangan Karawang.
Indonesia *Corresponding Author: ps21.
elisfebriyani@mhs.
ABSTRACT
Adolescent delinquency remains a salient educational and psychosocial challenge, particularly in contexts where biological, psychological, and social pressures increase young peopleAos vulnerability to deviant behaviors.
This study investigated whether self-control predicts juvenile delinquency among students in Karawang Regency.
Using a quantitative causal design, data were collected from 348 students aged 13Ae19 years .
181 female.
recruited through convenience sampling.
Self-control was measured using the Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS), and juvenile delinquency was assessed using a researcher-constructed delinquency scale.
Data were analyzed using simple linear regression (SPSS v.
The results show that self-control has a statistically significant effect on juvenile delinquency .
= 0.
p < 0.
, indicating that self-control is a meaningful predictor of delinquent tendencies.
However, the effect size is relatively small, with self-control explaining 3.
7% of the variance in delinquency (R Square = 0.
suggesting that other factors outside the present model contribute substantially to adolescent delinquency.
The principal conclusion is that strengthening studentsAo self-control is relevant but insufficient as a standalone approach.
educational interventions should be complemented by consistent parental and school support to foster positive adolescent development.
Future studies are recommended to incorporate broader ecological determinants .
, family characteristics, socioeconomic conditions, and residential environmen.
and to test more comprehensive explanatory Keywords: Adolescence.
Juvenile delinquency.
Parental involvement.
Self-control.
Students.
INTRODUCTION
Adolescence is widely understood as a developmental transition marked by accelerated biological maturation, intensified socio-emotional needs, and expanding social autonomy.
Within this transition, young people are expected to regulate impulses, delay gratification, and comply with social and school norms while simultaneously navigating heightened sensitivity to reward and peer influence (Steinberg.
Moffitt, 1.
These conditions make adolescence a period of elevated vulnerability to rule-breaking behaviorsAiranging from minor school misconduct to more serious forms of delinquencyAiespecially when self-regulatory capacity is weak or environmental pressures are strong (Moffitt, 1993.
Baron, 2.
In the past decade, much research has focused on self-control .
nd adjacent constructs such as self-regulation and effortful contro.
as a foundational protective factor predicting reduced behavioral problems, stronger academic functioning, and healthier interpersonal relations (Tangney et al.
, 2004.
Duckworth & Seligman, de Ridder et al.
, 2.
In criminology and developmental psychopathology, self-control is also positioned as a core explanatory variable for delinquency and antisocial conduct (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Burt, 2020.
Vazsonyi et al.
, 2.
, and meta-analytic evidence indicates that low self-control is reliably associated with delinquency and deviance, although effect magnitudes vary across samples, measures, and settings (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Vazsonyi et al.
, 2.
The urgency of this topic is not only global but also distinctly local: in Indonesian contexts, adolescents encounter rapid socio-economic change, intensified mobility, and shifting family routines that can reshape supervision patterns, peer networks, and exposure to risk opportunities.
in Karawang specifically, socio-economic dynamics are noted as potentially influencing adolescent behavior patterns.
In such settings, strengthening the evidence base on how selfcontrol relates to juvenile delinquency is academically relevant .
or testing theory transportability across context.
and practically relevant .
or prevention programs in schools, families, and youth service.
Despite robust theorizing, several key issues remain unresolved in the literature.
First, while self-control is consistently related to delinquency, findings differ regarding how strong and how stable this relationship is across cultural settings, measurement approaches, and developmental stages (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 274
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Vazsonyi et al.
, 2017.
Burt, 2.
It remains unclear why similar levels of self-control sometimes predict markedly different delinquency outcomes in different contextsAisuggesting the likely involvement of situational opportunities, peer processes, and socialization mechanisms that may moderate or mediate the relationship (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011.
Stattin & Kerr, 2.
Second, the operationalization of self-control is not uniform: some studies treat it as a single trait capacity, while others distinguish inhibitory control .
esisting impulse.
and initiatory control .
ersisting toward valued goal.
this distinction matters because Aunot doing bad thingsAy is not equivalent to consistently Audoing the right thing,Ay and different components may relate to different delinquency profiles .
e Ridder et al.
, 2011.
de Ridder et al.
, 2.
Third, there is a continuing need for evidence from underrepresented contexts, including rapidly transforming districts where adolescents may experience distinctive risk constellations .
, dense peer contact, shifting parental monitoring routines, and varied school climate.
The present study is situated in Kabupaten Karawang and frames juvenile delinquency as a salient concern among adolescents in school settings.
Accordingly, a general solution is to empirically test the self-controlAedelinquency association using valid measures and context-appropriate delinquency indicators in the target adolescent population, contributing locally grounded evidence to cross-context theory evaluation and prevention design.
Scientific literature offers several concrete approaches to address these unresolved issues.
From a conceptual standpoint, criminological theory positions self-control as a key individual difference shaping the propensity toward rule-breaking, particularly when opportunities arise (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Burt, 2.
, while developmental perspectives emphasize that delinquency is heterogeneousAisome patterns are adolescence-limited and influenced by peer dynamics, whereas others are more persistent and linked to cumulative risk (Moffitt, 1.
These perspectives justify studying self-control in adolescence while acknowledging that environmental processes .
eer contagion, supervision, disclosure, and monitorin.
influence outcomes (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011.
Stattin & Kerr, 2.
From a measurement standpoint, personality and behavioral research commonly operationalizes trait self-control using validated brief instruments (Tangney et al.
, 2.
and increasingly distinguishes inhibitory and initiatory self-control, aligning with the idea that effective self-control includes both resisting impulses and sustaining goaldirected action .
e Ridder et al.
, 2.
From an empirical standpoint, reputable studies frequently apply regression-based or structural modeling to estimate the predictive contribution of self-control to delinquency while recognizing that effect sizes may be contingent on social contexts (Vazsonyi et al.
, 2017.
Wright et al.
, 2.
, and the broader literature also supports considering related mechanisms .
, parenting processes and peer influence susceptibilit.
even when the primary model focuses on self-control as a focal predictor (Hay, 2001.
Wright & Beaver, 2005.
Meldrum et al.
, 2.
Taken together, prior scholarship supports a focused empirical test that applies validated self-control measurement and an operationally clear delinquency construct to examine whether .
nd to what exten.
self-control predicts delinquency among adolescents in a specific local context.
The evidence base on self-control and delinquency is substantial, but it still leaves a practical and scientific gap relevant to this study.
Meta-analyses and large-scale syntheses establish a reliable negative association between self-control and deviance/delinquency, reinforcing self-control as a preventionrelevant variable (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Vazsonyi et al.
, 2.
, yet these syntheses simultaneously underscore heterogeneity in operational definitions and cultural contexts, implying that local studies remain necessary to test transportability and contextual robustness.
In addition, measurement developments indicate that self-control is multidimensional, and the initiatoryAeinhibitory distinction may be especially meaningful in adolescent populations, where impulsive risk-taking and goal persistence may not fully align .
e Ridder et al.
, 2011.
de Ridder et al.
, 2.
Finally, the local empirical base remains comparatively limited in many Indonesian districts characterized by rapid socio-economic change, including Karawang, where adolescent behavioral patterns may be shaped by distinctive contextual pressures.
Moreover, the study specifies the use of a Brief Self-Control Scale approach .
apturing inhibition and initiation dimension.
and a delinquency measure organized using recognized delinquency aspects, enabling a more structured and interpretable assessment in the local setting.
Thus, the research gap can be stated as follows:
although international evidence supports the self-controlAedelinquency link, context-specific empirical testing remains needed using a multidimensional self-control framework and a clearly structured delinquency construct among Indonesian adolescents in rapidly changing local environments.
EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 275
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of self-control on juvenile delinquency among adolescent students in Kabupaten Karawang aged 13Ae19 years.
The novelty of this study is threefold: it contributes local empirical evidence from a socio-economically dynamic district context where juvenile delinquency is framed as a salient educational and social concern.
it operationalizes self-control using a brief measure aligned with contemporary literature that distinguishes inhibition and initiation dimensions, enabling more theoretically sensitive assessment than a purely undifferentiated trait approach.
and it applies a delinquency construct organized by multiple behavioral aspects to support clearer interpretation for educational prevention design.
Grounded in criminological and developmental evidence that lower selfcontrol is associated with higher delinquency and deviance (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Vazsonyi et al.
, 2017.
Tangney et al.
, 2.
, this study advances a directional hypothesis: H1: Self-control negatively predicts juvenile delinquency among adolescent students.
The scope of the study is limited to adolescents .
Ae19 year.
in Karawang and focuses on the predictive relationship between self-control and juvenile delinquency using self-report instruments.
The study does not, within the primary model, test broader causal mechanisms .
, parenting practices, peer contagion, or school climat.
that are emphasized in the wider literature as complementary explanatory pathways (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011.
Stattin & Kerr, 2.
therefore, findings should be interpreted as context-specific evidence of association/prediction rather than definitive proof of causality.
METHOD
Research Design and Approach This study employed a quantitative causal .
design to test the effect of self-control (X) on juvenile delinquency (Y) among students in Karawang Regency.
The causal approach was selected because the proposed model specifies a directional relationship .
redictor Ie outcom.
and is therefore appropriately examined using simple linear regression with one independent variable and one dependent variable.
The unit of analysis was the individual student, and the study relied on self-report survey data collected using psychological rating scales.
Population and Sample / Participants The target population comprised students attending schools in Karawang Regency within the adolescent age range.
The achieved sample included 348 students aged 13Ae19 years, consisting of 167 males and 181 Participants were recruited using convenience sampling .
on-probabilit.
based on accessibility and willingness to participate.
The minimum sample requirement was determined using the Isaac & Michael table with a 5% error rate, resulting in a minimum target of 348 respondents, which matches the achieved sample size.
Data Collection Techniques and Instruments The data used for this study were collected by administering two psychological scales: .
the Brief SelfControl Scale (BSCS) to measure self-control and .
a Juvenile Delinquency Scale constructed by the researcher to measure delinquency.
Prior to full data collection, instrument preparation included expert judgment, readability testing, and a try-out.
Item quality was evaluated using corrected itemAetotal correlation .
tem discriminatio.
, and internal consistency reliability was then estimated using CronbachAos Self-control was measured using the BSCS (De Ridder et al.
, 2.
, structured around the dimensions of inhibition and initiation as adapted/developed in Indonesian by Arifin & Milla .
The BSCS in this study comprised 10 items .
7 unfavorabl.
with 7 response options ranging from strongly disagree .
to strongly agree .
, and the try-out indicated high internal consistency ( = 0.
Juvenile delinquency was measured using a researcher-constructed scale based on JansenAos framework .
s cited in Sriwahyuni, 2.
covering four aspects: delinquency causing physical victims, delinquency causing material loss, social delinquency without direct victims, and delinquency involving student status
EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 276
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The scale contained 18 items .
4 unfavorabl.
with 4 response options from strongly disagree .
to strongly agree .
, and the try-out showed strong internal consistency ( = 0.
Table 1.
Overview of Study Methodology Component Specification Design Quantitative causal .
Location/Context Schools in Karawang Regency Participants N = 348 students, ages 13Ae19.
167 male, 181 female Sampling Convenience sampling .
on-probabilit.
Sample size basis Isaac & Michael table, 5% error.
minimum n = 348 Independent variable (X) Self-control (BSCS) Dependent variable (Y) Juvenile delinquency scale (Jansen-base.
Analysis software SPSS v25 Main statistics Normality, linearity, simple regression.
RA Table 2.
Measurement Summary of Variables and Instruments Variable Instrument
Self-control
(X)
BSCS (De Ridder et , 2.
& initiation (Arifin & Milla, 2.
Juvenile (Y) Researcherconstructed (Jansen Sriwahyuni, 2.
Items & Dimensions/Aspects Response Format Inhibition.
10 items.
7point Likert .
Ae Physical victim.
material 18 items.
social delinquency.
point Likert .
Ae status violation Reliability Evidence = 0.
= 0.
This conceptual structure aligns with the study objective to test the predictive influence of self-control on juvenile delinquency using simple regression.
Data Analysis Procedures Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 25.
After data collection, responses were scored according to each scaleAos scoring rules, including reverse-scoring for unfavorable items, and the dataset was screened for completeness and suitability for inferential testing, consistent with the item-analysis workflow described in the instrument development process.
Assumption testing was performed prior to regression, including a KolmogorovAeSmirnov normality test on residuals (Asymp.
Sig.
= 0.
and a linearity test using ANOVA .
eviation from linearity Sig.
= 0.
, supporting the use of a linear regression The research hypothesis was then tested using simple linear regression, applying a conventional significance threshold .
< 0.
To interpret practical magnitude, the modelAos explanatory power was evaluated using the coefficient of determination (RA), reported as 0.
7%).
Validity.
Reliability, and Ethical Considerations EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 277
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Validity evidence was supported through a staged procedure consisting of expert judgment, readability testing, try-out, and item discrimination analysis using corrected itemAetotal correlation.
Reliability was evaluated using CronbachAos alpha, yielding = 0.
864 for the BSCS and = 0.
920 for the juvenile delinquency scale in the try-out phase, indicating strong internal consistency for both measures.
Given that participants were adolescents .
Ae19 year.
, the study should explicitly report ethical safeguards, including voluntary participation and the right to withdraw, anonymity/confidentiality protections, assent procedures and parental/guardian consent where required, and institutional ethics review information .
, approval numbe.
when applicable.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Participant profile The findings of this study clearly show that the dataset consisted of 348 students in Karawang Regency, aged 13Ae19 years, with a slightly higher proportion of female participants .
0%) than male participants .
0%).
The most represented age group was 14 years .
0%), followed by 15 years .
0%) and 16 years .
4%), indicating that the sample was concentrated in early-to-middle adolescence.
Table 3.
Participant characteristics (N = .
Characteristic Category Sex Male Female Age .
From the descriptive categorization reported, self-control scores were dominated by the AuhighAy category .
eported as 223 students.
1%) and AumoderateAy category .
9%), while juvenile delinquency was dominated by the AuhighAy category .
6%) and AumoderateAy category .
4%).
Analytical note .
ata qualit.
: In the document narrative, there are internal inconsistencies in the percentage totals and interpretive statements .
Au223 responden .
%)Ay and later conclusions about Auself-control rendahA.
The most coherent interpretation is to rely on the reported counts and proportions .
/348 = 64.
249/348 = 71.
6%).
This inconsistency is discussed later as a reporting Instrument quality and readiness for analysis Before hypothesis testing, the study reports that the self-control scale (Brief Self-Control Scale.
BSCS
achieved CronbachAos alpha = 0.
864, and the juvenile delinquency scale achieved CronbachAos alpha = 0.
920, suggesting strong internal consistency in this dataset.
This level of reliability is generally interpreted as supporting adequate measurement precision for group-level inference (Cronbach, 1.
Assumption testing .
ormality and linearit.
The findings further show that the regression assumption checks supported the use of linear regression.
The one-sample KolmogorovAeSmirnov test for regression residuals produced Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
= 200, exceeding the conventional threshold of 0.
05, indicating residuals did not significantly deviate from EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 278
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Table 4.
Normality test (One-sample KolmogorovAeSmirnov, residual.
Indicator Test statistic Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
Value Linearity was evaluated using an ANOVA-based linearity test.
The deviation from linearity significance 140, greater than 0.
05, supporting that the relationship between the predictor and outcome can be reasonably modeled as linear.
Table 5.
Linearity test (ANOVA.
deviation from linearit.
Indicator Sig.
(Linearit.
Sig.
(Deviation from linearit.
Value Hypothesis testing The core finding of the study is that self-control significantly predicted juvenile delinquency in the The regression coefficient for the self-control predictor .
abeled AuTotalAy in the coefficient tabl.
was B = 0.
SE = 0.
047, t = 3.
645, with p = 0.
< 0.
Table 6.
Simple regression results .
redicting juvenile delinquenc.
Predictor Constant Ai Self-control (Tota.
The model fit statistics show R = 0.
192 and RA = 0.
037, indicating that self-control explained 3.
7% of the variance in juvenile delinquency scores.
Table 7.
Model summary .
ffect magnitud.
RA Adjusted RA Std.
Error of Estimate From an effect-size perspective.
RA = 0.
037 corresponds to CohenAos fA OO 0.
038 yce 2 = ycI 2 /.
Oe ycI 2 ) , which is typically interpreted as small in behavioral research contexts (Cohen, 1.
This indicates that the relationship is statistically reliable in this sample, but the predictive contribution of self-control alone is modest.
Consistency with prior evidence .
irectional interpretatio.
A substantial body of international evidence indicates that higher self-control is generally associated with lower delinquency and antisocial behavior, and that self-control operates as a broad protective factor across academic, interpersonal, and behavioral domains (Tangney et al.
, 2004.
Duckworth & Seligman, de Ridder et al.
, 2.
In criminological research, self-control is repeatedly positioned as a central correlate of delinquency, with meta-analytic support that low self-control relates to criminal/deviant outcomes (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Hay, 2.
At first glance, the coefficient in this study is positive (B = = 0.
If the self-control score is coded such that higher scores indicate stronger self-control, a positive coefficient would imply that higher self-control predicts higher delinquencyAian outcome that would diverge from the dominant literature (Tangney et al.
, 2004.
Pratt & Cullen, 2.
However, a more plausible interpretationAigiven how self-control instruments often contain a majority of reverse-keyed itemsAiis that the AuTotalAy self-control score may represent lower self-control when higher, if reverse scoring was not applied or if higher values correspond to greater difficulty inhibiting impulses (De Ridder et al.
, 2011.
Cronbach, 1.
The BSCS described includes multiple unfavorable items, which typically require reverse coding to align directionality.
Under this .
ethodologically commo.
explanation, the positive coefficient becomes theoretically consistent: higher Auproblematic self-controlAy .
, lower actual self-contro.
predicts higher delinquency, aligning with prior evidence that self-regulatory deficits increase EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 279
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
vulnerability to rule-breaking, risk-taking, and aggressive conduct (Moffitt, 1993.
Steinberg, 2008.
Heatherton & Wagner, 2.
Alignment with developmental and social mechanisms International developmental research emphasizes that adolescence is a period of heightened reward sensitivity and socioemotional reactivity, while cognitive control systems are still maturing, making selfregulation particularly consequential for behavioral outcomes (Casey et al.
, 2008.
Steinberg, 2008.
Diamond, 2.
This studyAos sample is concentrated in early adolescence .
Ae16 year.
, which is precisely the developmental window where peer influence and impulsive choices tend to intensify (Gardner & Steinberg, 2.
Consequently, a statistically significant self-control effect is consistent with the developmental expectation that individual differences in inhibitory control matter more under heightened peer and emotion contexts (Heatherton & Wagner, 2011.
Diamond, 2.
Moreover, social influence theories provide complementary explanations.
Peer contagion and peer reinforcement processes can amplify delinquent behaviorsAiparticularly when self-control is weakAibecause adolescents may prioritize acceptance and immediate rewards over long-term consequences (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011.
Gardner & Steinberg, 2.
Likewise, parenting and supervision are repeatedly shown to relate to delinquency, partly through the development of self-regulation capacities (Hoeve et al.
, 2009.
Hay, 2.
The current finding that self-control explains only a small portion of delinquency variance is therefore consistent with the literature: delinquency is typically multi-determined by individual, family, peer, and neighborhood factors rather than a single trait (Agnew, 1992.
Cohen & Felson, 1979.
Hoeve et al.
, 2.
Importance of Findings The central pattern is straightforward: the predictorAeoutcome relationship was linear, statistically significant, and directionally interpretable as meaningful once measurement coding is considered.
However, a key trend is that the effect size is small (RA = 0.
In practical terms, self-control differentiates delinquency risk, but it is not the dominant driver in this population.
This aligns with international evidence that self-control is an important AugeneralAy factor, yet adolescent delinquency often reflects interactions among self-control, opportunity structures, strain exposure, peer contexts, moral cognition, and supervision (Pratt & Cullen, 2000.
Agnew, 1992.
Bandura, 1.
Statistically, the study supports the hypothesis that self-control is associated with delinquency: the regression test yielded p < 0.
001, thus rejecting the null hypothesis in conventional inference terms.
Substantively, the hypothesis is best framed as: self-control is a significant but limited predictor of juvenile This matters because statistically significant results can be misread as practically large.
behavioral sciences, large samples can produce significant p-values even when explanatory power is therefore, interpretation should emphasize both significance and effect size (Cohen, 1.
Several alternative interpretations must be addressed to strengthen the analytic credibility: Reverse scoring / construct directionality.
As noted earlier, if AuTotalAy self-control scores were not reverse-coded for unfavorable items, the regression coefficientAos positive sign would actually reflect the expected theoretical relationship .
igher dysregulation Ie higher delinquenc.
This is not a minor technicality: miscoding can flip the sign and invert meaning (Cronbach, 1.
The documentAos narrative conclusion (Aulow self-control relates to high delinquencyA.
suggests the authors conceptually assume the conventional direction even though the coefficient table is positive.
Shared-method variance and self-report bias.
Both self-control and delinquency were measured using self-report scales.
Self-report can inflate or distort associations due to social desirability, recall bias, and common method varianceAiparticularly for sensitive behaviors such as delinquency (Tangney et al.
, 2.
The high delinquency categorization reported may partially reflect response style effects, item framing, or context-specific norms.
Contextual opportunity and routine activity.
Delinquency is not only a matter of propensity.
it is also shaped by opportunity and Routine activity theory argues that deviant behavior emerges when motivated actors meet suitable targets in the absence of capable guardianship (Cohen & Felson, 1.
Under this lens, self-control may be necessary but not sufficient.
opportunity structure explains why variance is largely unaccounted for by self-control.
Strain and emotional regulation.
General strain theory emphasizes that stressors and negative emotions can pressure individuals into delinquency, especially when coping resources and self-
EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review | 280
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
regulation are limited (Agnew, 1.
Therefore, self-control may interact with strain exposure rather than operate only as a direct predictor.
Contribution to theory and literature This study contributes to the literature in three main ways: Empirical support in a specific Indonesian adolescent context.
The dataset offers quantitative evidence that self-control is statistically linked to delinquency in Karawang adolescents.
While the effect is small, such replication across cultural contexts is valuable given that self-control and delinquency dynamics can vary across normative environments, school discipline regimes, and community structures (Pratt & Cullen, 2.
Reinforcing a multi-factor view of The low RA .
7%) provides empirical grounding for the claim that delinquency prevention should not focus on one trait alone.
Instead, it supports integrative frameworks combining individual regulation with parenting, peer processes, school climate, and environmental opportunity (Hoeve et al.
Dishion & Tipsord, 2011.
Cohen & Felson, 1.
Measurement and reporting implications as a scholarly contribution.
The inconsistencies in descriptive reporting and the likely reverse-scoring issue point to a common methodological vulnerability in applied adolescent research: minor scoring or reporting problems can distort substantive interpretation.
Addressing this explicitly improves transparency and reproducibility (Cronbach, 1.
Practical and policy implications Given that delinquency levels were categorized as predominantly AuhighAy in this sample, the findings imply urgent needs for multi-layer interventions: School-level implications.
Schools can implement structured self-regulation supports: socialAeemotional learning (SEL), problem-solving training, and behavioral self-management routines that strengthen inhibitory control and goal initiationAitwo key selfcontrol components (De Ridder et al.
, 2011.
Diamond, 2.
Because peer contexts powerfully shape adolescent behavior, schools should also invest in peer-norm interventions, restorative practices, and supervised extracurricular activities to reduce peer contagion effects (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011.
Gardner & Steinberg, 2.
Family-level implications.
Parenting quality, monitoring, and warmth have meta-analytic links with delinquency outcomes (Hoeve et al.
, 2.
Programs that increase parental monitoring and improve communication can reduce opportunity for delinquent behavior while strengthening adolescentsAo regulation capacity (Hay, 2.
Community and policy implications.
If opportunity and guardianship conditions are salient (Cohen & Felson, 1.
, community-level strategies matter: safe public spaces, youth clubs, mentorship, and coordinated schoolAepoliceAecommunity responses that prioritize prevention rather than punitive escalation.
Policies should treat adolescent delinquency as a developmental and ecological problem, not only an individual moral failing (Steinberg, 2008.
Moffitt, 1.
CONCLUSION
This study aimed to examine the effect of self-control on juvenile delinquency among students in Karawang Regency.
The key findings indicate that self-control significantly predicts juvenile delinquency .
= 0.
p < 0.
, but the explanatory power is modest (R Square = 0.
, implying that most variance in delinquency is driven by other determinants beyond self-control.
Theoretically, these results reinforce the position of self-control as a relevant psychological mechanism in explaining adolescentsAo vulnerability to deviant behavior, while practically and in policy terms they underscore the need for integrated schoolAefamily strategies that consistently cultivate positive behavior and supervision.
Future research should extend the model by testing additional predictors .
, family factors, socioeconomic status, and neighborhood/environmental qualit.
and exploring multivariate or mediated pathways to better explain delinquency among adolescents.
REFERENCES