臺灣青少年毒品犯罪率之數量分析－家庭結構與娛樂因素之影響

梁文馨; 黃麗璇

doi:10.6209/JORIES.202112_66(4).0003

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P69 - 101

社会科学 > 教育学

DOI： 10.6209/JORIES

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

台湾青少年毒品犯罪率之数量分析－家庭结构与娱乐因素之影响

A Quantitative Study of Drug-Related Crime Among Teenagers and Young People in Taiwan: The Impact of Household Structure and Entertainment Venues

梁文馨(Wen-Hsin Liang) ；黄丽璇(Li-Hsuan Huang)

教育科学研究期刊； 66 卷 4 期 (2021 / 12 / 01) ， P69 - 101

繁体中文 DOI： 10.6209/JORIES.202112_66(4).0003

犯罪；青少年；毒品；毒品犯罪；数量分析； crime ； adolescent ； drugs ； drug-related crime ； quantitative analysis

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (49) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

Motivation: Drugs are addictive, and their use and attendant negative consequences and externalities impose a heavy burden on society. According to the Annual Report on Drug Abuse and Inspection Statistics (Taiwan Food and Drug Administration, 2018), juvenile drug use accounted for 59.3% of schedule III drug-related crimes in 2017. Because curiosity is one of the most important factors leading to drug use, school or university campuses are key sites for young people's drug addiction prevention. The literature on drug-related crime is mostly based on qualitative research, and this is especially so for the research conducted in Taiwan. This study analyzed data from the Statistics of Police Work (National Police Agency, Ministry of the Interior, 2002-2018) by using quantitative methods, with the aim of determining the driving forces of drug-related crime by teenagers and young people in Taiwan. We focused on the effect of household structure and entertainment venues nearby, with an aim of determining policy suggestions for drug abuse prevention in schools of various levels. The two research questions of this study were as follows: Research question 1: Would the pattern of drug-related crime in counties in Taiwan be related to the youth population structure? Research question 2: Would household structure and entertainment venues be crucial factors on the drug-related crime rate for teenagers and young people in Taiwan? What other factors would be significant? Literature Review: The reasons for drug-related crimes are many, ranging from an individual's early experiences in childhood and adolescence to their living environment, social pressure, and economic status. The drug-related crime literature, hence, comes from both natural and social sciences, thus revealing its interdisciplinary character. The theory of lower-class culture conflict, for instance, proposes that crime is a natural response of individuals from a lower-class culture to the environment (Miller, 1958). The general strain theory of crime and delinquency states that the causes of crime include psychological factors, such as stress and anxiety, which means that middle- or upper-class people may also commit crimes (Agnew, 1992). Crime may also reflect people's choices, however. Becker (1968) proposed that when the expected reward from crime is higher than the pay received in legal employment (particularly when unemployed), the probability of choosing to commit a crime increases. Even employed persons may engage in illegal activities, as long as the utility obtained by crime is higher than that from employment (Grogger, 1998; Raphael & Winter-Ebmer, 2001). Moreover, a larger police force, representing a higher probability of being arrested, may lower criminal inclinations (Levitt, 1997; Marvell & Moody, 1996). Relevant research has suggested that the living environments and family backgrounds of young drug offenders tend to be similar: they typically have weak relationships with their families, have peers who are drug users, and have low academic achievement (Robertson et al., 2003; Shu et al., 2015). Youth drug-related crime may be related to weak social bonds (Lin et al., 2001), echoing social control theory (Hirschi, 1969). Crime may also be caused by the attitudes and values of people, with these being transferred from generation to generation (Miller, 1958). The accessibility of drugs, for instance, at large-scale music festivals and entertainment venues, and opportunities to commit crimes and other antisocial behaviors may be critical influential factors among the young (Chin, 2018; Day et al., 2018; Tossmann et al., 2001). Research Methods: Fixed-effects models for panel data were employed for empirical analysis, and panel data estimation bias was corrected. In addition, the causal relationship between the drug-related crime rate and unemployment was considered (Lin, 2008; Lin & Liu, 2006; Raphael & Winter-Ebmer, 2001). The Durbin-Wu-Hausman test was used to test for overidentification, and if an endogenous problem was identified, the two-stage least squares method with clustered standard errors was used to obtain consistent estimates. Results: ．The schedule II drug-related crime rate of young people aged 12-23 exhibited a rapid increase. Among those aged 18-23, with other factors remaining constant, our data indicated an average increase of 98.68 people per year in a county committing a crime. ．The schedules I and III drug-related crime rates were positively related to the proportion of the population aged 12-17 and 18-23, respectively. ．Based on the coefficient estimates, for every 1% increase in the proportion of single-parent families, the schedules II and III drug-related crime rates of 12-17 and 18-23-year-old individuals increased by 39.25 (113.03), and 23.81 (25.92) people, respectively. ．Grandparent family positively correlated with the schedule III drug-related crime rate of 18-23-year-old individuals, with a large estimated coefficient (130.95), compared with otherwise similar young people. ．The estimated coefficient of attendance at music festivals for the schedule II crime rate for those aged 12-17 was 10.34. A significant relationship between the number of entertainment venues and the number of schedule III drug offenses of people aged 18-23 was observed. ．The drug-related crime rate of youths aged 12-17 slightly increased with household income, especially for the schedule III drug-related crime rate, which includes drugs that are not easily recognized and can be easily consumed, such as ketamine and FM2. ．An increase in the proportion of the educated population in counties by 1% can significantly reduce the schedule III drug-related crime rate of young people aged 18-23 by 45.99 people per year. ．Every 1% increase in the number of antinarcotics personnel was found to reduce the schedule III drug-related crime rate of young people aged 12-17 and 18-23 by 366.52 and 505.05 people per year, respectively. Discussion: The empirical results indicate that the drug-related crime rate of a county is associated with the proportion of the population aged 12-23 and that the drug-related crime rate varies across the four schedules of drugs. With other factors remaining constant, the more youths aged 12-17 (aged 18-23) are in the population, the higher the schedule I (schedule II, and III) drug-related crime rates are. The causes of drug-related crime for adolescents seem to differ from those for adults. Living in a single-parent family is a significant explanatory variable for the drug-related crime rate of young people aged 12-23, especially for crimes relating to schedule II and III drugs among young people aged 18-23. Grandparent family is significantly related to the schedule III drug-related crime rate of people aged 18-23, and the impact of grandparent family depends on a young person's age and the drug schedule. The presence of entertainment venues nearby is an important factor for drug-related crime only for people aged 18-23, with a small effect. The percentage of educated people in a county and the number of antinarcotics police officers have a negative relationship with the drug-related crime rate of people aged 18-23. Household disposable income is also a factor for drug-related crime among those aged 12-17. Policy Suggestions: We propose several policy suggestions based on the findings: ．Revising policies for drug abuse prevention according to age and making this the top priority for schools of all levels. ．Giving more attention to young people from single-parent families in senior high schools and colleges as well as in primary schools and junior high schools. ．Paying special attention to the situation of students raised by grandparents and to those at higher risk of dropping out of school, especially in senior high schools and colleges. ．Enhancing drug policing in entertainment venues near senior high schools and colleges. ．Continuing to monitor the physical and mental health of children from families with higher socioeconomic status.

参考文献 ( 49 ) 〈TOP〉

吴吉裕、陈巧云（2014）。青少年贩毒组织架构及其网络分布之初探。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊，6（1），33-80。【Wu, C.-Y., & Chan, C.-Y. (2014). Preliminary adolescent drug trafficking organization and its network of distribution. Journal of Research in Delinquency and Prevention, 6(1), 33-80. https://doi.org/10.29751/JRDP.　201406_6(1).0002】
连结：
吴枚瑛、洪瑞儿（2020）。探讨高雄市青少年健康知识、态度及行为素养。教育科学研究期刊，65（3），187-223。【Wu, M.-Y., & Hong, Z.-R. (2020). Exploration of Kaohsiung City adolescents’ health knowledge, attitudes, and behavioral literacy. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 65(3), 187-223. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.　202009_65(3).0007】
连结：
林明仁、刘仲伟（2006）。失业真的会导致犯罪吗？以台湾1978年至2003年县市资料为例。经济论文丛刊，34（4），445-482。【Lin, M.-J., & Liu, C.-W. (2006). Does unemployment increases crime? Evidence from county data of Taiwan 1978-2003. Taiwan Economic Review, 34(4), 445-482. 】
连结：
彭淑华（2006）。台湾女性单亲家庭生活处境之研究。东吴社会工作学报，14，25-62。【Pong, S.-H. (2006). The life situations of female-headed families. Soochow Journal of Social Work, 14, 25-62. 】
连结：
杨士隆、张梵盂、曾淑萍（2016）。青少年非法药物使用进阶之实证调查：以收容少年为例。药物滥用防治，1（2），1-25。【Yang, S.-L., Chang, F.-Y., & Tzeng, S.-P. (2016). Investigating the illicit drugs use among juvenile suspects: Application of gateway theory. Journal of Substance Abuse Research, 1(2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.6645/JSAR.　2016.1.2.1】
连结：

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址