Violence among the Youth in Turkey: An Assessment of General Strain Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most tests of criminological theories have been carried out in the western world, especially the United States. Agnew developed a General Strain Theory and claimed that it could account for deviance/crime in the developing countries. However, the support for the theory was generally mixed at best. The goal of this study is to examine the major theses of general strain theory in relation to youth violence in Nigde, a small city in central part of Turkey. The data came from a random sample of 974 students drawn from the lists of the university students at Nigde University (N= 12,514). Data were analyzed by using logistic regression analysis. The present study focused on three important research questions: Is the influence of strain on violence positive, Is the impact of strain on violence is mediated by anger, and Is the effect of strain on violence moderated by some criminal and non-criminal copings? The results indicated that few strain variables had direct positive impacts on violence. Anger had positive effect on the dependent variable. Few interactions between the strain and coping variables were observed. In short, the overall results gave a limited support for the three major arguments of general strain theory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".