The Impact of Employment, Job Quality, and Labor Market Context on Adolescent Problem Behavior

根据1997年全国青年纵向调查的数据，高中期间的就业是普遍存在的。例如，87%的学生在高年级的5月份至少工作了一个月，许多就业的学生工作强度很高，通常认为每周工作超过20小时。此外，近四分之一的就业老年人（23%）每周全职工作超过35小时。但可以追溯到20世纪80年代初的实证研究表明，长时间工作加上学校入学率与多种问题行为的增加相关，其中最重要的是犯罪和药物使用。部分是基于研究表明的大量工作参与对问题行为的不利影响，国家研究理事会（1998：227）建议将联邦对青少年在校期间工作参与的限制--目前只适用于14和15奥尔兹的青少年--扩大到16和17奥尔兹。这项建议在第108届国会提出的《青年工人保护法》中获得通过。 这一建议是一个例子，说明社会学研究如何能够直接导致公共政策建议，至少导致决策者态度的改变。事实上，在20世纪70年代，三个联邦政府小组建议增加青少年就业。然而，所讨论的研究并没有直接解决国家研究理事会提出的建议。在他们的建议中，NRC推断，随着16岁童工法的放松，进入劳动力市场的运动导致了问题行为的增加。但导致这一建议的研究是基于工作强度和问题行为之间的横截面相关性，充其量，是对以前犯罪的控制。知道工作时间长的年轻人比工作时间短的年轻人有更多的问题行为，控制可观察到的因素，本身并不能证明年轻人会因为工作参与的增加而增加他们的问题行为。事实上，最近的计量经济学工作警告说，之前研究中观察到的不利工作强度效应可能是由于忽视未观察到的异质性而导致的，更广泛的影响PI将16岁和17岁时童工法的州与州之间的差异映射到自我的变化上，1997年全国青年纵向调查报告了青年的工作和问题行为。这项研究将研究在16岁时从联邦法律到州法律的政策制度的变化对问题行为、工作质量和青年工作的其他方面产生了什么影响。这项研究特别关注劳动力市场条件与这些法律之间的相互作用，部分原因是这些法律在宽松的劳动力市场中不太可能像在对青年劳动力有需求的紧张劳动力市场中那样相关。一般程序使PI有能力阐明将联邦限制扩大到16和17岁奥尔兹的潜在后果。这是第一项如此直接地探讨NRC政策建议的研究。这种方法也将提供新的准实验证据的社会学问题的因果关系的工作和青年的行为。研究结果将是独一无二的，因为它们从立法变化中获得权力，这对决策者有直接的利益，因此，社会科学家和决策者都感兴趣。

Shawn BushwayUniversity of Maryland, College ParkAccording to data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, employment during high school is ubiquitous. For example, fully 87 percent of students have worked during at least one month of high school by May of their senior year, and many employed students work at high intensity, generally considered over 20 hours per week. In addition, almost one in four employed seniors (23%) works full time at over 35 hours per week. But empirical work stretching back to the early 1980s establishes that long work hours in combination with school enrollment are correlated with elevated involvement in a variety of problem behaviors, not the least of which are crime and substance use. Partly on the basis of the research showing adverse effects of extensive work involvement on problem behavior, the National Research Council (1998:227) proposed extending federal limits on youth work involvement during the school year-which currently apply to 14 and 15 year olds only-to 16 and 17 year olds. This recommendation was adopted in the Youth Worker Protection Act, a bill introduced in the 108th Congress. This recommendation represents an example of how sociological research can lead directly to public policy recommendation, and at the very least to a change in attitudes on the part of policymakers. Indeed, in the 1970s, three federal government panels recommended an increase in employment for adolescents. Yet the research in question does not directly address the proposal made by the National Research Council. In their recommendation, the NRC infers that the movement into the labor market that accompanies the relaxation of child labor laws at age 16 leads to increased problem behavior. But the research that led to this recommendation is based on the cross-sectional correlation between work intensity and problem behavior with, at best, a control for previous offending. Knowing that youths who work longer hours have more problem behavior than youth who work fewer, controlling for observables, does not in itself prove that youths will increase their problem behavior as a result of an increase in work involvement. Indeed, recent econometric work cautions that the adverse work intensity effect observed in prior studies may be driven by inattention to unobserved heterogeneity, and that longer work hours may have no causal impact or may under some circumstances reduce delinquent involvement.Broader ImpactsThe PI maps state-to-state variation in child labor laws at ages 16 and 17 onto changes in self-reported work and problem behavior for youths in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997. The study will examine what happens to problem behavior, job quality, and other dimensions of youth work as a result of the change in policy regime from federal to state laws at age 16. The study pays special attention to the interaction between labor market conditions and these laws, in part because it is unlikely that the laws will be as relevant in loose labor markets as they are in tight labor markets where there is a demand for youth labor. The general procedure gives the PI the ability to shed light on the potential consequences of expanding federal restrictions to cover 16 and 17 year olds. This the first study that so directly explores the policy recommendation from the NRC. This approach will also provide new quasi-experimental evidence for the sociological question regarding the causal relationship between work and youth behavior. Study results will be unique in that they derive their power from legislative variation that is of direct interest to policymakers, and as such, will be of interest to both social scientists and policymakers..