Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of co-offending characteristics

Nature Human Behaviour (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Co-offending involves two or more individuals committing a crime together. It is influenced by social processes such as peer influence, group cohesion and strategic cooperation that shape the social dynamics of criminal behaviour. Studying co-offending helps to reveal how social interactions and relationships influence individuals’ decisions to engage in crime. Here we conducted a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis on two measures of co-offending, prevalence and group size, using data from 110 included studies from 17 countries. The pooled effect of the prevalence of co-offences was 0.29 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.22–0.35) based on a total sample of 45,973,445 offences, and the pooled effect of the prevalence of co-offenders was 0.50 (95% CrI 0.43–0.56) based on a total sample of 3,459,133 offenders. On average, most of the offences were committed by two people with a pooled average group size of 2.73 (95% CrI 2.63–2.84). Property crimes had a higher prevalence of co-offences and co-offenders compared with violent crimes, while the average group size was larger for violent offences. Young offenders were more likely to engage in co-offending compared with adult offenders, and offences committed by youth usually involved larger groups. Furthermore, male offenders tended to form larger groups than females. No notable differences were observed between male and female co-offenders in terms of the prevalence of co-offenders. Variations in reported measures across studies pose challenges for cross-study comparison, highlighting the importance of standardized reporting. The research plan was preregistered on the Open Science Framework platform (RK7Y3).

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: PRISMA flow diagram.
Fig. 2: Forest plot for the meta-analysis of the prevalence of co-offences (model 1).
Fig. 3: Results of the meta-regression models.
Fig. 4: Forest plot for the meta-analysis of the prevalence of co-offenders (model 3).
Fig. 5: Forest plot for the meta-analysis of the average group size (model 7).
Fig. 6: Results of the models on the average group size.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data used in this study are available via the OSF platform at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RUF9K (ref. 130). Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

All scripts used in this study are available via the OSF platform at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RUF9K (ref. 130).

References

  1. Weerman, F. M. Co-offending as social exchange: explaining characteristics of co-offending. Br. J. Criminol. 43, 398–416 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Smångs, M. Delinquency, social skills and the structure of peer relations: assessing criminological theories by social network theory. Social Forces 89, 609–631 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carrington, P. J. Co-offending and the development of the delinquent career. Criminology 47, 1295–1329 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Weerman, F. M. Theories of Co-offending. in Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice (eds Bruinsma, G. & Weisburd, D.) 5173–5184 (Springer, 2014); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_110

  5. Burgess, R. L. & Akers, R. L. A differential association-reinforcement theory of criminal behavior. Soc. Probl. 14, 128–147 (1966).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kornhauser, R. R. Social Sources of Delinquency: An Appraisal of Analytic Models (Univ. Chicago, 1975).

  7. Stolzenberg, L. & D’Alessio, S. J. Co-offending and the age-crime curve. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 45, 65–86 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Van Mastrigt, S. B. Co-offending and co-offender selection. in The Oxford Handbook of Offender Decision Making (eds Bernasco, W., Van Gelder, J.-L. & Elffers, H.) 338–360 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199338801.013.21

  9. Reiss, A. J. Co-offending and criminal careers. Crime Justice 10, 117–170 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. McCord, J. & Conway, K. P. Patterns of juvenile delinquency and co-offending. in Crime and Social Organization 1st edn (eds Waring, E. & Weisburd, D.) 15–30 (Routledge, 2002).

  11. Nguyen, H. & McGloin, J. M. Does economic adversity breed criminal cooperation? considering the motivation behind group crime. Criminology 51, 833–870 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schaefer, D. R., Rodriguez, N. & Decker, S. H. The role of neighborhood context in youth co-offending. Criminology 52, 117–139 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. McGloin, J. M. & Rowan, Z. R. A threshold model of collective crime. Criminology 53, 484–512 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. McGloin, J. M. & Piquero, A. R. ‘I wasn’t alone’: collective behaviour and violent delinquency. Austr. N. Z. J. Criminol. 42, 336–353 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Tillyer, M. S. & Tillyer, R. Co-offending, violence, and situational moderators. J. Crim. Justice 64, 101626 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lantz, B. The consequences of crime in company: co-offending, victim–offender relationship, and quality of violence. J. Interpers. Viol. 36, 4363–4388 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Carrington, P. J. Group crime in Canada. Can. J. Criminol. 44, 277–315 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Knight, B. J. & West, D. J. Temporary and continuing delinquency. Br. J. Criminol. 15, 43–50 (1975).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lantz, B. & Hutchison, R. Co-offender ties and the criminal career: the relationship between co-offender group structure and the individual offender. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 52, 658–690 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Green, B., Horel, T. & Papachristos, A. V. Modeling contagion through social networks to explain and predict gunshot violence in Chicago, 2006 to 2014. JAMA Intern. Med. 177, 326–333 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Conway, K. P. & McCord, J. A longitudinal examination of the relation between co-offending with violent accomplices and violent crime. Aggress. Behav. 28, 97–108 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Becker, S. & McCorkel, J. A. The gender of criminal opportunity: the impact of male co-offenders on women’s crime. Fem. Criminol. 6, 79–110 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Felson, M. The process of co-offending. Crime Prev. Stud. 16, 149–167 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Carrington, P. J. & Mastrigt, S. B. Co-offending in Canada, England and the United States: a cross-national comparison. Global Crime 14, 123–140 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Andresen, M. A. & Felson, M. The impact of co-offending. Br. J. Criminol. 50, 66–81 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Aultman, M. G. Group involvement in delinquent acts: a study of offense types and male–female participation. Crim. Justice Behav. 7, 185–192 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Juodis, M., Woodworth, M., Porter, S. & Brinke, L. Partners in crime: a comparison of individual and multi-perpetrator homicides. Crim. Justice Behav. 36, 824–839 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wijkman, M. D. S., Bijleveld, C. & Hendriks, J. Women don’t do such things! Characteristics of female sex offenders and offender types. Sexual Abuse 22, 135–156 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hodgson, B. & Costello, A. The prognostic significance of burglary in company. Eur. J. Criminol. 3, 115–119 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Khachatryan, N., Heide, K. M., Rad, J. & Hummel, E. V. Post-incarceration recidivism of lone versus group juvenile homicide offenders. Behav. Sci. Law 34, 709–725 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Alarid, L. F., Burton Jr, V. S. & Hochstetler, A. L. Group and solo robberies: do accomplices shape criminal form? J. Crim. Justice 37, 1–9 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. De La Torre Laso, J., Rodríguez, J. M. & Toro Pascua, J. C. Group sexual offending in Spain: an exploratory study. J. Sexual Aggress. 28, 164–177 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bright, D., Whelan, C. & Morselli, C. Understanding the structure and composition of co offending networks in Australia. Trends Iss. Crime Crim. Justice https://doi.org/10.52922/ti04480 (2020).

  34. Calderoni, F., Campedelli, G. M., Szekely, A., Paolucci, M. & Andrighetto, G. Recruitment into organized crime: an agent-based approach testing the impact of different policies. J. Quant. Criminol. 38, 197–237 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Carrington, P. J. Co-offending. in Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice (eds Bruinsma, G. & Weisburd, D.) 548–558 (Springer, 2014); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_108

  36. De La Torre Laso, J. Características de la co-delincuencia sexual femenina vs. las delincuentes sexuales en solitario. Rev. Esp. Invest. Criminol. https://doi.org/10.46381/reic.v20i1.571 (2022).

  37. Bamford, J., Chou, S. & Browne, K. D. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the characteristics of multiple perpetrator sexual offences. Aggress. Viol. Behav. 28, 82–94 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. De La Torre Laso, J., Toro Pascua, J. C. & Martín González, M. ¿En qué se diferencian las agresiones sexuales cometidas en solitario y en grupo? Una revisión sistemática. Interdiscip. Rev. Psicol. Cienc. Afines https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2022.39.2.4 (2022).

  39. Viera, A. J. & Garrett, J. M. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam. Med. 37, 360–363 (2005).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Di Meo, G. Historical co-offending networks: a social network analysis approach. Br. J. Criminol. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azad005 (2023).

  41. Nieto, A., Davies, T. & Borrion, H. Examining the importance of existing relationships for co-offending: a temporal network analysis in Bogotá, Colombia (2005–2018). Appl. Netw. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41109-023-00531-0 (2023).

  42. Grund, T. & Morselli, C. Overlapping crime: stability and specialization of co-offending relationships. Soc. Netw. 51, 14–22 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Cunningham, S. N. & Vandiver, D. M. Solo and multi-offenders who commit stranger kidnapping: an assessment of factors that correlate with violent events. J. Interpers. Viol. 33, 3459–3479 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Muskens, M., Bogaerts, S., Casteren, M. & Labrijn, S. Adult female sexual offending: a comparison between co-offenders and solo offenders in a Dutch sample. J. Sexual Aggress. 17, 46–60 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Reiss, A. J. & Farrington, D. P. Advancing knowledge about co-offending—results from a prospective longitudinal survey of London males. J. Crim. Law Criminol. 82, 360–395 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Tillyer, M. S. & Tillyer, R. Maybe I should do this alone: a comparison of solo and co-offending robbery outcomes. Justice Quart. 32, 1064–1088 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lantz, B. Co-offending and arrest: an examination of the “group hazard” hypothesis. Crime Delinq. 66, 572–600 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Ashton, S. A., Valentine, M. & Chan, B. Differentiating categories of violent adolescent offending and the associated risks in police and youth offending service records. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211058960 (2021).

  49. Miller, H. A. & Marshall, E. A. Comparing solo- and co-offending female sex offenders on variables of pathology, offense characteristics, and recidivism. Sexual Abuse 31, 972–990 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ouellet, F., Boivin, R., Leclerc, C. & Morselli, C. Friends with(out) benefits: co-offending and re-arrest. Global Crime 14, 141–154 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Clarkson, R., Eichinger, M. & Darjee, R. Multiple perpetrator sexual homicide in Australia and New Zealand: an exploratory study of groups, victims, offenders and offences. J. Crim. Justice https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101726 (2020).

  52. Vandiver, D. M. Female sex offenders: a comparison of solo offenders and co-offenders. Viol. Victims 21, 339–354 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Van Mastrigt, S. B. & Farrington, D. P. Co-offending, age, gender and crime type: implications for criminal justice policy. Br. J. Criminol. 49, 552–573 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Goldweber, A., Dmitrieva, J., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R. & Steinberg, L. The development of criminal style in adolescence and young adulthood: separating the lemmings from the loners. J. Youth Adolesc. 40, 332–346 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Rush Burkey, C. & Bensel, T. An examination and comparison of rationalizations employed by solo and co-offending female sex offenders. Viol. Gender 2, 168–178 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Wijkman, M. D. S. & Silva, T. Multiple perpetrator rape committed by female offenders: a comparison of solo, duo, and 3+ group offenders. Sexual Abuse 33, 321–338 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Ten Bensel, T., Gibbs, B. & Burkey, C. R. Female sex offenders: is there a difference between solo and co-offenders? J. Interpers. Viol. 34, 4061–4084 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Wijkman, M. D. S., Bijleveld, C. & Hendriks, J. Juvenile female sex offenders: offender and offence characteristics. Eur. J. Criminol. 11, 23–38 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Comartin, E. B., Burgess-Proctor, A., Kubiak, S. & Kernsmith, P. Factors related to co-offending and coerced offending among female sex offenders: the role of childhood and adult trauma histories. Viol. Victims 33, 53–74 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Budd, K. M., Bierie, D. M. & Williams, K. Deconstructing incidents of female perpetrated sex crimes: comparing female sexual offender groupings. Sexual Abuse 29, 267–290 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kjellgren, C., Wassberg, A., Carlberg, M., Långström, N. & Svedin, C. G. Adolescent sexual offenders: a total survey of referrals to Social Services in Sweden and subgroup characteristics. Sexual Abuse 18, 357–372 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Vandiver, D. M. Assessing gender differences and co-offending patterns of a predominantly “male-oriented" crime: a comparison of a cross-national sample of juvenile boys and girls arrested for a sexual offense. Viol. Victims 25, 243–264 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Burgess-Proctor, A., Comartin, E. B. & Kubiak, S. P. Comparing female- and male-perpetrated child sexual abuse: a mixed-methods analysis. J. Child Sexual Abuse 26, 657–676 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Comartin, E. B., Burgess-Proctor, A., Kubiak, S., Bender, K. A. & Kernsmith, P. Comparing women’s and men’s sexual offending using a statewide incarcerated sample: a two-study design. J. Interpers. Viol. 36, 3093–3116 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Hodgson, B. Co-offending in UK police recorded crime data. Police J. 80, 333–353 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zaitsu, W. Criminal mutilation homicides in Japan: corpse dismemberment and disposal pattern types, and offender characteristics. J. Forensic Sci. 67, 2367–2375 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Koons-Witt, B. A. & Schram, P. J. Does race matter? Examining the relationship between co-offending and victim characteristics for violent incidents involving female offenders. Fem. Criminol. 1, 125–146 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Reid, A. A., Tayebi, M. A. & Frank, R. Exploring the structural characteristics of social networks in a large criminal court database. In Proc. 2013 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics https://doi.org/10.1109/ISI.2013.6578821 (2013).

  69. Häkkänen-Nyholm, H., Repo-Tiihonen, E., Lindberg, N., Salenius, S. & Weizmann-Henelius, G. Finnish sexual homicides: offence and offender characteristics. Forensic Sci. Int. 188, 125–130 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Pettersson, T. Gendering delinquent networks: a gendered analysis of violent crimes and the structure of boys’ and girls’ co-offending networks. Young 13, 247–267 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Bijleveld, C. J. H., Weerman, F. M., Looije, D. & Hendriks, J. Group sex offending by juveniles: coercive sex as a group activity. Eur. J. Criminol. 4, 5–31 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Block, R. & Zimring, F. E. Homicide in Chicago, 1965–1970. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 10, 1–12 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Bastomski, S., Brazil, N. & Papachristos, A. V. Neighborhood co-offending networks, structural embeddedness, and violent crime in Chicago. Soc. Netw. 51, 23–39 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Aebi, M., Vogt, G., Plattner, B., Steinhausen, H. C. & Bessler, C. Offender types and criminality dimensions in male juveniles convicted of sexual offenses. Sexual Abuse 24, 265–288 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Gilbert, E., Padmore, J. & Norman, I. Offending patterns—alone or in a group—and severe conduct problems: secondary analysis of cross-sectional questionnaire data. J. Aggress. Conflict Peace Res. 13, 19–32 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Chai, A. M. M., Yaksic, E. & Chopin, J. One “two” many: an examination of solo perpetrator versus team perpetrator serial homicides. Homicide Stud. 26, 176–198 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Wei, Z., Homel, R., Prichard, J. & Xu, J. Patterns of juvenile offending in Shanghai and Brisbane. Austr. N. Z. J. Criminol. 37, 32–51 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Uhnoo, S. Starting a fire together: the dynamics of co-offending in juvenile arson. Eur. J. Criminol. 13, 315–331 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Falco Metcalfe, C. & Baker, T. The drift from convention to crime: exploring the relationship between co-offending and intermittency. Crim. Justice Behav. 41, 75–90 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Dynes, M. E., Domoff, S. E., Hassan, S., Tompsett, C. J. & Amrhein, K. E. The influence of co-offending within a moderated mediation model of parent and peer predictors of delinquency. J. Child Fam. Stud. 24, 3516–3525 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Higgs, T., James, J. & Proulx, J. The unusual suspects: multiple-perpetrator and multiple concurrent victim sexual homicide. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol. 63, 1705–1725 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Bell Holleran, L. L. & Vandiver, D. M. U.S. homicides: multi-offenders and the presence of female offenders. Viol. Gender 3, 27–35 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Weulen Kranenbarg, M. When do they offend together? Comparing co-offending between different types of cyber-offenses and traditional offenses. Comput. Hum. Behav. 130, 107186 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Andersen, S. N. Co-offending in Norway: a comparative perspective. in Criminal Networks and Law Enforcement: Global Perspectives On Illegal Enterprise 1st edn (eds Moiseienko, A. & Hufnagel, S.) 7–27 (Routledge, 2019).

  85. Sarnecki, J. Delinquent Networks: Youth Co-Offending in Stockholm 1st edn (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001); https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489310

  86. Hendriks, J., Wijkman, M. & Bijleveld, C. Group sexual offending: comparing adolescent female with adolescent male offenders. in Handbook on the Study of Multiple Perpetrator Rape: A Multidisciplinary Response to an International Problem (eds Horvath, M. & Woodhams, J.) 82–96 (Routledge, 2013).

  87. Van Mastrigt, S. B. & Carrington, P. J. Sex and age homophily in co-offending networks. Opportunity or preference? in Crime and Networks 1st edn (ed Morselli, C.) 28–51 (Routledge, 2013).

  88. Warr, M. Organization and instigation in delinquent groups. Criminology 34, 11–37 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Nathan, P. & Ward, T. Female sex offenders: clinical and demographic features. J. Sexual Aggress. 8, 5–21 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Kaplan, M. S. & Green, A. Incarcerated female sexual offenders: a comparison of sexual histories with eleven female nonsexual offenders. Sexual Abuse 7, 287–300 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Hochstetler, A. Opportunities and decisions: interactional dynamics in robbery and burglary groups. Criminology 39, 737–764 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Rowan, Z. R., Appleby, S. & McGloin, J. M. Situating crime pattern theory into the explanation of co-offending: considering area-level convergence spaces. Br. J. Criminol. 62, 681–698 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Erickson, M. L. The group context of delinquent behavior. Soc. Probl. 19, 114–129 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Chambers, J. C., Horvath, M. A. H. & Kelly, L. A typology of multiple-perpetrator rape. Crim. Justice Behav. 37, 1114–1139 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Gidycz, C. A. & Koss, M. P. A comparison of group and individual sexual assault victims. Psychol. Women Quart. 14, 325–342 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Hindelang, M. J. Criminal Victimization In Eight American Cities: A Descriptive Analysis of Common Theft and Assault (Ballinger, 1976).

  97. Lundrigan, S. Victim gender, number of perpetrators, and interpersonal interaction in stranger rape: an analysis of direct and moderator effects. J. Invest. Psychol. Offender Profiling 11, 95–114 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Morgan, L., Brittain, B. & Welch, J. Multiple perpetrator sexual assault: how does it differ from assault by a single perpetrator? J. Interpers. Viol. 27, 2415–2436 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Park, J. & Kim, S. Group size does matter: differences among sexual assaults committed by lone, double, and groups of three or more perpetrators. J. Sexual Aggress. 22, 342–354 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Reiss, A. J. Understanding changes in crime rates. in Indicators of Crime and Criminal Justice: Quantitative Studies (eds Fienberg, S. E. & Reiss, A. J.) 11–17 (U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1980).

  101. Shackelford, T. K. Risk of multiple-offender rape–murder varies with female age. J. Crim. Justice 30, 135–141 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Shaw, C. R. & McKay, H. D. Social Factors in Juvenile Delinquency; a Study of the Community, the Family, and the Gang in Relation to Delinquent Behavior for the National Commission of Law Observance and Enforcement (US Government Printing Office, 1931).

  103. Ullman, S. E. A comparison of gang and individual rape incidents. Viol. Victims 14, 123–133 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Ullman, S. E. Comparing gang and individual rapes in a community sample of urban women. Viol. Victims 22, 43–51 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Woodhams, J. & Cooke, C. Suspect aggression and victim resistance in multiple perpetrator rapes. Arch. Sexual Behav. 42, 1509–1516 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Woodhams, J., Gillett, R. & Grant, T. Understanding the factors that affect the severity of juvenile stranger sex offenses: the effect of victim characteristics and number of suspects. J. Interpers. Viol. 22, 218–237 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Wright, R. & West, D. J. Rape—a comparison of group offences and lone assaults. Med. Sci. Law 21, 25–30 (1981).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Denov, M. S. To a safer place? Victims of sexual abuse by females and their disclosures to professionals. Child Abuse Neglect 27, 47–61 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Eichinger, M. & Darjee, R. Sexual homicide in Australia and New Zealand: a description of offenders, offences and victims. Psychiatry Psychol. Law 28, 885–908 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Erickson, M. L. & Jensen, G. F. Delinquency is still group behavior: toward revitalizing the group premise in the sociology of deviance. J. Crim. Law Criminol. 68, 262–273 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Faller, K. C. Women who sexually abuse children. Viol. Victims 2, 263–276 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Faller, K. C. The spectrum of sexual abuse in daycare: an exploratory study. J. Fam. Viol. 3, 283–298 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Faller, K. C. A clinical sample of women who have sexually abused children. J. Child Sexual Abuse 4, 13–30 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Hindelang, M. J. The social versus solitary nature of delinquent involvements. Br. J. Criminol. 11, 167–175 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Lewis, C. F. & Stanley, C. R. Women accused of sexual offenses. Behav. Sci. Law 18, 73–81 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. O’Connor, A. A. Female sex offenders. Br. J. Psychiatry 150, 615–620 (1987).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Rowan, E. L., Rowan, J. B. & Langelier, P. Women who molest children. Bull. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 18, 79–83 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Rowan, Z. R., Kan, E., Frick, P. J. & Cauffman, E. Not (entirely) guilty: the role of co-offenders in diffusing responsibility for crime. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 59, 415–448 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Rudin, M. M., Zalewski, C. & Bodmer-Turner, J. Characteristics of child sexual abuse victims according to perpetrator gender. Child Abuse Neglect 19, 963–973 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Aarten, P., Harmelen, A.-L. & Liem, M. Juvenile homicide in the Netherlands. in The Routledge International Handbook of Juvenile Homicide (ed Heide, K. M.) 105–118 (Taylor and Francis, 2023); https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003242833-9

  121. Adamse, I., Blokland, A. & Eichelsheim, V. Understanding co-offending patterns and criminal mentorship using police registry data. Deviant Behav. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2024.2417271 (2024).

  122. Balcioglu, Y. H., Yildiz, A., Uzlar, R. D., Oncu, F. & Turkcan, A. Exploring starter typologies in a Turkish homicide offender sample with psychotic illness. J. Forensic Psychiatry Psychol. 35, 371–388 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Fortunato, E., Slikboer, R., Henshaw, M., Meyer, D. & Ogloff, J. R. P. An exploration of risk factors for further police contact among females known for online child sexual exploitation offenses. Behav. Sci. Law https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2703 (2024).

  124. Lantz, B. & Wenger, M. R. Co-offending and police notification: the differential reporting of young groups to the police. Psychol. Crime Law 30, 799–822 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Lantz, B. & Wouters, S. R. Are group settings intoxicating? Groups, alcohol, and the situational dynamics of violence. Crim. Justice Behav. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241307320 (2024).

  126. Nawata, K. Group violence in crime: analyzing crime severity, group size, and juvenile involvement through police statistics and newspaper articles in Japan. Asian J. Criminol. 19, 397–417 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Piper, E., Ariel, B., Harinam, V. & Bland, M. The compounding effect: how co-offending exacerbates the harm caused by violent offenders. Am. J. Crim. Justice 49, 485–507 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Sellers, B. G. & Heide, K. M. Juvenile homicide offenders: empirical differences among young boys, preteens, and teens who kill. in The Routledge International Handbook of Juvenile Homicide (ed Heide, K. M.) 247–273 (Taylor and Francis, 2023); https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003242833-19

  129. Zi, Z., Zhang, P., Liu, Q. & Zhang, L. Examining the fairness of criminal judicial procedures in china: a quantitative analysis of the influential factors in the application of technical investigations in drug-related cases. Asian J. Criminol. 19, 51–67 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Klymentiev, R., Harvey, D., Rocha, L. E. C. & Vandeviver, C. A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of co-offending characteristics. OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RUF9K (2023).

  131. Geeraert, J., Rocha, L. E. C. & Vandeviver, C. Navigating the social maze: an integrative review on the social network properties of deviant peer influence in adolescent networks. Deviant Behav. 45, 947–964 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Lantz, B. & Ruback, R. B. The relationship between co-offending, age, and experience using a sample of adult burglary offenders. J. Dev. Life-Course Criminol. 3, 76–97 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Van Mastrigt, S. B. & Farrington, D. P. Prevalence and characteristics of co-offending recruiters. Justice Quart. 28, 325–359 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Englefield, A. & Ariel, B. Searching for influential actors in co-offending networks: the recruiter. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Stud. 5, 24–45 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Campaniello, N. & Gavrilova, E. Uncovering the gender participation gap in crime. Eur. Econ. Rev. 109, 289–304 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Mears, D. P., Ploeger, M. & Warr, M. Explaining the gender gap in delinquency: peer influence and moral evaluations of behavior. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 35, 251–266 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. McCarthy, B., Hagan, J. & Cohen, L. E. Uncertainty, cooperation, and crime: understanding the decision to co-offend. Soc. Forces 77, 155–184 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Page, M. J. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 10, 89 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  139. Charette, Y. & Papachristos, A. V. The network dynamics of co-offending careers. Soc. Netw. 51, 3–13 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Lavergne, L. et al. Determining the impact of unknown individuals in criminality using network analysis of DNA matches. Forensic Sci. Int. 331, 111142 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Tayebi, M. A., Bakker, L., Glässer, U. & Dabbaghian, V. Locating central actors in co-offending networks. in Proc. 2011 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2011.120 (IEEE, 2011).

  142. Geeraert, J., Rocha, L. E. C. & Vandeviver, C. The impact of violent behavior on co-offender selection: evidence of behavioral homophily. J. Crim. Justice 94, 102259 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Shelfer, D. & Zhang, Y. A social network analysis of chronic violent offenders. Am. J. Crim. Justice 49, 700–722 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. Grames, E. M., Stillman, A. N., Tingley, M. W. & Elphick, C. S. An automated approach to identifying search terms for systematic reviews using keyword co-occurrence networks. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1645–1654 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. Van De Schoot, R. et al. An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews. Nat. Mach. Intell. 3, 125–133 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. United Nations convention against transnational organized crime and the protocols thereto. United Nations https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/organized-crime/intro/UNTOC.html (2000).

  147. Tremblay, P. Searching for suitable co-offenders. in Routine Activity and Rational Choice 1st edn (eds Clarke, R. V. & Felson, M.) 17–36 (Routledge, 2017); https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315128788-2

  148. Reis, D. J. et al. A practical guide to random-effects Bayesian meta-analyses with application to the psychological trauma and suicide literature. Psychol. Trauma Theor. Res. Pract. Policy 15, 121–130 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Gelman, A. et al. Bayesian Data Analysis 3rd edn (CRC Press, 2014); https://doi.org/10.1201/b16018

  150. Kruschke, J. K. & Liddell, T. M. The Bayesian new statistics: hypothesis testing, estimation, meta-analysis, and power analysis from a Bayesian perspective. Psychonom. Bull. Rev. 25, 178–206 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Bürkner, P.-C. brms: an R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. J. Stat. Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01 (2017).

  152. Jeffreys, H. Theory of Probability 3rd edn. (Oxford Univ. Press, 1961).

  153. Hoeben, E. M. & Thomas, K. J. Peers and offender decision-making. Criminol. Public Policy 18, 759–784 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO) (grant numbers G017122N, C.V. and L.E.C.R.; W001625N, L.E.C.R. and C.V.), Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (grant number B2/223/P3/Be-ForIntel, C.V.) and Special Research Fund (grant number 2024/01/709, L.E.C.R.). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. We thank M. Eeckhout for her assistance in the preparation of this manuscript. This work has also benefitted from a statistical consult with Ghent University FIRE (Fostering Innovative Research based on Evidence).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminology, Criminal Law and Social Law, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Ruslan Klymentiev, Dayle Harvey & Christophe Vandeviver

  2. Department of Economics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Luis E. C. Rocha

  3. Department of Physics and Astronomy, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Luis E. C. Rocha

Authors
  1. Ruslan Klymentiev
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dayle Harvey
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luis E. C. Rocha
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christophe Vandeviver
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.K.: conceptualization, methodology, software, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, and visualization. D.H.: investigation, writing – original draft, and writing – review and editing. L.E.C.R.: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, supervision, and funding acquisition. C.V.: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, supervision, project administration, and funding acquisition.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christophe Vandeviver.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Human Behaviour thanks Colin Vize, Frank Weerman and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 The average value of the occurrence of each group size.

Data is split by (a) crime type, (b) sex, and (c) age group. Bars represent standard deviation values. n is the number of studies. Group sizes of 6 and larger were grouped into ‘6+’ for a better visual representation.

Source data

Extended Data Table 1 Description of the data of the included studies
Full size table
Extended Data Table 2 Summary of model results for the prevalence of co-offenses and the prevalence of co-offenders
Full size table
Extended Data Table 3 Summary of model results for the average group size
Full size table
Extended Data Table 4 Model parameters and priors (prevalence)
Full size table
Extended Data Table 5 Model parameters and priors (average group size)
Full size table

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–10; Supplementary Tables 1–3; subanalysis of the effect of the observation period on the prevalence of co-offenders; summary of findings on longevity of co-offending partnerships and network measures; PRISMA checklists.

Reporting Summary

Peer Review File

Source data

Source Data Fig. 2

Source data (sheet ‘prevalence_of_cooffenses’). Source Data Fig. 3 Source data (sheets ‘prevalence_of_cooffenses’ and ‘prevalence_of_cooffenders’). Source Data Fig. 4 Source data (sheet ‘prevalence_of_cooffenders’). Source Data Fig. 5 Source data (sheet ‘group_size’). Source Data Fig. 6 Source data (sheet ‘group_size’). Source Data Extended Data Fig. 1 Source data (sheet ‘group_size’). Source Data Extended Data Table 1 Source data (sheet ‘included_studies’). Source Data Extended Data Table 2 Source data (sheets ‘prevalence_of_cooffenses’ and ‘prevalence_of_cooffenders’). Source Data Extended Data Table 3 Source data (sheet ‘group_size’).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Klymentiev, R., Harvey, D., Rocha, L.E.C. et al. A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of co-offending characteristics. Nat Hum Behav (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02244-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02244-z

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing