Overall, the title does not efficiently inform the reader of the research described in the article. The subjects of the research are not in the title and the title includes terms that may not be easily identifiable to the reader. .
The abstract is a brief description of what the reader will learn from reading the article. The purpose of the article, which is whether or not "street families" reduce victimization among homeless youth, is not clearly stated. The authors briefly mention the research methodology used. The researchers used interviews and questionnaires to gather their data. Upon receiving their data they used regression analyses to compute their data. The authors did not include specific results, but rather stated that their data supported their hypothesis. In general, the abstract is not sufficient for the reader to know what the article is about without reading it in its entirety. The abstract was too brief when describing the purpose and results and included too much information on social capital. .
The introduction prefaces the article with pertinent information that is useful to the reader. The authors began their introduction with the problem of sociological theories and how they fail to credit the relationship between childhood relationships. The authors feel that these relationships deter children from crime better than relationships between children and families. The researchers feel this is important because it can redirect how youth crime is addressed. To support their ideas, they include the ideas of "W. F. Whyte's classic apposition of "college" and "corner" boys and his enduring argument that friends can lead youth away from, as well as toward, crime and disrepute" (McCarthy et al. 831). The authors also cited many other people in the introduction. Before the introduction the authors listed key words from the article: "homeless youth, social capital, violent victimization and offending, fictive families, deviant peers" (McCarthy et al.
