PBSI 371 EDENS- FINAL

Focus/ "big question" of criminal justice is-

Why do people do "bad things"

sociological crime model

focuses on broader social factors that influence behavior

biological crime model

looks at inherited traits like impulsivity and high emotional reactivity

psychological crime model

individual person is the primary focus of study, looks at thought process and motivations

adolescent-limited offenders

law-breaking behavior that is "normative" if it only occurs in childhood (i.e. speeding, vandalism)

life-course-persistent offender

a person whose criminal activity typically begins in early adolescence and continues throughout life; a career criminal

cognition

content of what people think as well as how they process it and form ideas

correctional psychology use of cognition

may attempt to change the way people think about crime and emphasize punishment

criminal thinking tends to be

short-term and justifying

Dodge's Social Information Processing Theory of Aggression

1. encode social cues

2. interpret social cues

3. formulate social goals

4. generate problem solving strategies

5. evaluate likely effectiveness

6. enact response

7. interpret peer evaluation and response

(new social cues restart the cycle)

reactive aggressors (dodge)

kids who were identified as "non-aggressive", their goal in acting aggressively is to reestablish a sense of justice

reactive aggressors tend to be of

low popularity among peers

hostile attributional bias (dodge)

belief that people are intentionally hostile, and must be equally punished (self-perpetuated by repeat hostile encounters)

proactive aggressors (dodge)

act out more often in aggressive ways, enjoy the social dominance aspect

antisocial cognitions

prominent in the thought processes of delinquents and criminals, fairly good predictor of recidivism

can different criminal groups have more antisocial cognitions than others

yes, i.e. child molesters think more dangerously

TCU Criminal Thinking Scale

scale intended to measure criminal sentiments and endorsement

thinking errors

criminals' typical patterns of faulty thoughts and beliefs used to justify or rationalize their actions

enablers

people who may adopt thinking errors to justify crimes of their friends/ family

MOLEST Scale (bumby, 1996)

measures distorted thinking in relation to pedophilia

limitation of individual theories that explain crime and violence

-no one theory works as a broad explanation of all forms of bad behavior

-criminality is highly diverse even within one specific category of crime (i.e. murders having different MOs and victim pools)

things that are periodically or episodically reinforced

are the most difficult habits to break

risk factors/integrated model

antecedent conditions, early indicators, developmental processes, maintenance factors

Atecedent Conditions risk factors

• Genetics

• Neurochemical imbalances

• Temperamental factors (traits kids are born with or predisposed to like shyness)

• Chaotic environment

Early indicators risk factors

• Childhood aggression

• ADHD (not a risk factor alone but can add to other problems)

• Early "behavior problems" (can refer to running away, theft, and other non-aggressive behaviors)

Developmental processes risk factors

• Inept parenting & poor supervision (Coercive family process)

• Modeling

• Substance abuse onset

• School failure (marker that things are going wrong in other areas)

Maintenance factors risk factors

factors that contribute to re-arrest

• 'High risk' environments

• Criminal associates

• Consolidation of antisocial values

modeling behavior

kids can learn through watching others actions (ex bobo doll experiment)

risk assessment is often given in

-parole cases

-setting bail

-deciding who to commit or incarcerate and for how long

civil psychiatric risk assessment

risk must be reported if a patient states they will be a threat to themselves or others

cases that approve risk assessments in the courts

• Barefoot v. Estelle (1983)

• Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of

California (1976)

what does the court say about risk assessment

even though mental health professionals are wrong more often about risks they can and should inform

Barefoot ruling

it is not unconstitutional for MH experts to make claims about "future dangerousness"

Tarasoff ruling

treatment providers may be held liable for not reporting risk and preventing clients from harming others

problems with future violence claims

-there is no one risk assessment that predicts equally well in all situations

-there is no way of saying someone definitely will or won't be violent again

false positive

error where one predicted to be violent again actually is not

false negative

error where one predicted not to be violent in the future actually does end up being violent

in assessment most MH pros would rather make a

false positive because it is on the side of caution

Sensitivity

the tests ability to correctly identify those who will be violent again (true positive rate)

Specificity

the tests ability to correctly identify those who will NOT be violent again (true negative rate)

improving the sensitivity will

make the specificity worse

base rates

how common a characteristic or behavior is in the general population

we identify a lot of false positives with our study because

in real life the base rate of violence is much lower than in the study group

clinical judgement risk assessment

-relies on the opinion of the evaluators

-not standardized

-poor accuracy

actuarial risk assessment

-structured and formally scored

-uses a FORMULA

-does not account for info that does not go in the formula

clinical vs actuarial

actuarial is generally considered more effective and fair

Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG)

-assigns weight to how strongly each of its 12 variables predict violence

-negative scores lower the likelihood of violence

-PCL-R holds the most weight

VRAG "bins"

-score ranges that give a % likelihood of reoffending over 7 years

-Bin 1= least likely, Bin 9= most likely

importance of cross-validation

-models may preform well on the original use, but not on follow up uses

-tests validity on replica studies

replication of VRAG risk bins

-very poor replication

-shows lower bins do tend to have lower risk, but actual probabilities are very far off

VRAG-R

-replaced the PCL-R with "antisocial" subscale

-replaced other poor performing items

VRAG-R bins

-do not try to claim perfect accuracy with bin 1 and 9 anymore

-more realistic claims

cross validation of he VRAG-R shows

bins do order people by relative risk, but their percentages are way off (i.e original says bin 9 is 80% likely to reoffend but studies found only 18.5% actually did)

HCR-20-V3 (Historical Clinical Risk Management Scheme-20)

-does not use probability statements

-guides assessment w/out formal scoring system

-uses a relevance rating to assess how much each trait will contribute to the specific person's problems

Mr.Case violence risk assessment

-class on average saw him as moderate risk

-people quantified low, moderate, and high very differently (some people seeing 70% as moderate others seeing 70% as high)

most motives for punishing crime are focused on ________ not __________

retribution; rehabilitation

utilitarian motive for punishment

punishment will be so unfavorable that the public will be deterred

When does punishment work?

Punishment must be at maximum intensity Punishment must be immediate

Punishment must be consistently applied

Opportunities to escape or access alternative rewards must be blocked

can the legal system meet the parameters for effective punishment

no, punishment is delayed and inconsistent

Unusual features of sex offender sentencing

- registration & notification

- involuntary "civil" commitment

civil commitment

-unrelated to crime

-not functioning as "punishment"

-held until determined safe to go

-undetermined sentence length

who can be civilly committed

must be BOTH unable to care for oneself, and at risk for harm to self/ others

parens patriae

idea of society becoming like a parent for decompensated individuals

police power

legal rationale for commitment, danger to self or others

is civil commitment a criminal justice process?

legal process, but not criminal

civil commitment hearings

are very short, and end in commitment a vast majority of the time

emergency commitment

-if an imminent threat, can be held up to 3 days before a trial

-2 physicians must confirm hold is needed

relation between mental illness and violence

-modest global relationship on some mental illnesses like psychosis

-typically very weak connection

most people who are civilly committed are turned in by

family members

factors increasing violence among psychiatric patients

-substance abuse

-thought control (mind is essentially saying violence HAS to be done)

-poverty-stricken neighborhoods

mentally ill people are more likely to be the _______ of crimes than the _______

victim; perpetrator

criticisms of civil commitment

-revolving door

-systematic abuse

-coercive

Francis Farmer

actress with a reputation for "meltdowns" was civilly committed and forced to have a lobotomy

Kansas v. Hendricks (1997)

supreme court said that since some sexual deviancies are considered mental illness by the DSM, SVPs could be committed indefinitely

Constraints on commitment

- There must be at least some pretense of treatment, but it doesn't have to actually work.

- There has to be some possibility of release.

-Minnesota was brought to court because almost no one was being released

Kansas v. Crane (2002)

someone must have impairments of volitional control, and we can detain anyone the jury finds as dangerous due to volitional impairment

coercive family process (Larson article)

-interaction between ineffective parental discipline and increasing child non-compliance

-parents avoid confrontations with their children by giving in, and child gets what they want so both are reinforced by the process

According to Larson what else may contribute to growing antisocial behavior in children

-family stress such as financial problems, divorce, or poor supervision

-child stress such as difficult temperament and problems like ADHD

attack, counter-attack, positive outcome sequence

-parent intrudes with a compliance request that the child sees as an attack (i.e. go to bed)

-child uses aversive behavior as a counter-attack to avoid this request

-parent wishes to avoid the confrontation so the give in

-both the parent and child receive a reinforcing outcome because the child gets what they want and the parent avoids a fight

4 considerations for if a given risk assessment tool should be used (Heilburn)

age, gender, mental health status, and location

Anamnestic Assessment

-for each prior violent event, the individual is questioned in detail regarding their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, as well as all other relevant factors such as drug use and location

-evaluators use this procedure to identify risk factors that recur across violent acts

two major goals of risk assessment

prediction/classification, and risk reduction