Sleep and delinquency: The context of self-control,social support,and sex differences among French adolescents

Abstract

Prior research demonstrates that poor sleep is an important predictor of delinquent behavior among adolescents. Engagement in delinquency is linked to a range of negative mental and physical health outcomes over the life course, underscoring a critical need to address adolescent sleep problems to reduce delinquency. However, little scholarly attention has been paid to how the broader context of social support influences the sleep–delinquency relationship. In this study, we analyze a series of structural equation models using a sample of 447 French adolescents to examine how parental and peer support correspond to three related aspects of sleep among adolescents (quantity, quality, and the frequency of sleep disturbance) with implications for delinquency. Furthermore, we assess how sex differences moderate the relationship between social support and sleep. First, we find that all three indicators of sleep are associated with delinquency, significantly mediated by reductions in self-control. Second, both peer and parental support correspond to sleep outcomes with full sequential mediation evident for sleep quality and delinquency. Finally, we find significant differences in the relationship between social support and all sleep indicators for boys and girls. Peer support is more strongly associated with sleep among boys, whereas parental support is more strongly associated with sleep among girls. We discuss the implications of these findings for improving adolescent sleep to reduce delinquency as well as opportunities for future research.

Keywords

sleep delinquency self-control SEM social support sex differences

Introduction

Poor sleep among adolescents corresponds to an array of negative physical, mental, and behavioral health outcomes (Shochat et al., 2014). Sleep problems are common in adolescents ages 12–18 years due to significant social, biological, and developmental changes that occur during this phase of the life course. Although the National Sleep Foundation recommends adolescents obtain at least 8–10 hours of sleep per night, only about one in ten adolescents meet these requirements regularly on weeknights (Minges and Redeker, 2016). Adolescents who do not get adequate sleep are at higher risk for psychiatric disorders (Gregory and Sadeh, 2016), obesity (Felső et al., 2017), risk-taking behaviors (Short and Weber, 2018), and suicidal behavior (Porras-Segovia et al., 2019). The prevalence of sleep problems and their harmful consequences among adolescents implore the need to better understand the processes that influence sleep and its associated outcomes.

Researchers have identified poor sleep as an important risk factor for delinquent behavior among adolescents (Clinkinbeard et al., 2011; Connolly et al., 2021; Mears et al., 2022; Meldrum et al., 2015; Peach and Gaultney, 2013; Semenza et al., 2020). This relationship has been explained by numerous theoretical mechanisms including low self-control (Meldrum et al., 2015; Vazsonyi et al., 2018), ADHD symptomology (Jackson and Vaughn, 2017), susceptibility to peer influences (Semenza et al., 2022), and heightened impulsivity (Gillett et al., 2021). Furthermore, delinquency in adolescence has been linked to poorer mental and physical health outcomes over time (Barnert et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2020). As such, understanding juvenile delinquency and related risk-taking behaviors is of critical concern for adolescent health and well-being across the life course. Yet, despite growth in this area of research, there remain three key limitations. First, there has been limited theoretical consideration of how the broader social context of adolescents' relationships with their peers and parents shape the dynamics of sleep and delinquency. In particular, there remains inadequate attention paid to (a) the role of different types of social support and (b) sex differences across forms of support with explicit implications for sleep and delinquency. Second, much of the research on sleep and delinquency relies on measures of sleep quantity rather than indices of other sleep-related issues, such as poor sleep quality and sleep disturbance (see Connolly et al., 2021, and Peach and Gaultney, 2013, for exceptions). This is a notable limitation because recent research suggests that sleep quality, rather than quantity, may be more consequential for juvenile delinquency and risk-taking behaviors (Connolly et al., 2021). Third, the majority of research on sleep and delinquency has been conducted in the United States (Short and Weber, 2018), necessitating more study outside of the United States to generalize the findings of this work across international contexts (however, see Vazsonyi et al., 2015, 2018, 2021 for research outside of the United States).

To address these gaps in the literature, we draw upon a risk and resiliency framework (Jenson and Fraser, 2015) to consider a model of social support, sleep, and delinquency with particular attention to sex differences in how parental and peer support influence three related aspects of sleep among adolescents: quantity, quality, and the frequency of sleep disturbance. We argue that protective peer and parental support influence sleep differently depending on sex and that sleep will be associated with the risk of delinquency through the key mechanism of self-control. We then draw on a sample of French adolescents to test a series of hypotheses using structural equation models. This study extends knowledge regarding sleep and delinquency by considering how the broader context of risk and resilience via social support and differences by sex shape these associations. We conclude with a summary of our results, implications for policy and practice, and suggestions for future research.

Background

The link between sleep and delinquency

A substantial body of research demonstrates that sleep problems among adolescents correspond to a higher risk for delinquency. The evidence is largely consistent across samples and national contexts although studies predominantly focus on implications for sleep duration rather than measures of sleep quality (e.g., sleep interruptions, frequent waking, and trouble falling asleep). In one of the first studies on the subject, Clinkinbeard et al. (2011) found that delinquency was more likely among youth who slept for fewer hours in the United States using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Meldrum and Restivo (2014) found that individuals suffering from especially severe sleep deprivation (less than five hours of sleep) are at particular risk for delinquent behaviors including weapon carrying, drunk driving, and fighting. Similar findings related to sleep duration and delinquency have been documented outside of the United States in Finland (Backman et al., 2015), Norway (Sivertsen et al., 2015), and Taiwan (Yen et al., 2010).¹

Beyond research that focuses on the implications of sleep duration for delinquency, a handful of studies have examined delinquency-related consequences of poor sleep quality. For instance, Catrett and Gaultney (2009) found that insomnia and difficulty sleeping were associated with risky behaviors including delinquency. Recently, Connolly et al. (2021) found that adolescent reports of restless sleep correspond to heightened rates of delinquency even after controlling for sibling differences using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Notably, the authors found no relationship between sleep quantity and delinquency after controlling for familial confounding and temporal stability. The authors concluded that sleep quality, rather than sleep duration, may be a more appropriate target for intervention when considering health-related means of reducing delinquency.

Researchers suggest that sleep deficits result in negative affect and emotional dysregulation, which then increases the risk of impulsive behaviors including aggression, violence, and property delinquency (Clinkinbeard et al., 2011; Kamphuis et al., 2012). Similar studies have shown that deficits in self-control and attention mediate the sleep–delinquency relationships (Jackson and Vaughn, 2017; Meldrum et al., 2015; Vazsonyi et al., 2018). For instance, Meldrum et al. (2015) found that a broad index of sleep deprivation indicators was associated with greater risk for delinquency using data from 15-year-old adolescents in the NIH's Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development. The authors found that the significant association between sleep deprivation and delinquency was largely mediated by low self-control (62% mediation).

Adolescents who suffer from poor sleep have a harder time controlling their impulses and delaying gratification due to an imbalance between the socioemotional and cognitive control systems that influence decision-making (Krizan and Herlache, 2016; Peach and Gaultney, 2013). Ultimately, sleep deprivation and poor sleep quality are thought to lead to comprised response-control, or the inability to inhibit impulses, which influences engagement in delinquent behaviors (Connolly et al., 2021; Semenza et al., 2020). Although the mechanism of low self-control has been empirically tested in a handful of studies, it has largely been shown to mediate the relationship between sleep duration and delinquency. However, one notable study has examined how low self-control specifically mediates the relationship between indicators of quality or sleep problems and delinquency. In a national probability sample of Swiss adolescents, Vazsonyi et al. (2018) found evidence of both direct and indirect links between sleep problems and deviance via low self-control. These findings were largely invariant across immigrant and socioeconomic status (SES) groups. Although more research is needed on sleep quality and delinquency, this initial research provides important evidence that sleep quality influences delinquency through self-control beyond the more commonly studied indicator of sleep duration.

Risk and resiliency: The role of social support for sleep among adolescents

Most studies that examine sleep and delinquency do not account for the broader social context in which adolescents are embedded that influence sleep in the first place. We therefore draw on a framework of risk and resiliency to consider additional factors surrounding the sleep–delinquency link (Jenson and Fraser, 2015). Researchers have long considered both risk and protective factors that contribute to heightened risk for behavioral problems among young people like delinquency (Kremer et al., 2020). Risk factors occur throughout the social ecology and include individual, school, peer, family, or community influences that increase the likelihood that a child will engage in delinquency, whereas protective resources are attributes, social resources, or characteristics that lower the probability of delinquent behavior (Werner and Smith, 1992). Protective resources such as emotional self-regulation, positive attitude, and reliable social support from peer and family members operate to help young people be resilient against negative problem behaviors (Jenson and Fraser, 2015).

For a complex behavioral outcome like delinquency, youth experience a combination of risk and protective factors that influence delinquent behavior. According to Jenson and Fraser (2015), the balance between level of risk exposure via the presence of multiple risk factors and the availability of protective factors can shape resiliency against negative outcomes for young people. The likelihood of delinquency is molded by an interactive process that involves both risk and protection as well as adaptation to those factors that results in delinquent behavior (or lack thereof). These combined risk and protective factors influence one another throughout a young person's immediate social environment and surrounding social ecology to shape developmental outcomes (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). A variable-centered approach to considering the confluence of risk and protective factors for delinquency is especially useful for considering how different factors influence one another to shape a particular outcome of interest (Masten, 2001).

It is increasingly evident that poor sleep increases the risk for delinquency, at least in part through the mechanism of reduced self-control (Meldrum et al., 2015; Vazsonyi et al., 2018). Within a risk and resilience framework, poor sleep is a risk factor for low self-control, which operates to increase the likelihood of delinquent behavior. However, there are likely many “upstream” protective and risk factors that shape the sleep behaviors that ultimately affect delinquency. One critical aspect of this larger context of risk and resilience is social support. Social support refers to an individual's perceptions and experiences of affection, care, value, belonging, or assistance from those in their personal social networks (Heaney and Israel, 2008). Pertinent to this study, social support is thought to provide a safe, reduced-stress environment that enables the high-quality sleep critical for health and well-being (Dahl and El-Sheikh, 2007). Social support is thus a protective factor for good sleep that may also indirectly increase resilience against delinquent behavior.

Social support influences sleep outcomes among adolescents such that better support from both parents and peers is generally associated with improved sleep (see Kent de Grey et al., 2018 for a meta-analysis on this topic). A substantial body of work links social support to improved sleep outcomes, yet much of this evidence comes from adult samples in the United States (Hao et al., 2021; Mesas et al., 2020). However, the research that has examined the influence of social support on sleep specifically among adolescents generally finds that greater support improves sleep outcomes (Van Schalkwijk et al., 2015; Tynjälä et al., 1999). For instance, multiple forms of social support have been linked to better sleep quality (Delaruelle et al., 2021), greater sleep quantity (Adam et al., 2007), and fewer sleep problems (Pyper et al., 2017).

Social support is conferred by many different people within an adolescent's social network including parents, teachers, coaches, and peers (Berkman et al., 2000). This support can be critically protective against the stress and negative emotions documented to degrade sleep (Kim and Dimsdale, 2007; Van Reeth et al., 2000). Adolescents who regularly receive support may be generally better prepared to cope with problems that harm sleep while also benefitting from further support during times of acute stress or anxiety (Van Schalkwijk et al., 2015). More generally, social support is thought to promote sleep quality by confirming with adolescents that they are safe and can sleep without fearing for their well-being (Kent de Grey et al., 2018). Although parental support is a key indicator of adolescent well-being, research demonstrates that peer support becomes increasingly salient as children get older and rely more on peer groups than their parents (Nickerson and Nagle, 2004). Yet evidence suggests that both parental and peer supports are important for proper sleep among adolescents (Van Schalkwijk et al., 2015).

In addition to its association with better sleep, social support is a key correlate of delinquency among adolescents and criminality for adults (Colvin et al., 2002). Youth that report greater parental and prosocial peer support are generally at lower risk for engaging in delinquency (Hoeve et al., 2012, 2009). Positive social support enhances social bonds and attachments to family and peers, reducing the likelihood that young people will cope with daily difficulties and negative affect by engaging in delinquent behaviors (Costello and Laub, 2020; Hirschi, 1969). Despite a history of scholarship that focuses on the direct relationship between social support and delinquent behavior, it is plausible that social support also influences intermediate processes, such as sleep, which correspond to delinquent behavior. Specifically, inadequate social support associated with degraded sleep may correspond to reduced self-control, which then influences delinquency (Meldrum et al., 2015). In support of this notion, Vazsonyi et al. (2015) found that both sleep quality and quantity independently and cumulatively mediate the effects of parental warmth on indicators of deviant behavior. While other researchers have documented the complex dynamics of social support, self-control, and delinquency (Hay et al., 2013; Wright et al., 1999), the study from Vazsonyi et al. suggests that social support from parents as well as peers may be an important distal factor that influences sleep and, in turn, engagement in delinquent behavior.

Sex differences in social support

It is important to further consider how the dynamics of social support, sleep, and delinquency differ among males and females. Juvenile delinquency is most commonly committed by males (Daigle et al., 2007), yet sex differences in delinquent behavior may be shaped by various types of social support and how they influence sleep. From this vantage, different types of social support may confer more protection for boys or girls against poor sleep outcomes. While some research suggests that boys have shorter sleep durations (Moore et al., 2011) and poorer sleep quality (Markovic et al., 2020) than adolescent girls, other studies find that adolescent girls have poorer sleep quality and hygiene than boys (Galland et al., 2017). Given mixed evidence of sex differences in adolescent sleep, we consider how divergent types of social support influence sleep differently for boys and girls with implications for delinquent behavior.

Scholarly evidence remains mixed regarding sex differences in the broad relationship between general social support and well-being. However, it appears social support for females is more pertinent for outcomes related to health and well-being. In a meta-analysis on social support and mental health, although mean sex differences did not appear to translate into functional differences in the association, effect sizes were larger in studies conducted solely on women (Harandi et al., 2017). In another meta-analysis on social support and well-being among children and adolescents, Chu et al. (2010) found that female participants had a significantly stronger mean effect size of social support on health outcomes than males. While these studies suggest there are sex differences in how social support impacts outcomes related to well-being, there may be additional differences in how social support types (e.g., parents, teachers, and peers) influence health outcomes such as sleep.

Research among adolescents suggests that various forms of social support from parents or peer groups may be differentially influential among girls and boys (Reimers et al., 2019). For example, there is evidence that adolescent girls have stronger attachments to their parents (Svensson, 2004) and derive greater social support from their parents than adolescent boys (Colarossi and Eccles, 2000). Adolescent girls may be more dependent on their parents than their male counterparts, in part because parents tend to enact more control over their daughters’ behavior than their sons’ (Gavin and Furman, 1996; Kerns et al., 1996). However, some research in this area is based on convenience samples of adolescents and may not necessarily be wholly generalizable. Evidence of sex differences in how parental support specifically influences health outcomes remains limited, although parental support appears to be more protective among girls than boys against harmful health behaviors like smoking, drug use, and alcohol consumption (Choquet et al., 2008). Parental support may therefore be more closely associated with sleep outcomes for girls than for boys because that type of support is particularly salient to their health and well-being.

On the other hand, social support derived from peer groups is shown to be more influential among male adolescents than their female counterparts. Chen (1999) suggests that adolescent boys often distance themselves from their parents during adolescence to properly achieve a conventional male identity. This leads boys to become more autonomous from their mother than girls (Gavin and Furman, 1996), often accomplished by developing relationships that involve companionship and joint activity with peers (Gabriel and Gardner, 1999). Through these peer relationships, peer support may be more influential on behavior for boys than girls (Gentina et al., 2016). For the purposes of this study, then, we explore whether peer support is likely to be more influential on sleep outcomes for boys than girls and conversely, how parental support might be more influential among girls.

Current study

Prior research suggests a complex relationship between adolescent sleep and delinquent behavior, yet further investigation is warranted to understand the broader social context in which this relationship operates. Drawing upon a risk and resilience framework, we offer a series of hypotheses with particular attention to the role of various forms of social support and sex differences in how these supports influence sleep and delinquency. We note the data used here to assess this series of relationships are cross-sectional and, as such, causal associations cannot be confirmed without longitudinal data (O’Laughlin et al., 2018). This study therefore offers an initial test of the interrelated relationships between the main study constructs of interest that can be built upon in future research. In general, we anticipate that social support will be protective against poor sleep, which will correspond to greater risk for delinquency via reduced self-control. However, we expect that the protective effect of parental and peer support will differ significantly between boys and girls. Please see Figures 1 and 2 for an illustration of our conceptual model and all hypotheses.

H1a. Sleep quality and sleep quantity will be negatively associated with delinquency.

H1b. The frequency of sleep disturbance will be positively associated with delinquency.

H2a. Peer support and parental support will be positively associated with sleep quantity and sleep quality.

H2b. Peer support and parental support will be negatively associated with the frequency of sleep disturbance.

H3. Self-control will mediate the relationship between all indicators of sleep and delinquency.

H4a. The relationship between parental support with delinquency will be mediated sequentially by indicators of sleep and self-control.

H4b. The relationship between peer support with delinquency will be mediated sequentially by indicators of sleep and self-control.

H5a. The relationship between peer support and sleep indicators will be stronger for boys than girls.

H5b. The relationship between parental support and sleep indicators will be stronger for girls than boys.

Figure 1.

Main conceptual model (H1–H3).

Figure 2.

Conceptual model—Sex moderation (H5).

Method

Sample

We collected data using a survey of adolescents in 14 classrooms across four public and private schools in the city of Lille in Northern France. Since adolescents represent a vulnerable population in a research context (Batat and Tanner, 2019), all participants were required to submit both a signed parental consent and individual assent to participate in the study prior to taking the survey. All parents were given an opportunity to decline their children's participation in the survey. The adolescent participants were assured that all information provided was strictly confidential and only the first names of participants were collected. Students were assured that questionnaires would not be shared with parents, teachers, or anyone else except the researcher. The researchers obtained approval and support of all school authorities including school heads and teachers and collected the data from 447 students (14–18 years; 262 girls, 185 boys).

All participants were informed of the objective of the study in French. A paper-and-pencil survey was administered to all participants in each of the classrooms during regular school hours in January and February 2020. Participants completed the survey in the classroom in the presence of a teacher and the researcher, completing the questionnaire in roughly an hour on average. The average age of participants was 17.1 years and the average class size was 30 students. The average level of education for mothers was 6.4 (SD = 2.7) on a ten-item scale (1 = never went to school, 2 = 8^th grade or less, …, 10 = professional training beyond a 4-year college or university). The average level of the father's education was 7.5 (SD = 2.9). Table 1 provides descriptive statistics for all 447 respondents included in the sample.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics (N = 447).

	N	%	M (SD)	Range
Socio-demographics
Sex
Male	185	41.3
Female	262	58.7
Age	447		17.1 (8.09)	14–18 years
Grade level
9	104	23.3
10	138	30.8
11	205	45.7
Birth order
Oldest	185	41.4
Middle	81	18.1
Youngest	145	32.4
Only child	36	8.1
Parental education
Mother			6.4 (2.7)	1 = low; 10 = high
Father			7.9 (2.9)
Sleep outcomes
Sleep quantity (hrs/day)			7.51 (1.11)
Sleep quality			3.37 (0.90)	1 = never; 5 = every day/night
Sleep disturbance			3.08 (0.99)	1 = never; 5 = every day/night
Social support
Parental support			3.75 (1.10)	1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree
Peer support			3.26 (1.30)	1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree
Self-control			3.23 (1.22)	1 = false; 5 = true
Delinquency			2.34 (1.25)	1 = never; 5 = always

Measures

Sleep

We measured sleep duration by asking respondents how many hours of sleep they got on average per night during the past month. Participants reported an average of approximately 7.51 hours of sleep per night. We measured sleep quality and sleep disturbance using two scales developed by Vernon et al. (2015), which were adapted from the School Sleep Habits Survey (Wolfson and Carskadon, 2003) and specifically developed for an adolescent population. The sleep quality scale includes two items: (a) “How often have you felt satisfied with your sleep?” and (b) “How often have you had a good night's sleep?” with responses ranging from “never” (1) to “every day/night” (5). The sleep disturbance scale is comprised of three items including: (a) “How often have you arrived late to class because you overslept?” (b) “How often have you fallen asleep in morning class?” and (c) “How often have you stayed up until at least 3 am?”

Prior research on adolescents provides evidence of the sleep scale's validity used here (Vernon et al., 2015). However, we recognize some of the items used here to conceptualize sleep disturbances and sleep quality such as oversleeping or coming late to class differ from those used in past research such as the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) (Buysse et al., 1989). Given our focus on young people, we chose to measure aspects of sleep quality in the context of respondents’ specific experiences with school. As such, these items from the School Sleep Habits Survey were deemed most appropriate for the broader questionnaire given to students as well as for use in the current study. See Table 2 for a report of the internal consistency reliabilities (coefficient alphas), variable inter-correlations, and convergent validities for all study variables. Moreover, see Appendix A, supplementary material for a description of all items included in each scale used in our analyses.

Table 2.

Seven-factor CFA model.

			Discriminant validity
Construct	Reliability (Jöreskog's Rhô)	Convergent validity (Rhô VC)	Delinquency	Self-control	Sleep disturbance	Sleep quality	Sleep quantity	Parental support	Peer support
Peer support	0.88	0.51							-
Parental support	0.87	0.64						-	0.12*
Sleep quantity	-	-					-	0.11*	0.09
Sleep quality	0.70	0.51				-	0.27**	0.29**	0.11*
Sleep disturbance	0.70	0.52			-	−0.36**	−0.10*	−0.09*	−0.10*
Self-control	0.73	0.50		-	−0.09*	0.32**	0.10*	0.16*	0.03
Delinquency	0.83	0.50	-	−0.32*	0.27**	−0.21**	−0.07	−23**	−0.03

Correlation significant at the p<.05 level (two-tailed).

Correlation significant at the p<.01 level (two-tailed).

Delinquency

We measured delinquency using nine items from the normative deviance scale (NDS), which has demonstrated good psychometric properties and internal consistency among adolescents (Gentina et al., 2016; Vazsonyi and Snider, 2008; Vazsonyi et al., 2001). We use a shortened version of the scale, composed of nine items that measure the frequency of various delinquent behaviors along a 5-point scale (1 = never, 5 = always). Following exploratory factor analysis (detailed below), three items were removed and the remaining six items displayed sufficient reliability as shown in Table 2 (Jöreskog's Rhô = 0.83). The items were chosen to capture particular aspects of alcohol use, smoking, and school-related misconduct of interest to the researchers while remaining brief enough for inclusion in the larger survey that included other sections beyond the scope of the present study. Items include drinking alcohol, lying about one's age to buy alcohol or cigarettes, and having been sent out of a classroom because of “bad” behavior.

Self-control

To measure self-control, we used the 8-item Weinberger Adjustment Inventory (WAI), developed by Weinberger and Schwartz (1990), which measures the extent to which an adolescent moderates impulses before acting (e.g., “I do things without giving them enough thought”). The responses range from 1 (false or mostly false) to 5 (true or mostly true). Although the WAI focuses specifically on one aspect of self-control related to impulse moderation and control (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990), the inventory has been well-validated in clinical and nonclinical samples of adolescents (Weinberger, 1997). This scale is particularly pertinent to the current study since prior research indicates that lowered impulse control may be a particularly salient mechanism that links poor sleep to heightened risk for delinquent behavior among young people (Meldrum et al., 2015; Peach and Gaultney, 2013).

Social support

To measure parental support, we used the four-item Chaplin and John (2010) scale, with responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Items include responses to prompts such as, “My parents make me feel very special” and “My parents find time to talk to me.” We measured peer support using the four-item Chaplin and John (2010) scale. Items include responses to prompts including, “My friends are hard to please” and “My friends can be mean to me.” Prior research with adolescents provides evidence of the scales’ validity among adolescents (Gentina et al., 2018a, 2018b).

Sex

Finally, we use a binary measure of sex derived from the original survey which asks respondents, “Are you male or female?” This measure is used in our moderation analyses related to Hypotheses 5a and 5b.

Results

Exploratory and confirmatory analyses

Prior to hypothesis testing, we conducted analyses to determine the acceptability of fit of our measurement models. Exploratory factor analysis was carried out using SPSS, while confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted in the AMOS module. After confirming that all items passed the tests of univariate quasi normality and multivariate normality, we conducted exploratory factor analyses (principal components) using Oblimin rotation. Items with communalities below 0.50 were eliminated, as well as those with factors loadings below 0.50 (three items for delinquency). The seven-factor measurement model solution (parental support, peer support, sleep quantity, sleep quality, sleep disturbance, self-control, and delinquency) explained 64.1% of the total variance.

We tested Model 2, for which the composite reliability coefficients (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70), internal convergent validity (rhôvc > 0.50) and discriminant validities were acceptable (Fornell and Larcker, 1981) (see Table 2). To assess discriminant validity, we verified that each latent construct extracted more variance from its indicators (ρ_vc) than it shared with all other constructs. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses of the seven scales can be found in Table 2.

We used the following criteria in evaluating CFA: (a) chi square and degrees of freedom (χ²/df < 5, (b) comparative fit index (CFI > 0.90), (c) root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA < 0.10), and (d) standardized root mean square residual (SRMR < 0.10) (Vandenberg and Lance, 2000). The measurement Model 2 demonstrated excellent fit (χ² = 1147.54, df = 335, p < .001; adjusted χ² = 3.42; CFI = 0.90; RMSEA = 0.07; SRMR = 0.05), as described in Table 3.

Table 3.

Measurement models and invariance for main results.

	χ²	df	p	χ²/df	CFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Models	ΔCFI	ΔRMSEA
Measurement model (full sample; N = 447)
M1: Reflective (28-item, 1-factor)	4533.50	351	.00	12.91	0.04	0.16	0.32	1 vs 2	0.86	0.09
M2: Reflective (28-item, 7-factor)	1147.54	335	.00	3.42	0.90	0.07	0.05	1 vs 2	0.86	0.09
Invariance (sex groups)
M3: Configural invariance (28-item, 7-factor)	1523.87	670	.00	2.27	0.90	0.05	0.06	3 vs 4	0.01	0.01
M4: Metric invariance	1564.03	691	.00	2.26	0.89	0.06	0.07	3 vs 4	0.01	0.01
SEM model
M5: SEM model on the full sample	1103.19	335	.00	3.29	0.90	0.07	0.07
M6: SEM model across sex groups	1482.44	672	.00	2.20	0.91	0.05	0.07

Measurement invariance across sex groups

We examined configural (factor structure) and metric (factor loading) invariance across sex groups, using multi-group CFA. The model achieved configural invariance. To test for metric invariances, we set all the factor loadings to be the same across sex in a constrained multi-group CFA (Table 3, Models 3 and 4). As evidence of metric invariance, the constrained and unconstrained models do not differ (ΔCFI/ΔRMSEA < 0.01).

Hypothesis testing

General model (H1a, H1b, H2a, H2b)

We specified the main SEM model (see Figure 1) among the whole sample to examine the relationships between social support, sleep, self-control, and delinquency. The estimation of the structural model (Table 3, Model 5) generated acceptable fit (χ² = 1103.19, df = 335, χ²/df = 3.29, p < .001, CFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.07). Contrary to our expectations, sleep quality (γ = −0.01, t = −0.11, p = .90) and sleep quantity (γ = −0.08, t = −0.95, p = .34) are not directly associated with delinquency. As such, we do not find support for H1a. Only sleep disturbance is directly and positively related to delinquency (γ = 0.63, t = 4.40, p < .001), supporting H1b.

Parental support is positively associated with sleep quantity (γ = 0.28, t = 2.83, p < .05), and sleep quality (γ = 0.38, t = 6.27, p < .001) and negatively associated with sleep disturbance (γ = −0.63, t = −5.26, p < .001). Similarly, peer support is positively associated with sleep quality (γ = 0.15, t = 4.40, p < .001) and negatively associated with sleep disturbance (γ = −0.20, t = −2.92, p < .05). However, contrary to our expectation, peer support is not positively associated with sleep quantity in the full sample (γ = 0.05, t = 0.52; p = .63). We therefore find support for H2a regarding parents only and support for H2b regarding both peers and parents. Moreover, all the sleep indicators were significantly related to self-control (sleep quantity –> self-control, γ = 0.19, t = 2.26, p < .001; sleep quality –> self-control, γ = 0.35, t = 4.39, p < .001; sleep disturbance –> self-control, γ =−0.49, t = −4.97, p < .001). Moreover, self-control is negatively related to delinquency (γ = −0.25, t = −2.55, p < .05). All the results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4.

Main SEM results (n = 447).

	Standardized parameter estimates	t	p
H1a:
Sleep quality → Delinquency	−0.08	−0.95	=.34
Sleep quantity → Delinquency	−0.01	−0.11	.90
Sleep disturbance → Delinquency	0.63	4.40	<.001
H2a:
Peer support → Sleep quality	0.15	4.40	<.001
Peer support → Sleep quantity	0.05	0.52	=.63
Parental support → Sleep quality	0.38	6.27	<.001
Parental support → Sleep quantity	0.28	2.83	<.05
H2b:
Peer support → Sleep disturbance	−0.20	−2.92	<.05
Parental support → Sleep disturbance	−0.63	−5.26	<.001
Sleep quality → Self-control	0.35	4.39	<.001
Sleep quantity → Self-control	0.19	2.26	<.001
Sleep disturbance → Self-control	−0.49	−4.97	<.001
Self-control → Delinquency	−0.25	−2.55	<.05
H3:
Sleep quantity → Self-control → Delinquency	−0.04	[−0.06; −0.01], <.05
Sleep quality → Self-control → Delinquency	−0.05	[−0.08; −0.02], <.05
Sleep disturbance → Self-control → Delinquency	0.05	[0.01; 0.08], <.05

Mediation effects (H3 and H4)

To test the simple mediations outlined in H3, we used Preacher et al.'s (2007) PROCESS tool (Model 4). If the bootstrapped confidence interval does not include 0, the indirect effect is significant and mediation is supported. The confidence interval does not include zero, indicating that sleep disturbance increases delinquency indirectly through reductions in self-control. Specifically, sleep disturbance is negatively associated with self-control, which is, in turn, negatively associated with delinquency (γ = 0.05 [0.01; 0.08], p < .05). On the other hand, both sleep quality (γ = −0.05 [−0.08; −0.02], p < .05) and sleep quantity (γ = −0.04 [−0.06; −0.01], p < .05) correspond to delinquency indirectly through self-control. Better sleep quality and greater sleep quantity are each associated with increases in self-control, which is negatively associated with delinquency.

To test the sequential mediations outlined in H4a and H4b, we used Preacher et al.'s (2007) PROCESS macro and computed bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals. The PROCESS macro is particularly adept at accounting for multiple mediation effects operating in parallel, enabling users to formally assess sequential indirect links while combining mediation and moderation tests (Hayes, 2015; Hayes et al., 2017). Following prior research (Ai et al., 2021; Zhuang et al., 2018), we computed regression equations and estimated the mediator variable models using sleep variables and self-control as the respective sequential mediators, enabling us to estimate indirect effects by bootstrapping methods (1000 bootstraps). The results of these analyses are shown in Table 5.

Table 5.

Sequential mediation results (n = 447).

	Standardized parameter estimates	Bootstrapped confidence interval	p-Value	Mediation
Parental support ---> Sleep ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency (H4a)
Parental support ---> Sleep quality ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency	−0.041	[−0.043; −0.006]	<.05	Full sequential mediation
Direct effect: Parental support ---> Delinquency	−0.011	[−0.166; 0.054]	>.05	Full sequential mediation
Parental support ---> Sleep quantity ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency	0.001	[−0.001; 0.004]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Direct effect: Parental support ---> Delinquency	−0.011	[−0.166; 0.054]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Parental support ---> Sleep disturbance ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency	−0.001	[−0.003; 0.001]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Direct effect: Parental support ---> Delinquency	−0.011	[−0.003; 0.054]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Peer support ---> Sleep ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency (H4b)
Peer support ---> Sleep quality---> Self-control ---> Delinquency	−0.056	[−0.061; −0.001]	<.05	Full sequential mediation
Direct effect: Peer support ---> Delinquency	0.002	[−0.055; 0.059]	>.05	Full sequential mediation
Peer support ---> Sleep quantity---> Self-control ---> Delinquency	0.001	[−0.010; 0.024]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Direct effect: Peer support ---> Delinquency	0.002	[−0.055; 0.059]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Peer support ---> Sleep disturbance ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency	−0.001	[−0.003; 0.001]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation
Direct effect: Peer support ---> Delinquency	0.002	[−0.055; 0.059]	>.05	No direct effect, no sequential mediation

For each of the hypothesized sequential mediations through sleep quality, the confidence interval does not include zero, indicating a significant mediation chain. As such, Table 5 demonstrates the existence of a full sequential mediation for peer support (Peer support ---> Sleep quality ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency, γ = −0.05 [−0.06; −0.001], p < .05) and parental support (Parental support ---> Sleep quality ---> Self-control ---> Delinquency, γ = −0.04 [−0.04; −0.001], p < .05). Full mediation is inferred if the direct effect between the social support variables and delinquency is reduced to non-significance in the presence of the mediators. However, mediation chains are not significant for sleep quantity and sleep disturbance since the bootstrapped confidence intervals for these sequential mediations include 0. As a result, we find support for H4a and H4b dependent on the sleep indicator in question.

Moderating sex effects (H5a, H5b)

Finally, we tested our simple moderating hypotheses to examine sex differences in the influence of different types of social support on sleep. We used a multi-group analysis conducted with the software AMOS 26.0, which uses a case-wise full information maximum likelihood estimation procedure with missing values estimation to include all available data from each case (Albright and Park, 2009; Enders, 2006; Wothke, 2000). The multigroup analysis demonstrates good fit of the full model (χ² = 1482.44, df = 672, p < .001; adjusted χ²= 2.20; CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.05; Table 3, Model 6). We used multi-group analyses with two runs of data analysis to test for the moderating effects of respondent sex (Kline, 2005). In the first model, structural parameters are constrained to be equal across groups (χ²H). In the second, the structural constraints are removed, resulting in a Chi Square (χ²N) with additional degrees of freedom. The test for the moderating effect then produces the difference in the two values (χ²N − χ²H = χ²Δ), generating a χ² value with degrees of freedom equal to the difference in degrees of freedom of the (χ²H) and (χ²N) values.

In support of H5a, we find that respondent sex moderates the effect of peer support on all sleep indicators (sleep disturbances Δχ²[1] = 4.15, p < .05), sleep quality (Δχ²[1] = 5.90, p < .05) and sleep quantity (Δχ²[1] = 4.02, p < .05). The relationships between peer support and sleep indicators are consistently stronger for boys than for girls. Moreover, in support of H5b, sex moderates the effect of parental support on sleep disturbances (Δχ²[1] = 5.03, p < .05) and sleep quantity (Δχ²[1] = 4.04, p < .05). However, sex does not moderate the effect of parental support on sleep quality (Δχ²[1] = 2.54, p = .20). All relationships between parental support and sleep indicators are stronger for boys than for girls. The results of the multi-group moderation analyses are shown in Table 6.

Table 6.

Moderating hypotheses tests by sex.

	Adolescent girls (n = 262)			Adolescent boys (n = 185)
	Standardized parameter estimates	t	p	Standardized parameter estimates	t	p	Δχ²
H5a: Peer support → Sleep quality	0.10	1.30	=.19	0.26	2.65	<.05	Δχ²(1) = 5.90, p < .05
H5a: Peer support → Sleep quantity	0.06	0.78	=.43	0.17	2.56	<.05	Δχ²(1) = 4.02, p < .05
H5a: Peer support → Sleep disturbance	−0.16	−1.94	=.07	−0.26	−2.29	<.05	Δχ²(1) = 4.15, p < .05
H5b: Parental support → Sleep quality	0.43	4.76	<.001	0.37	3.88	<.01	Δχ²(1) = 2.54, p = .20
H5b: Parental support → Sleep quantity	0.24	2.10	<.001	0.14	1.43	=.15	Δχ²(1) = 4.04, p < .05
H5b: Parental support → Sleep disturbance	−0.43	−4.36	<.001	−0.31	−2.75	<.05	Δχ²(1) = 5.03, p < .05

Discussion

We set out to examine the relationship between sleep and delinquency among French adolescents while considering the broader context of social support and related sex differences. Our analyses produced three main findings. First, sleep disturbance is directly associated with delinquent behavior while self-control significantly mediates the indirect relationship between all indicators of sleep (quality, quantity, and disturbance) and delinquency. Second, parental support is associated with all sleep outcomes while peer support corresponds specifically to sleep quality and sleep disturbance. We found the strongest support for full sequential mediation related to parental support, sleep quality, and delinquency. Finally, we found that different types of social support are more influential for sleep depending on self-reported respondent sex. Peer support is more strongly associated with all three indicators of sleep among boys, whereas parental support is linked more so to sleep outcomes for girls.

Our findings expand past research demonstrating that poor sleep is associated with greater risk of delinquency through the mechanism of degraded self-control (Meldrum et al., 2015; Vazsonyi et al., 2018). We build on this literature by showing that all three indicators of sleep correspond to delinquent outcomes via reductions in self-control. These findings underscore the importance of considering multiple facets of sleep deprivation and their implications for behavioral health among adolescents. Beyond previously studied measures of inadequate sleep quantity, poor quality sleep and frequent disturbances may also make it more difficult for young people to control impulses and engage in proper decision-making that ultimately generates higher risk for involvement in delinquency (Krizan and Herlache, 2016; Peach and Gaultney, 2013).

A key contribution of this study is the finding that social support plays a significant role in contextualizing the sleep–delinquency relationship. From a risk and resilience perspective, strong social support may provide protection against poor sleep in certain contexts with important differences between boys and girls that shape risk for delinquent behavior. Supporting H2a and H2b, we find that both parental and peer support correspond to sleep outcomes, although peer support is not significantly associated with sleep quantity. Furthermore, our sequential mediation analyses confirm the importance of both peer and parental support in the relationship between sleep quality and delinquency through self-control. This corroborates research suggesting that poor quality of sleep is an especially pertinent risk factor for delinquent behavior (Connolly et al., 2021). Greater social support from parents and peers may serve to improve sleep quality among adolescents by reducing stress, anxiety, or strain that make sleep more difficult for young people (Van Reeth et al., 2000; Van Schalkwijk et al., 2015). Furthermore, adolescents that receive better social support may be better able to cope with everyday problems and invoke increased support during acute times of crisis (Dahl and El-Sheikh, 2007). Young people who are better supported by their parents and peers may feel generally safer, which allows them to sleep easier without fear for harm to their everyday well-being (Kent de Grey et al., 2018).

Our moderation analysis demonstrates that various types of social support are more salient for sleep outcomes for adolescent boys and girls. In accordance with H5a and H5b, peer support is more strongly associated with all three sleep indicators among boys, while parental support has a more robust association with sleep outcomes among girls. Taken in the context of this study's other findings, the theoretical pathway from social support to delinquency appears to be sex-specific, at least in part, when considering sleep and its influence on self-control. Specifically, poor peer support may have a stronger effect on degrading sleep among boys, which can then serve to reduce self-control and increase the risk of delinquent behavior.

On the other hand, poor parental support may be more likely to harm sleep among girls, again increasing delinquency risk through the mechanism of self-control. These dynamics operate most consistently around sleep quality. Since research suggests social support provides young people with the resources to feel safe and cope with the daily stressors that are harmful to sleep (Kent de Grey et al., 2018), the associations found here suggest the social support-sleep link may be context-specific depending on sex and support type of those in question. However, there remains relatively little research in this area so future studies should continue to explore how sex (alongside more expansive aspects of gender identity) and social support conjunctively influence downstream factors such as sleep and delinquent behavior. Although theorists argue that social support is directly associated with delinquency and crime (Colvin et al., 2002), the evidence here suggests that degraded sleep and associated changes in self-control may operate as an important mediating process between the two.

There are several practical implications of our findings that can inform interventions to enhance adolescent sleep and reduce the risk of delinquency. Efforts to encourage better sleep habits among adolescents should focus not only on total time spent sleeping each night, but also on improving the quality of sleep (Connolly et al., 2021). Sleep hygiene programs to bolster adolescent sleep quality can be implemented in the general public or via school-based initiatives and have been found to successfully improve quality of sleep across cultural contexts (Illingworth et al., 2020; Otsuka et al., 2020). Strategies to improve adolescent sleep quality may include setting up bedrooms for optimal sleep (Kim et al., 20200), reducing noise pollution and disturbances from mobile devices (Carter et al., 2016), or delaying school start times to ensure that adolescent circadian rhythms align with school scheduling demands (Semenza et al., 2020). Improving sleep quality can improve affective and cognitive control, reducing the risk of delinquency among adolescents and mitigating subsequent health harms (Luyster et al., 2012).

On the other hand, efforts to improve sleep among adolescents will be most effective in concert with adequate social support from both parents and peers. Although sleep hygiene programs may help improve sleep quality, sleep enhancement strategies may be less effective in the context of poor social support. It is therefore critical for parents to ensure that they are providing adequate emotional care to their children, especially adolescent girls, since our results suggest a stronger influence of parental support on girls' sleep compared to boys'. Relatedly, positive peer support appears to be vital for proper sleep among boys. Given this, sleep hygiene programs with an approach to improving sleep that considers not only the child's physical environment but also their social context may ultimately be most effective (LeBourgeois et al., 2005). Programs that include resources from school counselors, conflict mediation specialists, and school psychologists may help to improve key interpersonal relationships among adolescents with implications for sleep quality and downstream repercussions for delinquent behavior. Given the documented negative health consequences of engaging in delinquency and the resultant criminal justice contact among adolescents (Boen, 2020; Esposito et al., 2017; Jackson, 2021), a more holistic approach to adolescent sleep improvement can yield long-term benefits for well-being over the life course.

Limitations and future research

Our paper is not without certain limitations that offer opportunities for future research. First, our data were collected from schools in one region of France and cannot be generalized to the entire country or across national contexts. We encourage researchers to continue studying the issues explored here in contexts outside of the United States using nationally representative samples where possible. Second, we were limited to the use of a self-reported, binary measure of respondent sex (male/female) included in the original survey. Continued work in this area should leverage measures that include aspects of gender identity and expression among gender-diverse persons where possible. Third, our two measures of social support are somewhat limited to support provided by parents and peers. Our measures do not include other relatives, teachers, or additional adults that may be instrumental in the lives of adolescents. Future studies should replicate the findings here while considering other types of social support and potential sex differences for sleep outcomes.

Relatedly, our measure of self-control focuses on one aspect of the broader self-control construct—impulse control. The larger construct of self-control is multifaceted and complex, comprised of multiple conceptual elements that contribute to the broader trait (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). As such, we encourage future researchers to assess the dynamics analyzed here using more diverse measures of self-control that account for multiple elements. In addition, our measures of sleep disturbance and quality were derived from the School Sleep Habits Survey (Wolfson and Carskadon, 2003) and may differ from other measures of these sleep-related concerns (Vernon et al., 2015). Although these items were chosen here given their particular applicability to students in the context of their school experiences, additional research using sleep quality items from measures like the PSQI would be beneficial to further test the associations explored here (Buysse et al., 1989).

Finally, the data used here are cross-sectional and we cannot confirm causal relationships between the various measures in question. Although we outline a theoretical process using a series of structural equation models, longitudinal data are required to confirm the directional and causal nature of the relationships. For instance, it is conceivable that delinquent engagement corresponds to subsequent degraded sleep given research suggesting that criminal justice contact has negative implications for adolescent behavioral health (Jackson et al., 2019, 2020). Given the potential for methodological bias in cross-sectional research, future researchers should leverage randomized designs and longitudinal methods such as cross-lagged panel modeling wherever possible to test the mediation dynamics we have begun to address in this study (O’Laughlin et al., 2018).

Despite these limitations, our study provides important insight into the broader context of the previously documented sleep–delinquency link. Social support is a pertinent factor for achieving proper sleep for adolescents and different types of support are more instrumental than others for adolescent boys and girls. Enhanced social support from parents and peer groups may serve to improve adolescent sleep, especially aspects of sleep quality, and potentially reduce the risk of delinquent involvement. Since proper sleep is critical for adolescents to thrive and grow, improvements to sleep quality and resultant reductions in delinquency can provide potentially substantial benefits for well-being among youth.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-euc-10.1177_14773708231154031 - Supplemental material for Sleep and delinquency: The context of self-control, social support, and sex differences among French adolescents

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-euc-10.1177_14773708231154031 for Sleep and delinquency: The context of self-control, social support, and sex differences among French adolescents by Daniel C. Semenza and Elodie Gentina in European Journal of Criminology

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Daniel C. Semenza

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Notes

References

Adam

Snell

Pendry

(2007) Sleep timing and quantity in ecological and family context: A nationally representative time-diary study. Journal of Family Psychology 21(1): 4.

Yang

(2021) Adolescents’ social media use and their voluntary garbage sorting intention: A sequential mediation model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(15): 8119.

Albright

Park

(2009) Confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS, LISREL, Mplus, and SAS/STAT CALIS. Working Paper, The University Information Technology Services (UITS) Center for Statistical and Mathematical Computing, Indiana University, USA. Accessed August 15, 2022. Available at: http://www.indiana.edu/∼statmath/stat/all/cfa/index.html.

Backman

Laajasalo

Saukkonen

, et al. (2015) Are qualitative and quantitative sleep problems associated with delinquency when controlling for psychopathic features and parental supervision? Journal of Sleep Research 24(5): 543–548.

Barnert

Dudovitz

Nelson

, et al. (2017) How does incarcerating young people affect their adult health outcomes? Pediatrics 139(2): e20162624.

Batat

Tanner

(2019) Unveiling (in)vulnerability in an adolescent’s consumption subculture: A framework to understand adolescents’ experienced (in)vulnerability and ethical implications. Journal of Business Ethics 169(4): 713–730.

Berkman

Glass

Brissette

, et al. (2000) From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Social Science and Medicine 51(6): 843–857.

Boen

(2020) Criminal justice contacts and psychophysiological functioning in early adulthood: Health inequality in the carceral state. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 61(3): 290–306.

Bronfenbrenner

(1979) The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

10.

Buysse

Reynolds III

Monk

, et al. (1989) The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: A new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Research 28(2): 193–213.

11.

Carter

Rees

Hale

, et al. (2016) Association between portable screen-based media device access or use and sleep outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatrics 170(12): 1202–1208.

12.

Catrett

Gaultney

(2009) Possible insomnia predicts some risky behaviors among adolescents when controlling for depressive symptoms. The Journal of Genetic Psychology 170(4): 287–309.

13.

Chaplin

John

(2010) Interpersonal influences on adolescent materialism: A new look at the role of parents and peers. Journal of Consumer Psychology 20(2): 176–184.

14.

Chen

(1999) A gender comparison on the association of adolescent emotional autonomy with educational expectations and self-esteem. Applied Behavioral Science Review 7(1): 1–21.

15.

Choquet

Hassler

Morin

, et al. (2008) Perceived parenting styles and tobacco, alcohol and cannabis use among French adolescents: Gender and family structure differentials. Alcohol and Alcoholism 43(1): 73–80.

16.

Chu

Saucier

Hafner

(2010) Meta-analysis of the relationships between social support and well-being in children and adolescents. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 29(6): 624–645.

17.

Clinkinbeard

Simi

Evans

, et al. (2011) Sleep and delinquency: Does the amount of sleep matter? Journal of Youth and Adolescence 40(7): 916–930.

18.

Colarossi

Eccles

(2000) A prospective study of adolescents’ peer support: Gender differences and the influence of parental relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 29(6): 661–678.

19.

Colvin

Cullen

Ven

(2002) Coercion, social support, and crime: An emerging theoretical consensus. Criminology 40(1): 19–42.

20.

Connolly

Jackson

Semenza

(2021) Quality over quantity? Using sibling comparisons to examine relations between sleep quality, sleep duration, and delinquency. Social Science and Medicine 280: 114053.

21.

Costello

Laub

(2020) Social control theory: The legacy of Travis Hirschi’s causes of delinquency. Annual Review of Criminology 3: 21–41.

22.

Dahl

El-Sheikh

(2007) Considering sleep in a family context: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Family Psychology 21(1): 1.

23.

Daigle

Cullen

Wright

(2007) Gender differences in the predictors of juvenile delinquency: Assessing the generality-specificity debate. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 5(3): 254–286.

24.

Delaruelle

Dierckens

Vandendriessche

, et al. (2021) Adolescents’ sleep quality in relation to peer, family and school factors: Findings from the 2017/2018 HBSC study in Flanders. Quality of Life Research 30(1): 55–65.

25.

Enders

(2006) Analyzing structural equation models with missing data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course 2: 493–519.

26.

Esposito

Lee

Hicken

, et al. (2017) The consequences of contact with the criminal justice system for health in the transition to adulthood. Longitudinal and Life Course Studies 8(1): 57.

27.

Felső

Lohner

Hollódy

, et al. (2017) Relationship between sleep duration and childhood obesity: Systematic review including the potential underlying mechanisms. Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases 27(9): 751–761.

28.

Fornell

Larcker

(1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1): 39–50.

29.

Gabriel

Gardner

(1999) Are there "his" and "hers" types of interdependence? The implications of gender differences in collective versus relational interdependence for affect, behavior, and cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77(3): 642.

30.

Galland

Gray

Penno

, et al. (2017) Gender differences in sleep hygiene practices and sleep quality in New Zealand adolescents aged 15 to 17 years. Sleep Health 3(2): 77–83.

31.

Gavin

Furman

(1996) Adolescent girls’ relationships with mothers and best friends. Child Development 67(2): 375–386.

32.

Gentina

Rose

Vitell

(2016) Ethics during adolescence: A social networks perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 138(1): 185–197.

33.

Gentina

Shrum

Lowrey

(2018a) Coping with loneliness through materialism: Strategies matter for adolescent development of unethical behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics 152(1): 103–122.

34.

Gentina

Shrum

Lowrey

, et al. (2018b) An integrative model of the influence of parental and peer support on consumer ethical beliefs: The mediating role of self-esteem, power, and materialism. Journal of Business Ethics 150(4): 1173–1186.

35.

Gillett

Watson

Saunders

, et al. (2021) Sleep and circadian rhythm actigraphy measures, mood instability and impulsivity: A systematic review. Journal of Psychiatric Research 144: 66–79.

36.

Gottfredson

Hirschi

(1990) A General Theory of Crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

37.

Gregory

Sadeh

(2016) Annual research review: Sleep problems in childhood psychiatric disorders–a review of the latest science. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 57(3): 296–317.

38.

Hao

, et al. (2021) Sleep quality in relation to social support and resilience among rural empty-nest older adults in China. Sleep Medicine 82: 193–199.

39.

Harandi

Taghinasab

Nayeri

(2017) The correlation of social support with mental health: A meta-analysis. Electronic Physician 9(9): 5212.

40.

Hay

Meldrum

Piquero

(2013) Negative cases in the nexus between self-control, social bonds, and delinquency. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 11(1): 3–25.

41.

Hayes

(2015) An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research 50(1): 1–22.

42.

Hayes

Montoya

Rockwood

(2017) The analysis of mechanisms and their contingencies: PROCESS versus structural equation modeling. Australasian Marketing Journal 25(1): 76–81.

43.

Heaney

Israel

(2008) Social networks and social support. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice 4: 189–210.

44.

Hirschi

(1969) Causes of Delinquency. New York, NY: Routledge.

45.

Hoeve

Dubas

Eichelsheim

, et al. (2009) The relationship between parenting and delinquency: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 37(6): 749–775.

46.

Hoeve

Stams

GJJ

Van der Put

, et al. (2012) A meta-analysis of attachment to parents and delinquency. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 40(5): 771–785.

47.

Illingworth

Sharman

Harvey

, et al. (2020) The teensleep study: The effectiveness of a school-based sleep education programme at improving early adolescent sleep. Sleep Medicine: X 2: 100011.

48.

Jackson

(2021) The case for conceptualizing youth–police contact as a racialized adverse childhood experience. American Journal of Public Health 111(7): 1189–1191.

49.

Jackson

Fahmy

Vaughn

, et al. (2019) Police stops among at-risk youth: Repercussions for mental health. Journal of Adolescent Health 65(5): 627–632.

50.

Jackson

Testa

Vaughn

, et al. (2020) Police stops and sleep behaviors among at-risk youth. Sleep Health 6(4): 435–441.

51.

Jackson

Vaughn

(2017) Sleep and preteen delinquency: Is the association robust to ADHD symptomatology and ADHD diagnosis? Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 39(4): 585–595.

52.

Jenson

Fraser

(Eds.) (2015) Social Policy for Children and Families: A Risk and Resilience Perspective. New York, NY: Sage Publications.

53.

Kamphuis

Meerlo

Koolhaas

, et al. (2012) Poor sleep as a potential causal factor in aggression and violence. Sleep Medicine 13(4): 327–334.

54.

Kent de Grey

Uchino

Trettevik

, et al. (2018) Social support and sleep: A meta-analysis. Health Psychology 37(8): 787–798.

55.

Kerns

Klepac

Cole

(1996) Peer relationships and preadolescents’ perceptions of security in the child-mother relationship. Developmental Psychology 32(3): 457.

56.

Kim

Dimsdale

(2007) The effect of psychosocial stress on sleep: A review of polysomnographic evidence. Behavioral Sleep Medicine 5(4): 256–278.

57.

Kim

, et al. (2020) Estimating the influence of adolescent delinquent behavior on adult health using sibling fixed effects. Social Science and Medicine 265: 113397.

58.

Kline

(2005) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

59.

Kremer

Poon

Jones

, et al. (2020) Risk and resilience among children with incarcerated parents: Examining heterogeneity in delinquency and school outcomes. Journal of Child and Family Studies 29(11): 3239–3252.

60.

Krizan

Herlache

(2016) Sleep disruption and aggression: Implications for violence and its prevention. Psychology of Violence 6(4): 542.

61.

LeBourgeois

Giannotti

Cortesi

, et al. (2005) The relationship between reported sleep quality and sleep hygiene in Italian and American adolescents. Pediatrics 115(Supplement 1): 257–265.

62.

Luyster

Strollo

Zee

, et al. (2012) Sleep: A health imperative. Sleep 35(6): 727–734.

63.

Markovic

Kaess

Tarokh

(2020) Gender differences in adolescent sleep neurophysiology: A high-density sleep EEG study. Scientific Reports 10(1): 1–13.

64.

Masten

(2001) Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist 56(3): 227.

65.

Mears

Tomlinson

Turanovic

(2022) The goldilocks rule—too little, too much, and “just right”: Curvilinear effects of sleep duration on delinquency. Justice Quarterly 39(2): 276–303.

66.

Meldrum

Barnes

Hay

(2015) Sleep deprivation, low self-control, and delinquency: A test of the strength model of self-control. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 44(2): 465–477.

67.

Meldrum

Restivo

(2014) The behavioral and health consequences of sleep deprivation among US high school students: Relative deprivation matters. Preventive Medicine 63: 24–28.

68.

Mesas

Peppard

Hale

, et al. (2020) Individuals’ perceptions of social support from family and friends are associated with lower risk of sleep complaints and short sleep duration. Sleep Health 6(1): 110–116.

69.

Minges

Redeker

(2016) Delayed school start times and adolescent sleep: A systematic review of the experimental evidence. Sleep Medicine Reviews 28: 86–95.

70.

Moore

Kirchner

Drotar

, et al. (2011) Correlates of adolescent sleep time and variability in sleep time: The role of individual and health related characteristics. Sleep Medicine 12(3): 239–245.

71.

Nickerson

Nagle

(2004) The influence of parent and peer attachments on life satisfaction in middle childhood and early adolescence. In: Dannerbeck A, Casas F, Sadurni M, et al. (eds) Quality-of-life Research on Children and Adolescents. Social Indicators Research Series, vol. 23. Dordrecht: Springer, 35–60.

72.

O'Laughlin

Martin

Ferrer

(2018) Cross-sectional analysis of longitudinal mediation processes. Multivariate Behavioral Research 53(3): 375–402.

73.

Otsuka

Kaneita

Itani

, et al. (2020) A school-based sleep hygiene education program for adolescents in Japan: A large-scale comparative intervention study. Sleep and Biological Rhythms 18(1): 27–36.

74.

Peach

Gaultney

(2013) Sleep, impulse control, and sensation-seeking predict delinquent behavior in adolescents, emerging adults, and adults. Journal of Adolescent Health 53(2): 293–299.

75.

Porras-Segovia

Pérez-Rodríguez

López-Esteban

, et al. (2019) Contribution of sleep deprivation to suicidal behaviour: A systematic review. Sleep Medicine Reviews 44: 37–47.

76.

Preacher

Rucker

Hayes

(2007) Assessing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research 42: 185–227.

77.

Pyper

Harrington

Manson

(2017) Do parents’ support behaviours predict whether or not their children get sufficient sleep? A cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 17(1): 1–10.

78.

Reimers

Schmidt

Demetriou

, et al. (2019) Parental and peer support and modelling in relation to domain-specific physical activity participation in boys and girls from Germany. PLoS One 14(10): e0223928.

79.

Semenza

Jackson

Testa

, et al. (2022) Adolescent sleep problems and susceptibility to peer influence. Youth and Society 54(2): 179–200.

80.

Semenza

Meldrum

Jackson

, et al. (2020) School start times, delinquency, and substance use: A criminological perspective. Crime and Delinquency 66(2): 163–193.

81.

Shochat

Cohen-Zion

Tzischinsky

(2014) Functional consequences of inadequate sleep in adolescents: A systematic review. Sleep Medicine Reviews 18(1): 75–87.

82.

Short

Weber

(2018) Sleep duration and risk-taking in adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Medicine Reviews 41: 185–196.

83.

Sivertsen

Skogen

Jakobsen

, et al. (2015) Sleep and use of alcohol and drug in adolescence. A large population-based study of Norwegian adolescents aged 16 to 19 years. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 149: 180–186.

84.

Svensson

(2004) Shame as a consequence of the parent-child relationship: A study of gender differences in juvenile delinquency. European Journal of Criminology 1(4): 477–504.

85.

Tynjälä

Kannas

Levälahti

, et al. (1999) Perceived sleep quality and its precursors in adolescents. Health Promotion International 14(2): 155–166.

86.

Vandenberg

Lance

(2000) A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods 3(1): 4–69.

87.

Van Reeth

Weibel

Spiegel

, et al. (2000) Physiology of sleep (review)–interactions between stress and sleep: From basic research to clinical situations. Sleep Medicine Reviews 4(2): 201–219.

88.

Van Schalkwijk

Blessinga

Willemen

, et al. (2015) Social support moderates the effects of stress on sleep in adolescents. Journal of Sleep Research 24(4): 407–413.

89.

Vazsonyi

Harris

Terveer

, et al. (2015) Parallel mediation effects by sleep on the parental warmth-problem behavior links: Evidence from national probability samples of Georgian and Swiss adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 44(2): 331–345.

90.

Vazsonyi

Jiskrova

Ksinan

(2018) Sleep, low self-control, and deviance: Direct and indirect links across immigrant groups and socioeconomic strata. Journal of Adolescence 68: 40–49.

91.

Vazsonyi

Liu

Javakhishvili

, et al. (2021) Sleepless: The developmental significance of sleep quality and quantity among adolescents. Developmental Psychology 57(6): 1018–1024.

92.

Vazsonyi

Pickering

Junger

, et al. (2001) An empirical test of a general theory of crime: A four-nation comparative study of self-control and the prediction of deviance. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 38: 91–131.

93.

Vazsonyi

Snider

(2008) Mentoring, competencies, and adjustment in adolescents: American part-time employment and European apprenticeships. International Journal of Behavioral Development 32(1): 46–55.

94.

Vernon

Barber

Modecki

(2015) Adolescent problematic social networking and school experiences: The mediating effects of sleep disruptions and sleep quality. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 18(7): 386–392.

95.

Weinberger

(1997) Distress and self-restraint as measures of adjustment across the life span: Confirmatory factor analyses in clinical and nonclinical samples. Psychological Assessment 9(2): 132.

96.

Weinberger

Schwartz

(1990) Distress and restraint as superordinate dimensions of self-reported adjustment: A typological perspective. Journal of Personality 58(2): 381–417.

97.

Werner

Smith

(1992) Overcoming the Odds: High Risk Children from Birth to Adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

98.

Wolfson

Carskadon

(2003) Understanding adolescent's sleep patterns and school performance: A critical appraisal. Sleep Medicine Reviews 7(6): 491–506.

99.

Wothke

(2000) Longitudinal and multigroup modeling with missing data. In: Little TD, Schnabel KU and Baumert J (eds) Modeling Longitudinal and Multilevel Data. New York, NY: Psychology Press, 205–224.

100.

Wright

BRE

Caspi

Moffitt

, et al. (1999) Low self–control, social bonds, and crime: Social causation, social selection, or both? Criminology 37(3): 479–514.

101.

Yen

King

Tang

(2010) The association between short and long nocturnal sleep durations and risky behaviours and the moderating factors in Taiwanese adolescents. Psychiatry Research 179(1): 69–74.

102.

Zhuang

She

Cai

, et al. (2018) Examining a sequential mediation model of Chinese university students’ well-being: A career construction perspective. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 593.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB