Social disorganization revisited: A longitudinal analysis of the effects of urban residential segregation on crime.

This study puts forth a longitudinal model of social disorganization (the true difference model) that examines the effects the causes of social disorganization on the change in homicide and robbery and the effect of the two crimes on three of those causes of social disorganization. This study argues for the replacement of ethnic/racial heterogeneity with racial residential segregation as a cause of social disorganization. It is hypothesized that family disruption will have a weaker relationship with crime as family disruption becomes more normative. This dissertation project tests both a cross-sectional model of social disorganization as well as the true difference model of social disorganization using 75 cities across the United States for the decennial years from 1960 to 2000. The results from the cross-sectional models provide modest support for social disorganization theory. However, there are two interesting patterns found within the cross-sectional models. First, family disruption has an effect on the level of homicide and robbery, in the predicted direction, from 1960 to 1980, but not in 1990 or 2000. This suggests some support for the argument that the effect of family disruption on crime weakens as family disruption becomes more normative. Second, from 1980 to 2000, the isolation index is a better predictor of the level of homicide and robbery than racial heterogeneity. The results from the true difference model of social disorganization indicate that social disorganization theory does not do a good job of predicting the change in crime. The effects of homicide and robbery on the changes in poverty and racial segregation (the dissimilarity index only) are consistent with past work on the effects of crime on structural characteristics. Thus, when looking at the effect of segregation on the level of crime, it appears that the isolation index is a better predictor of crime, but crime appears to affect the uneven distribution of blacks, but not their level of isolation. In conclusion, the utility of social disorganization in predicting the change in crime is questionable, but the use of the social disorganization perspective to study the change in crime should not be dismissed out of hand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]