Psych 230 Final Review Notes

• What is Forensic Psychology?
  
  • An interdisciplinary branch of psychology, that involves the application and production of psychological knowledge to problems, issues and circumstances in the civil and criminal justice system
  • 2 areas of the legal system. Civil (private law; disputes between private parties. Does not involve a violation of the criminal code, ex; custody and defamation.) Criminal ( public law; the government enforces the rights and interests of the public; involves a violation of the criminal code
• Criminal Justice or Correctional Psychology
  
  • The " criminal" prong of Forensic psychology
  • Study of the psychological causes and correlates of criminal behaviour
  • Application of this psychological knowledge to offenders in justice settings
• Definition of Criminal behavior
  
  • An act in the violation of the criminal law committed without defense or excuse and penalized by the justice system as a summary conviction or indictable offense
  • Behaviour must be intentional
  • Involves the violation of a criminal code
  • Person must be able to discern from right to wrong to appreciate that the act was illegal
• Sociological vs. Psychology Concepts of Crime
  
  Sociology
  
  • Emphases place on demographic and group correlates of Crime (SAUCER)
  • Sex, age, urbanity, class, ethnicity, religion
  • Groups of society as a whole and how they influence criminal activity e.g., unequal power distribution in society
• Psychology
  
  • Emphases placed on individual differences in variables that contribute to criminal conduct
  • E.g., antisocial attitudes and values, negative peers, etc.
• PIC-R and the Central Eight
  
  • History of antisocial behaviour
  • Antisocial personality pattern
  • Antisocial attitudes
  • Antisocial associates
  • Family/marital
  • Employment/education
  • Leisure/recreation substance abuse
  • Personal interpersonal community Reinforcement (PIC-R) model explains how risk factors and vulnerabilities are expressed in criminal behaviour
  • General personality and Cognitive Social Learning (GPCSL) theory of criminal behaviour
• Getting a job in corrections
  
  • Correctional officer
  • Parole and Probation officer
  • Allied health professions such as forensic nursing, social work, addictions
  • Academic such as professor
  • Government (e.g., research, administration)
• Canadian Accomplishments
  
  • Past CPA President (Ogloff)
  • Work in psychopathy (Hare)
  • Risk assessment and the prediction of violent, sexual, and general recidivism (e.g., Andrew, Bonta, Dutton, Hanson, Hart, Marshall, Quinsey, Wong, Wormith)
  • Effective correctional treatment, Canada has some of the best developed correctional intervention programs in the world. Leading researchers in the field
• Canada's Correctional Systems
  
  Provincial Systems
  
  • Operated by a ministry of corrections or justice
  • Sentences < 2 years duration
  • Short custody and/or periods of probation
  • Large number of remands
  • Responsibility of province
• Federal Systems
  
  • Correctional Service of Canada
  • 2 or more years duration, including life sentences
  • Mechanisms of preventative detention and conditional release
  • Parole Board of Canada release decision making body
  • Prisons and Regional Treatment facilities, half way houses
• Counting Crime
  
  Canadian Criminal Justice Statistics
  
  Sources of information for Crime statistics
  
  • Uniform Crime Reports
  • Victimization surveys
  • Self-report studies
• Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)
  
  • Most commonly used measure of crime statistics
  • Data sent in to Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (CCJS)
  • Criminal justice system acts as a funnel
  • Reported crime substantiated by police
  • Information used by policy markers and researchers
  • UCR: Designed to provide uniform, comparable, and national statistics. Some issues influencing accuracy:
  • More serious Offense (MSO) rule: violent offences take precedence
  • Multiple property crimes only recorded as a single offense, if they are considered to be part of the same incident
• Police Reporting Issues
  
  • Discretion involved
  • Decisions are shaped by public perceptions and concerns
• Categories of Criminal Code Offenses:
  
  Rate per 100,000 Canadians
  
  Rate of Robbery and Serious Assault per 100,000 Canadians
  
  2019-2020 Homicide Rate by Province
  
  Rate of Drug Offenses
  
  per 100,000 Canadians
  
  Rate of B&E and Other Property Crime per 100,000 Canadians
  
  Rate of Attempted Murder and Homicide per 100,000 Canadians
  
  Crime Severity Index
  
  Advancement on UCR
  
  An index computed by weighting severity of crimes
  
  i.e., more “serious crimes” weighted more heavily
  
  General and Violent Crime Severity Indexes per 100,000 Canadians
  
  Crime Severity Index Prairies
  
  per 100,000 Canadians
  
  
  
  Victimization Surveys
  
  2014 Victimization Survey:
  
  • General social survey (GSS)
  • Victimization GSS conducted every 5 years
  • Telephone interviews N= 26,000 Canadian ages 15+
  • 20% of Canadians age 15+
• Basic Research Methodology & Statistics
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  A typical scientific investigation or psychological study generally includes the following steps:
  
  • 1.) Formulating a hypothesis
  • 2.) Selecting a method and designing the study
  • 3.) Data collection
  • 4.) Analyzing the results and drawing conclusions
  • 5.) Reporting the findings
• 
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  1. Formulate a hypothesis
  
  • Hypothesis: An educated guess or testable prediction made about the relationship between two or more variables
  • e.g., psychopathic men, compared to nonpsychopathic men, have a higher risk of committing a new offense (hypothesis)
• 
  
  • Variable: Any events, conditions, behaviors, etc. that are measured or controlled in a study
  • e.g., association between psychopathy (variable) and recidivism (variable)
• Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  2. Select a research method and design the study
  
  • Research Method: A set of empirical observations and measurements that are taken to examine the associations among variables in study
  • 5 Basic Research Methods (experimentation, correlation, case study, survey, and naturalistic observation)
  • e.g., design to examine the relationship between psychopathy and recidivism
  • Design the Study: Select participants, specify materials (any apparatus or measurement devices required to measure cognitive and behavioral events), and design the procedure
• 
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  • Example – (Quasi) Experimental Design
• 1. Select participants
  
  e.g., random sample of 300 admissions to Sask Pen from 2010 to 2015
  
  2. Specify required materials
  
  e.g., the PCL-R and the rating manual, inmate files, police criminal records (CPIC)
  
  3. Design the procedure
  
  e.g., Research assistants will read the inmates’ files, and score the PCL-R based on file data; information on recidivism obtained via CPIC and coded including type and date of new offenses
  
  
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  3. Collect data
  
  • Data collection: Process of collecting measurements of behaviors
  • e.g. questionnaires, interviews, behavioral observations, psych tests, physiological measurements, archival records, collateral reports, and surveys.
  • e.g. study of psychopathy and recidivism:
• 1. PCL-R scores to measure psychopathy
  
  2. CPIC records to code recidivism
  
  
  
  
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  4. Analyze results and draw conclusions
  
  • Analyze results: Two types of analyses conducted:
• 1. Descriptive: Set of numerical analyses used to describe or summarize data
  
  • e.g., measures of central tendency such as mean, median, mode
• 
  
  2. Inferential: Process of examining the inferences made about population parameters from sample statistics, in order to evaluate the truth or falsity of your hypothesis
  
  • e.g., correlation, t-test, ROC, regression, ANOVA
  • Univariate statistics: single DV
  • Multivariate statistics: multiple DVs
• 
  
  
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  • Example - Analyzing Results
• 
  
  Percent recidivism, non-psychopathic men = 30.2%
  
  
  
  Percent recidivism, psychopathic men = 55.6%
  
  
  
  Percent difference in convictions is significant (e.g., p < .05)
  
  
  
  Thus, psychopathic men have higher rates of recidivism than non-psychopathic men.
  
  
  
  
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  4. Analyze results and draw conclusions
  
  • Drawing conclusions: state whether hypotheses are supported by results, provide the results of any additional analyses, identify broader implications of results, and generalizability of findings
• 
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  • Example - Conclusion
• Results supported the hypothesis in this study. Additional analyses revealed that psychopathic men tended to start their criminal careers at an earlier age and that they tended to commit diverse types of crimes than non-psychopathic men. These findings should be taken into account when making decisions concerning the release into and management of these individuals in society. Because the sample can be considered sufficient, it can be concluded safely that the results are generalizable to other incarcerated populations.
  
  
  
  Steps in Conducting a Scientific Investigation
  
  5. Report the findings:
  
  • Write a research report
• 1. Abstract - 100-150 word summary
  
  2. Introduction - review of pertinent literature
  
  3. Method - process of research design
  
  4. Results - usually numeric; significant findings
  
  5. Discussion - summary of main findings and how they tie into previous findings; potential weaknesses and strengths; suggestions for future research
  
  6. References - all citations listed in alphabetical order
  
  
  
  • Submit for publication, presentation… then revisions…
• 
  
  
  
  Research Methods in the Social Sciences
  
  Basic research methods:
  
  • 1.) Experimental design
  • 2.) Correlational design
  • 3.) Case study
  • 4.) Survey
  • 5.) Naturalistic Observation
  • 6.) Meta-analysis
• 
  
  Research Methods
  
  • Experimental Design: Looking for Causes
• Under controlled conditions, manipulate a variable (Independent Variable, IV) to examine whether there is a predictable and systematic change in another variable (Dependent Variable, DV)
  
  • Variables: IV (manipulated) vs. DV (measured)
  • Confounding Variable: Variable other than IV that, unless controlled, can influence DV
  • Conditions: Experimental (receives IV) vs. Control Group
  • Random Assignment: Participants have an equal chance of being assigned to a given condition
• Research Methods
  
  • Experimental Design (cont’d)
  • Advantages: Can establish cause-and-effect relationships
  • Disadvantages: May not be generalizable; cannot be used to investigate all types of problems or research questions in psychology
• 
  
  Cohen, D., Nisbett, R. E., Bowdle, B. F., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 945-960.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Results: Culture of Honor
  
  Results: Culture of Honor
  
  Research Methods
  
  2. Correlational (Regression) Design
  
  Examining, without any manipulation, the relationship between two variables
  
  • Correlation: To obtain a statistic expressing the degree of relationship between 2 variables
  • Regression: To allow prediction of one variable (Criterion Variable, CV) on the basis of knowledge about another variable (Predictor Variable, PV)
  • PV: variable from which the prediction is made
  • CV: variable to be predicted
• Research Methods
  
  2. Correlational Design (cont’d)
  
  • Advantages: Can estimate the direction of the relationship without manipulating any variables; Possible to do research on psychological phenomena that cannot be manipulated (e.g., personality, intelligence)
  • Disadvantages: Cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships
• 
  
  Research Methods
  
  3. Case Study
  
  An in-depth investigation focusing on a single individual
  
  • Typical methods: Interview, observation, examination of records, and psych testing
  • Advantages: Permit detailed examination
  • Disadvantages: May not be generalizable; may be subjective
• Research Methods
  
  4. Survey
  
  Administering a questionnaire or structured interview designed to gather info about specific aspects of a participant’s behavior
  
  • Advantages: Can obtain large and representative samples; quick and easy to administer, can gather info on behaviors that are difficult to observe (e.g., sexual behavior)
  • Disadvantages: Respondents may not fill-out survey or may not understand questions; self-report data may be unreliable, random sampling may not be possible
• Research Methods
  
  5. Naturalistic Observation
  
  Objectively observe, in a systematic and non-interfering manner, the behavior of a group of individuals within their natural environment
  
  • Participant Observation: Researcher joins, without interfering with, the activities of the individual or group being observed
  • Advantages: Can be a starting point; minimizes artificiality
  • Disadvantages: Lack of control over variables, prone to bias and distortion; can be difficult to remain unobtrusive
• 
  
  Research Methods
  
  6. Meta-Analysis
  
  A collection of studies about a phenomenon are combined quantitatively to generate an aggregate finding termed an effect size
  
  • We will discuss several meta-analyses in this course
  • Advantages: Excellent way to synthesize large number of research results; effect sizes efficient and informative statistic; can be rigorous
  • Disadvantages: Quality of studies and comprehensiveness of search affects credibility of findings; researcher judgment in coding and aggregating effect sizes
• 
  
  Crash Course on Basic Statistics
  
  Terminology:
  
  • Mean: the arithmetic average of a group of scores
  • t-test for independent means: comparing the means from two separate groups of participants
  • F-test (Analysis of Variance): similar to t-test for multiple IVs and/or multiple levels of an IV
  • Correlation: the manner in which two phenomena are statistically (usually linearly) associated
  • Area Under the Curve (AUC): index of predictive accuracy of binary events (e.g., recidivism)
• 
  
  
  
  Crash Course on Basic Statistics
  
  2 types of t-tests for making mean comparisons:
  
  
  
  1. Between-subjects design (independent mean comparison)
  
  e.g., comparing the amount of treatment change for psychopathic vs. non-psychopathic offenders
  
  2. Within-subject design (dependent mean comparison)
  
  e.g., comparing the risk score on a dynamic measure at pretreatment and posttreatment
  
  
  
  
  
  Crash Course on Basic Statistics
  
  Correlation:
  
  
  
  Pearson correlation
  
  • A mathematical index of the strength of association between two variables
• 
  
  • A measure of the degree and direction of a linear relationship ranging from -1.0 (a perfect negative correlation) to +1.0 (a perfect positive relationship). A value of 0.0 represents the absence of a linear relationship
• 
  
  • Additional types of correlation (variations on Pearson):
  • Point biserial: one variable continuous, one binary
  • Phi correlation: two binary variables

Biological Basis of Criminal Behaviour

• The born criminal
• Physique and crime
• Twin and adoption studies
• Neurochemical correlates
• ANS arousal and antisocial behaviour
• Prefrontal cortex dysfunction
• Neurocognitive correlates
• Evolutionary models

The Born Criminal

Cesare Lombroso:

• Believed that criminals were more genetically similar to their primitive ancestors than non-criminals - homo delinquent
• Believed that criminals possessed a unique of physical characteristics (e.g., flattened nose, large ears), and had a special penchant for tattoos, slang and orgies

Physique and Crime

William Sheldon:

• Developed a body typing classification system for identifying criminals called somatotyping
• Distinguished 3 basic body types

1. Ectomorphs: fragile and thin
2. Mesomorphs: powerful, athletic and muscular
3. Endomorphs: soft and fat

• Found a strong correlation b/w personality (temperament) and somatotype

Genetics and Antisocial Behaviour

Logic of Twin and Adoption Studies:

• Monozygotic (MZ) twins: identical, 100% of the same genes
• Dizygotic (DZ) twins: fraternal, 50% of the same genes
• MZ twins should show greater concordance on a characteristic (e.g., intelligence, antisocial behaviour) than DZ twins, if there is a genetic basis to that trait.

Adoption studies:

• Children separated from biological parents at birth are compared to them and their adoptive parents on a given characteristic
• Children should resemble biological parents more than their adoptive parents on the trait/characteristic studied if there is a genetic basis to the trait

General Trends and Findings:

• Twin studies on criminality show higher concordance rates for criminal behaviour in MZ twins over DZ twins
• Adoption studies on criminality show that adoptees resemble biological parents more in antisocial behaviour
• Overall, there appears to be a modest but consistent genetic components to antisocial behaviour

Biological Models of Criminality

Mednick et al. (1984) Danish Adoption Study

New Directions in Genetic Research:

• Gene-Linkage studies have identified some potential indirect genetic markers for Behaviour

1. Aldehyde Dehydrogenase 2 allele ( ALDH2)
2. Monoamine oxidase (MAO) A (on X-chromosome)

Neurochemical Correlates

• General paradigm involves obtaining a measure of central neurotransmitter activity, then correlating this measure with a measure of aggression (e.g., hostility scale).
• Three ways of measuring neurotransmitter activity:

1. Central Neurochemical Measures
2. Peripheral measure:
3. Pharamocochallenge techniques:

Serotonin and Human Aggression

• Serotonin (5-HT): Involved in regulation of sleep, sexual activity, appetite, analgesia and mood
• Research supports an inverse relationship between serotonin and various indices of human aggression

1. Aggressive behaviour found to be inversely related to CSF levels of 5-HIAA
2. Children with disruptive behavioural disorders-low levels of 5-HIAA
3. 5-HT functioning thought to be linked to reactive, impulsive subtype of aggression
4. Aggressive behaviour inversely related to MAO levels in men and women

• 5-HT thought to play a role in behavioural inhibition

Other Monoamines and Human Aggression:

Norepinephrine (NE):

• Positive relationship between NE activity and aggression proposed
• Positive correlation between elevated levels of MPHG and history of aggression males

Dopamine (DA):

• Low levels of homovanillic acid found to discriminate violent recidivists from no recidivists

ANS Arousal and Antisocial Behaviour

• Antisocial individuals are more likely to be chronically under aroused
• Traditional measures of ANS:

1. Heart rate (HR):
2. Skin Conductance (SC):
3. Electroencephalogram (EEG):

• Low HR, SC level, and slow wave EEGs indicate generalized ANS under arousal
• EEG findings: Increased aggression and delta and theta waves
• SC findings: Antisocial individuals lower SCLS than non-criminals
• HR findings: lower resting HR found in conduct disordered, delinquent, and antisocial children

Two Theoretical Models to Explain Findings:

1. Fearless theory: Low ANS arousal indicates low levels of fear and anxiety, increasing one's capacity for antisocial behaviour
2. Stimulation-seeking theory: Low ANS arousal is an aversive state and antisocial individuals seek out stimulation (often in the form of criminal behaviour) in order to bring their arousal to an optimum level

• Two theories not mutually exclusive

Prefrontal Cortex Dysfunction

Four lobes:

1. Frontal
2. Parietal
3. Temporal
4. Occipital

Frontal Lobe

• Motor cortex: raw execution of motor movements
• Premotor cortex: selection of movements to be executed
• Prefrontal Cortex: executive mental function
• Prefrontal cortex damage: can predispose individuals to violent and antisocial behaviour
• Damage to the orbitofrontal region can produce a syndrome called pseudopsychopathy or acquired sociopathy
• Immature behaviour
• Lack of tact or restraint
• Coarse language
• Promiscuous/aberrant sexual behaviour
• Lack of social grace

Brain Imaging: Position Emission Tomography; PET:

• Raine (1994) : Murders had reduced glucose metabolism in prefrontal cortex (using PET scan) compared to non-criminals controls. No difference in glucose metabolism in posterior frontal region

Neurocognitive Bases of Antisocial Behaviour

• Neuropsychology: A branch of psychology that involves examining the structure and function of the brain (including damage to it) through non-invasive test and activities

Neuropsychological Deficits and Delinquent Behaviours

• Verbal Deficits: Juvenile delinquents have evidence verbal deficits which are proposed to be linked to criminal behaviour
• Executive Function: delinquent youth also displayed impairment on measures of executive functioning (E.g., Wisconsin Card Sort Test)
• Verbal deficits are linked to left hemisphere dysfunction whereas executive function deficits have been linked to frontal cortex dysfunction

Potential Explanatory Mechanisms

1. Verbal deficits directly cause antisocial behaviour
2. Verbal deficits are symptomatic of generalized left hemisphere dysfunction
3. Neuropsychological deficits are only relevant in life-course persistent young offenders (vs. Adolescent limited)

Evolutionary Models of Antisocial Behaviour

Why is evolution relevant?

1. We are animals
2. Evolution provides a theoretical mechanism as to how biological differences in personality could have emerged

Evolution by Natural Selection

• Darwin's work began during a voyage to the Galapagos Islands aboard the Beagle
• Found different finches had different beak shapes and sizes, suited to their own niches
• Proposed they came from a common ancestral bird
• Natural selection: a process by which individuals better adapted to their environment are selected to survive, reproduce, and pass their genes on to succeeding generation

Adaptiveness of Antisocial Behaviour

• Notions that some traits adaptive in ancestral environment
• i.e., enhanced reproductive success or "fitness"
• May also apply to certain forms of antisocial behaviour
• An "adaptation"
• Adaptation: an anatomical structure, physiological process, or behavioural pattern that enabled an organism to survive and reproduce in its ancestral environment

Evolved Life History Strategy

• Antisocial behaviour as an evolved life history strategy: applies to psychopathy:
• Low parental investment
• High mating effort
• Short term mating
• Lots of biological offspring
• Low group altruism
• Deceitful and manipulative tendencies
• Coercion if necessary
• Works if most people are not antisocial/psychopathic

What is Inherited

• Possibly a general predisposition for rule violation and seemingly, selfish, dishonest, exploitative behaviour
• Unlikely that specific antisocial behaviours are inherited (e.g., an armed robbery gene)
• Different biological markers (direct and indirect) likely exist
• Social environment would regulate the expression of a potential criminal genotype. Social experiences have potential to alter the course of brain development
• No single biological marker is necessary or sufficient cause of violence, aggression, or criminal behaviour

How do Biological and social force interact?

• Raine (1997): biological determinants of antisocial behaviour (e.g., prefrontal cortex dysfunction, low serotonin) assume greater importance when social forces that promote antisocial behaviour are weak (e.g., high SES, intact home)
• However, social causes of criminal behaviour may be more important in those exposed to adverse early home conditions

Learning and Environmental Factors Contributing to Antisocial behaviour

Overview

• Psychodynamic models of antisocial behaviour: Freud and the Gluecks
• Social control theories of crime: Social bons and the General Theory of Crime
• Behaviorism
• Classical conditioning
• Operant condition
• Social learning theories
• Integrated theory of crime: GPCSL

Psychodynamic Models of Crime?

A Primer on Freud....

• Behaviour is instinctually driven (sex and aggression)
• Behaviour is unconsciously determined
• Behaviour involves reconciling competing tensions between innermost desires and societal expectations
• Id, Ego, Superego
• Our behaviour is influenced by our subconscious

The Gluecks

Husband and wife psychology team, that did a study on delinquent and nondelinquent

• Famous study comparing large samples of delinquent and nondelinquent youth
• Delinquency due to weak superego from faulty parenting
• Code for a lack of conscience or moral compass
• Emphasis on family and parenting variables
• Acknowledged temperamental, physical, psychological and other variables

Social Control Theories of Crime

• Most theoretical models of crime attempt to answer the question, "why do they do it"
• Social control theory attempts to answer the question, "why don't we all do it?"
• Social processes compel people to conform and bind them to the social order
• These are not particularly psychodynamic

Early Social Control Theories

• Stresses the importance of personal controls, particularly those provided by the family.
• Social control = ties to primary group
• Personal controls = internalized individually
• Absence of S&P controls = criminality
• Family most significant in development of personal controls
• Children from close, cohesive family with prosocial values, unlikely to be delinquent

Social Bond Theory (Hirschi)

• Individuals more likely to turn to crime if their bond to society is weak or broken
• Stresses the " four elements of the social bond"

1. Attachment: Strength of emotional ties to others
2. Commitment: extent to which one pursues conventional goals
3. Involvement: how busy somebody is with prosocial activites
4. Belief: basically prosocial ( i.e., conventional) values and morality

• Being a good parent

General Theory of Crime ( Gottfredson, Hirschi)

• Individuals with low-self control have a greater propensity to commit crimes when they have the opportunity to do so
• Low self-control = impulsive, present-oriented, unstable relationship, low remorse for harming others
• Poor self-control rooted in early childhood socialization
• Criticism: simplistic and contradicted by findings showing that adults forming stable social bonds (e.g., marriage, stable job) are less likely to become involved in criminality

Behaviorism

• Prior to 1930's psychology focused on unconscious and unobservable processes
• Watson declared concepts in psychology were too vague, untestable, and unscientific
• Watson focused on behaviour and promoted the removal of " mind" from psychological study
• Watson has often been referred to as the " Father of Behaviourism"
• Fundamental goal of psychology is to understand, predict, and control (modify) human behaviour
• Human behaviour is based on general principles, and is molded and adapted by environmental force (environmental determinism)

Classical Conditioning

• Popularized by Watson and based largely on "Pavlov's Dog" research
• Four components:

1. Unconditioned stimulus (US)
2. Unconditioned response (UR)
3. Conditioned stimulus (CS)
4. Conditioned response (CR)

Application to Criminal Behaviour

• Eysenck's "conditionability"
• Deviant Sexual Arousal Patterns (e.g., Fetishes)
• Arousal paired with previously neutral stimulus
• Undergarments, Rubber Rain boots; " The Boot Collector" (not inherently arousing!)
• Behavioural modification procedures to change

Operant Conditioning

• Skinner was a strong situationist
• " All behaviour is at the mercy of stimuli in the environment, and the individuals have virtually no control or self-determination"
• All behaviours are promoted by the environment
• Reductionism: complex human behaviour can be broken down into more simple behaviour
• Operant Conditioning: learning either to perform or withhold a particular response because its consequences
• Reinforcement (Positive or negative): Increase frequency of types of behaviour
• Punishment (Positive or Negative): decreases frequency of types of behaviour
• "Extinction": the frequency of behaviour becomes zero due to a lack of reinforcement
• "positive" refers to the application of a stimulus, "negative" its removal
• "Reinforcement" always increase behaviour, "punishment" always decrease it

Application to Criminal Behaviour

Positive Reinforcement:

• Material gain
• Thrill/adrenaline
• Positive peer responses

Negative Reinforcement

• Reduction of fear/anxiety
• Removal of perceived obstacles or stressors

Social Learning Theory

• Suggest that to understand criminal behaviour we must examine perceptions, thoughts, expectancies, competencies and values
• Learning principles works well for animals, but humans have complex cognitions that presumably influence behaviour

Social Learning theory (Bandura)

• We learn primarily through observing and listening to people around us
• Idea is that cognition plays a role in our active decisions to engage or not engage in a particular behaviour
• Vicarious learning and self-efficacy

Reciprocal Determinism

• Personal ( e.g., expectation, attitudes, beliefs)
• Environment (e.g., situation, stimuli, context)
• Behavioral ( overt actions, movements)

Differential Association Theory (Sutherland)

• Applications of social learning principles to antisocial behaviour
• Development of attitudes favorable toward crime + behaviours for committing crime from chronic exposure to delinquent peers
• Frequency, duration, priority, and intensity also key

Differential Association-Reinforcement theory (Akers)

• Integration of core elements of Skinnerian behaviourism, Bandura's social learning theory and Sutherland's differential association theory
• Essentially people learn to commit deviant acts through interpersonal interactions in their social environment
• Group interactions and observable and vicarious learning is key
• Differential reinforcement for antisocial vs. Prosocial behaviour
• Pro-criminal attitudes also formed

A General Personality and Social Psychological Perspective on Criminal Conduct ( a.k.a PIC-R) (Andrews & Bonta, 2010)

Implication for Forensics

• Criminal/antisocial behaviours have developed through the same principles as any other behaviour
• Antisocial/criminal behaviours have some adaptive basis; maintained because reinforced
• Criminals have different reinforcement strategies and contingencies
• If criminal behaviour is learned, criminal behaviour can be replaced with more adaptive strategies to reach goals
• Theoretically, some deviant arousal patterns may be "re-conditioned."
• Negative environmental factors can be modified to promote more prosocial behaviour.

Textbook Notes

• Biological theorists might stress the fact that criminality seems to run in Aaron's family, indicating a genetic basis to his behaviour. Evolutionary theories of crime, on the other hand, focus on explanations of how crime can be thought of as adaptive behaviour, developed as a means to survive in both our ancestral and present .. day environments.
• SIGMUND FREUD (I 856-1 939 ) IS WELL KNOWN FOR HIS THEORIES OF THE UNCONSCIOUS mind, the defence mechanisms he proposed, and the various therapeutic techniques he endorsed, such as free association and dream interpretation.
• Behaviourism focuses on the study of observable processes (Skinner 1953 ), and many theories of crime have their roots in behaviourism.
• Psychodynamic theories of crime, as the name implies, focus on the internal (often unconscious) psychological forces that influence human behaviour. Many of these theories are rooted in Freudian thinking. These theories often focus on factors that influence personality development, how personality development influences our ability to resolve intra--psychic conflicts, and how these conflicts impact our behaviour (including antisocial behaviour). According to this perspective, experiences occurring early in childhood, such as separation from one's mother, are thought to have a profound effect on personality development and thus, how people behave.
• Learning theories, which are rooted in the behaviouristic tradition, take a different approach to understanding crime. These theories of crime focus on how information is encoded, processed, and retained in the process of learning to become criminal. These theories often propose specific conditions that promote (or inhibit) learning and they describe various forms of learning.
• Social learning theories, for example, focus on one particular form of learning; that is, learning that takes place by observing others being reinforced or punished for their prosocial and antisocial behaviour.
• Cross-sectional research designs are very common. Using this methodology, researchers examine different groups of individuals (e.g., criminals versus non.- criminals) to determine if certain risk factors are associated with one group more than the other.
• Psychoanalysts believe that pleasure--seeking and destructive impulses originate in the Id. part of an individual's personality that is present at birth and represents unconscious, primitive, and instinctual desires (Blackburn 1995). The id is thought to be governed by the pleasure principle: it seeks immediate pleasure with little consideration of the undesirable consequences that may result if an impulse is acted upon.
• ego, which attempts to mediate between one's primal needs and society's demands. The ego is guided by the reality principle: its development coincides with the emergence of reality--oriented thinking and it allows the id to function in socially acceptable ways by suppressing the id's impulses until appropriate situations arise (e.g., by allowing for the delay of gratification).
• superego, the last of the three personality systems to develop according to psychoanalysts. The superego represents the internalization of group standards, typically conveyed to the child through parental care and discipline, and it acts as a moral regulator. The superego is thought to consist of two sub--systems: the conscience, which allows an individual to distinguish between right and wrong and forces the ego to inhibit id pursuits that are out of line with one's morals, and the ego-ideal, which represents the socially accepted standards to which we all aspire
• The existence of a harsh superego is assumed to lead to pathological levels of unconscious guilt (typically over unresolved infantile desires) and criminal behaviour is meant to subconsciously invite punishment in an attempt to resolve this guilt.
• The theory of maternal deprivation, which was developed and tested by the British child psychiatrist John Bowlby (1907-1990), draws heavily on the psychodynamic perspective and was a popular theory for how juvenile delinquency develops.
• Overview
  
  • Why assess risk?
  • How to assess risk
  • Generations of risk assessment
  • Correctional treatment
  • Risk, need, and responsivity (RNR)
  • RNR in action
  • Illustrative programs from our federal and provincial systems
• 
  
  
  
  Why Assess Risk?
  
  • Identify those likely to commit new crimes, including those who may be “dangerous.”
  • Sentencing -> accuracy
  • Treatment planning -> inform treatment.
  • Assessment of changes in risk
  • Release decisions
  • Preventative detention
• 
  
  Why Assess Risk?
  
  • Can risk change? Is risk dynamic?
  • Age -> adolescence -> early 20s
  • treatment
  • change in environment & community supports.
  • E.g., get married, get a job, reunite with family, complete education.
• 
  
  Recidivism
  
  • Recidivism (aka re-offending):
  • Committing a new criminal offense following previous detection or release
  • Subtypes of recidivism
  • Violent recidivism (real physical harm, psychological)
  • Nonviolent recidivism (indirect harm, no person involved)
  • Sexual recidivism
  • General recidivism (any offense in any category)
• 
  
  Risk Assessment as Recidivism Prevention
  
  • High predictive accuracy is vital, but do not want to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
  • Purpose of risk assessment is to prevent new crimes from occurring.
  • Risk assessment to inform risk management.
• Steps in Risk Assessment
  
  • Use of multiple information sources
  • Assess multiple domains of functioning -> cognitive, learning, psychological.
  • Use of multiple assessment methods
  • Evaluate the credibility of information sources.
  • Assess static and dynamic risk factors.
  • Assessment of strengths and protective factors
• 
  
  Static and Dynamic Variables
  
  • Static Variables:
  • Variables that tend not to change and are frequently historical in nature (e.g., age at release, prior offenses, male victim, etc.) (prior convictions/incarcerations. Prior supervision failiure, early onset of antisociality, young age < 24, number of criminal associations, history of alcohol abuse, school failure)
  • Dynamic Variables:
  • Variables that have the potential to change from treatment, experience, or other changing agents (e.g., community support, criminal attitudes, antisocial peers, substance abuse, etc.) ( antisocial attitudes and/or peers, instability e.g., employment, family, current substance abuse, resistance to treatment/supervision, mood problems ( anxiety, depression))
• 
  
  Challenges in Risk Assessment
  
  Low Base Rates
  
  • Rare events are hard to predict.
  • Some forms of recidivism are quite rare (e.g., sexual murder) while others are more frequent (e.g., property crime)
• 
  
  Challenges in Risk Assessment
  
  • Implications: Must be aware of base rates in making risk appraisals
  • If we predict 9 out 10, we will have made several mistakes (we may incarcerate excessively in order to avoid missing the violent offender).
  • If we predict 1 out 10, we will have made a few mistakes, but we may allow a violent offender back onto the streets!
• 
  
  
  
  

• 
  
  
  
  Challenges in Risk Assessment
  
  
  
  Challenges in Risk Assessment
  
  
  
  Risk Assessment is a Complex Task
  
  • Requires integration of multiple types and sources of psychological data.
  • Different types of offenders will have different needs and risk areas, often based on the type of violence they tend to engage in.
  • Implications?
  • Different risk factors; different assessment; different therapeutic approaches.
  • Knowing which type of violence or other offending behavior an offender generally engages in is a critical component in your assessment of risk.
• 
  
  Recidivism Prediction Metrics
  
  
  
  HOW TO ASSESS RISK?
  
  Generations of Recidivism Risk Assessment (RA)
  
  • First Generation:
  • Collect info: conduct interviews, review files, etc.
  • Make general assessments or global predictions: “In my professional opinion…”
  • GFI
• 
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Strengths of first-generation approach
  • Can explore many different aspects of client’s situation.
  • Can reflect unique circumstances.
• 
  
  • Weaknesses
  • Subject too much personal bias– can lead to overprediction – false positive!!!
  • subjective, intuitive, gut feelings
  • Decision rules not observable
  • Overlook or overemphasize info.
  • Over reliance on 1^st generation RA – problematic and inhibits the advancement of knowledge in RA.
• 
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Second Generation RA:
  • Objective, empirically biased static RA instruments (e.g., Statistical Information on Recidivism scale)
  • Also known as static actuarial or empirical actuarial tools
  • Actuarial defined:
  • Items (predictors) are statistically associated with increased recidivism.
  • Individual items may be weighted differently.
• 
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Instruments based on these items provided a substantial advantage over clinical judgment in the prediction of recidivism.
  • In addition, they usually use information that is easily accessible in clinical and forensic files and require little or no clinical training or subjective judgment.
• 
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Strengths of second-generation instruments
  • Objective and accountable
  • Cover important Static (historical) risk factors.
  • Clearly articulated decision rules
• 
  
  • Weaknesses
  • Consist of static predictors only
  • Not capable of measuring change
  • Item weights may not be generalized.
  • Atheoretical
  • Can get weird combinations of predictors sometimes.
• 
  
  SIR Scale
  
  • (General) Statistical Information on Recidivism (SIR) scale:
  • Nuffield (1982) developed the SIR using 15 variables.
  • Example of a static actuarial tool
  • Weighted score on 15 static items (scores range: -27 to +30)
  • Grouped into 5 categories/risk groups.
  • Every male non-Aboriginal offender in CSC has the SIR scale rated on them at intake.
• 
  
  
  
  Sample SIR items
  
  • Marital Status
  • Interval at Risk Since last Offense
  • Previous Imprisonment
  • Previous Parole Breech
  • Current Total Aggregate Sentence
  • Escape History
  • Security Classification
  • Previous Conviction for Break and Enter
  • Age at first Adult Conviction
  • Employment Status at Arrest
  • Previous Convictions for Assault
• 
  
  SIR scale
  
  • Norms: Sample of approximately 2,500 parolees released between 1970-1972
• 
  
  • Of the 5 groups:
  • Highest risk group (84% rearrested)
  • Lowest risk group (32% rearrested)
• 
  
  SIR scale
  
  • Study has been consistently replicated.
  • Bonta, Harman, Hann, & Cormier (1996)
  • 3,267 parolees released in 1983-1984
  • Followed up for 3 years.
  • General recidivism: 48.7%
  • Violent recidivism: 9.8%
  • Excellent predictive accuracy for general recidivism (r = .42; AUC = .74)
  • Less so for violent recidivism (r = .15)
• Rates of Violent and General Recidivism as a Function of SIR Risk Category
  
  
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Third Generation RA:
  • RA tools include both static and dynamic risk items informed by theory and research.
  • Involves an integration of assessment and treatment.
  • i.e., criminogenic needs identified as targets for treatment.
• 
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Strengths of third generation instruments
  • Assess a much wider range of variables.
  • Consist of both static and dynamic variables
  • Sensitive to change as a result of “maturation” or effective programming.
  • Theoretically based rather than empirically driven
  • Weaknesses
  • May not be able to capture change.
  • May not be specific. juju
  • Follow-though to case closure may not be explicit.
• 
  
  LSI-R
  
  • Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R; Andrews & Bonta, 1995)
  • Many variants of the LSI family of measures (e.g., adapted for youth, community case management)
  • 54 items scored present or absent (1-0)
  • Five risk levels
  • Very low, low, moderate, moderate-high, high
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  Recall the “Central Eight”
  
  • Level of Service Inventory: (LSI-R, LS/CMI, YLS/CMI, LSI-SK)
  • 8 criminogenic areas
  • 1. Offense history
  • 2. Antisocial Peers
  • 3. Antisocial Personality
  • 4. Antisocial Attitudes
  • 5. Family/Marital
  • 6. Employment/Education
  • 7. Substance Abuse
  • 8. Leisure/Recreation
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Rates of General Recidivism as a Function of LSI-R Risk Category
  
  Meta-Analysis of the LSI scales
  
  (Olver, Stockdale, & Warmth, 2014)
  
  
  
  Generations of RA
  
  4. Fourth Generation RA:
  
  • Campbell et al. (2009) definition
  • Designed to be integrated into
  • a) the process of risk manages ,
  • b) the selection of intervention modes and targeted for treatment
  • c) the assessment of rehabilitation
  • Andrews et al. (2006) definition
  • Guides and follows service and supervision from intake through case closure.
• 
  
  Generations of RA
  
  • Strengths of fourth generation instruments
  • Assessed variables are explicitly linked to criminal recidivism.
  • Includes static and dynamic variables.
  • Sensitive to change as a result of “maturation” or effective programming.
  • Follows client to case closure.
  • Weaknesses
  • Nonunique to fourth generation tools; but some general shortcomings indicative of all measures
• 
  
  • Examples of fourth generation instruments?
  • Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI)
  • Based on central 8
  • Guide case management from point of intake to case closure
  • Violence Risk Scale (VRS)
  • Capacity to link assessment and treatment and to evaluate change (will cover further in “Violent Offender” class) b.
• 
  
  Meta-Analysis of the LSI scales
  
  (Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2014)
  
  
  
  
  
  Correctional Treatment
  
  
  
  Do all of these studies lead us irrevocably to the conclusion that nothing works, that we haven’t the faintest clue about how to rehabilitate offenders and reduce recidivism?... I am bound to say these data... give us very little reason to hope that we have in fact found a sure way of reducing recidivism through rehabilitation.
  
  (Martinson, pp.48-9, 1974)
  
  
  
  Martinson’s “Nothing Works” Doctrine
  
  • Martinson (1974): wrote an influential paper reviewing 231 correctional treatment studies.
  • 40% to 60% evidenced positive treatment effects, yet Martinson’s conclusion remained negative.
  • Example of “knowledge destruction’
  • Martinson recanted, but the damage was done.
  • Why the ati-correctional treatment bias?
• -Reflect psychological bias.
  
  
  
  Principles of Effective Correctional Intervention
  
  • Andrews, Zinger, Hoge, Bonta, Gendreau, & Cullen (1990)
  • Meta-analysis of 80 correctional treatment studies (154 treatment comparisons) of juvenile and adult offenders.
  • Services are subdivided into 4 types.
  • . Criminal sanctions
  • Just plain prison, probation, etc.
  • . inappropriate service
  • Contraindicated for offenders (e.g., scared straight)
  • . Appropriate services
  • CBT/behavioral based
  • . Unspecified services
  • As is.
• 
  
  • Appropriate interventions yielded marked reductions in recidivism (n = 54; phi = .30), 53% on average.
  • Other approaches had a marginal impact.
• 
  
  Effects of Various Interventions
  
  on Recidivism (Andrews et al., 1990)
  
  
  
  Principles of Effective Correctional Intervention
  
  • Effective treatment for correctional populations follows 3 basic principles: (RNR)
  • 1.) Risk
  • 2.) Need
  • 3.) Responsivity
• 
  
  • Interventions that do not encompass the three principles can do more harm than good.
• Risk Principle
  
  • Level of intensity of treatment should match the level of risk presented by the client.
• High risk clients receive high intensity treatment. Intensive treatment should match the risk of the inmate, high risk needs more intervention and need more supervision when released.
  
  • Low risk clients receive few or minimal services.
• 
  
  Bonta, Wallace-Capretta, & Rooney (2000)
  
  • Examined efficacy of an intensive rehabilitation supervision program involving use of electronic monitoring.
  • 171 offenders followed up for 1 year. (on a short lease or not)
• Accurate classify people’s risk.
  
  
  
  Illustration of the Risk Principle
  
  (Bonta et al., 2000)
  
  
  
  Illustration of Risk Principle
  
  (Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2004)
  
  
  
  • Evaluated community based residential correctional programs in Ohio halfway houses
  • Completed residential program n = 7366
  • Control group (no residential program) n = 5855
  • 2-year follow up
  • No adherence to risk principle
  • …everyone same intensity of programming
• Some had a program and some didn’t.
  
  
  
  Need Principle
  
  • Effective correctional treatment directly target criminogenic needs
  • Criminogenic Needs: “crime-causing”
  • Also known as dynamic risk factors
  • Improvement in criminogenic needs = in risk for re-offending.
• 
  
  Need Principle
  
  • Level of Service Inventory: (LSI-R, LS/CMI, YLS/CMI, LSI-SK)
  • 8 criminogenic areas
  • 1. Offense history
  • 2. Antisocial Peers
  • 3. Antisocial Personality
  • 4. Antisocial Attitudes
  • 5. Family/Marital
  • 6. Employment/Education
  • 7. Substance Abuse
  • 8. Leisure/Recreation
• 
  
  
  
  Need Principle
  
  Criminogenic needs are important treatment targets.
  
  regardless of offender group or offense pattern.
  
  • Including sexual offenders, violent offenders, domestic batterers, and mentally disordered offenders, property offenders etc.
  • Important for different demographic groups including:
  • Women
  • First Nations residents
  • Juveniles
  • Mentally Ill
  • Both general and specific criminogenic needs are relevant for different offender groups, and when predicting different types of outcomes. If someone grew up in a bag neighborhood and get into gang related things more likely to breed a high risk
• 
  
  
  
  Need Principle
  
  • Criminogenic versus non-criminogenic needs
  • E.g. NCN
  • Personal distress (anxiety, depression)
  • Self-esteem
  • Fear of punishment
  • Family processing
• 
  
  Targeting Criminogenic Needs:
  
  Results from Meta-analysis
  
  
  
  
  
  Correlation of Need and Effect Size
  
  Andrews & Bonta (2010, p. 367)
  
  
  
  
  
  Responsivity Principle
  
  • General responsivity:
• Uses CBT. Use cognitive behavior methods of change and have people reorganized their attitudes to the world and other people.
  
  • Specific responsivity:
  • Effective treatments involve matching the treatment with the learning style and cognitive capabilities of the offender.
  • Specific responsivity factors include:
  • Cognitive/intellectual deficits
  • Mental health/illness
  • Motivation
  • Demographic variables
  • Cultural factors
  • Psychopathy (factor 1)
  • A neglect of basic responsivity factors can undermine effectiveness of treatment and increase attrition. Programs need to include this factor for a successful program.
• People from the justice system usually has low education.
  
  
  
  Reframing Resistance: Stages of Change
  
  
  
  Responsivity Principle
  
  Olver, Stockdale, & Warmth (2011). A meta-analysis of predictors of offender treatment attrition and its relationship to recidivism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 6-21.
  
  • Examined noncompletion from offender treatment programs.
  • K = 114 studies
  • N = 41,438 offenders
  • Attrition rate = 28%
  • Compared to 47% psychotherapy attrition literature (Wierzbicki & Pekarik, 1993)
• 
  
  Predictors of Treatment Attrition
  
  
  
  Treatment Attrition and Recidivism
  
  Responsivity Principle
  
  • Noncompliers are more likely to be.
  • Noncompletion linked to
  • Higher risk before txt + failure to benefit = bad news
  • Implications for the responsivity principle
  • Avoid creating an “ ” to weed out difficult clients.
• 
  
  Responsivity Principle
  
  • Possible Ways to Address Responsivity:
  • Be sensitive to offenders.
  • Sensitive to :
  • E.g., combine traditional and westernized treatment approaches.
  • Assess motivation and treatment readiness.
  • . interventions
  • E.g., behavioral interventions for preparation stage
  • Motivational interviewing
• 
  
  Is Better?
  
  • RNR: Is better?
  • Andrews et al. now up to 374 studies
  • Examining relationship of RNR adherence to criminal recidivism
• 
  
  Andrews et al. (2006)
  
  Updated RNR meta-analytic findings (K = 374)
  
  
  
  
  
  Effect Sizes of Different Interventions
  
  from McGuire, 2004
  
  
  
  
  
  Is Better? Conclusions
  
  • The greater the number of principles adhered to, the larger the reductions in recidivism.
  • The results are supported by individual meta-analyses as well as cumulative meta-analyses.
• 
  
  R-N-R in action
  
  
  
  Core Correctional Practices
  
  Social Learning Theory: Basic Premises
  
  • Behavior is learned.
  • How is it learned?
  • In a social way, from watching others.
  • Who is it learned from:
  • Environment
  • Family
  • Peers
  • Co-workers
  • What maintains it?
  • Rewards and costs
• 
  
  Core Correctional Practice
  
  Interaction Skills
  
  • Relationship practices
  • Dealing with resistance
  • Effective reinforcement
  • Effective disapproval
  • Effective use of authority
• Intervention Skills
  
  • Anti-criminal modeling
  • Skill-building
  • Problem-solving
  • Cognitive restructuring
• 
  
  Core Correctional Practice &
  
  Risk, Need and Responsivity
  
  Program Integrity
  
  • Implementation and delivery of program in its intended fashion
  • Attention paid to evidence-based principles.
  • Protects against program drift.
• 
  
  CPAI rating and recidivism
  
  Illustrative programs from our federal and provincial systems
  
  Correctional Service of Canada
  
  • Recap
  • Federal system
  • 15,000 inmates in custody + 8,000 on release
  • 5 regions
• 
  
  CSC Correctional Programs
  
  
  
  
  
  Integrated Correctional Program Model (ICPM)
  
  • ICPM
  • General multitarget program
  • RNR based.
  • Single stream for all offenders
  • Variations on intensity (moderate and high)
  • Sex offender vs. non-sex offender stream
  • Aboriginal stream
• 
  
  SK Ministry of Justice: On-Unit Programming
  
  • Intervention processes using Core Correctional Practice (CCP) in a concrete manner.
  • Structured one-to-one case manager-offender rehabilitation activities
  • As part of a larger intervention, case managers work with their assigned offenders on rehabilitation workbooks that target risk areas.
  • Workbooks from Change Companies Courage to Change (C2C) series.
• 
  
  C2C Workbooks
  
  • Consists of 9 workbook modules with content closely related to areas of risk:
  • Getting Started, Social Values, Responsible Thinking/Health Personality, Self-control, Peer relationships, Family Ties, Substance Abuse, Skills for Successful Living, Strategies for Success
  • The core curriculum is also augmented by two “pre-treatment” workbooks for offenders who may not yet be prepared to engage in change.
• 
  
  • Examining the role of thinking on behaviors
  • Recognizing criminogenic errors in thinking
  • Understand how thinking errors support a criminal lifestyle.
  • Learn to apply a strategy for positive change.

The Construct of Psychopathy

The Mask of Sanity: Hervey Cleckley

Groundbreaking approach to psychopathy

Provided the first detailed clinical descriptions

Postulated that psychopaths exude a thin veneer of normality and do not appear to be overtly psychotic or mentally disordered

Metaphor of electricity conductors

The 16 "Clecklian" criteria …

The 16 "Clecklian" Criteria

Superficial charm and good “intelligence”

Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking

Absence of “nervousness” or psychoneurotic manifestations

Unreliability

Untruthfulness and insincerity

Lack of remorse and shame

Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior

Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience

Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love

General poverty in major affective reactions

Specific loss of insight

Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations

Fantastic and uninviting behavior with drink and sometimes without

Suicide rarely carried out

Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated

Failure to follow any life plan

The Construct of Psychopathy

The Development of the PCL: Robert Hare

Cleckley's criteria were operationalized in the form of a research scale for assessing psychopathy.

Called the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL), measuring a constellation of emotional, interpersonal, and behavioral characteristics.

Interpersonal/Affective Characteristics

The personality traits of psychopathy

Superficial and Glib

Egocentric and Grandiose

Pathologically Deceitful and Manipulative

Lacks Guilt and Remorse

Callous Lack of Empathy

Shallow Emotions

Do I care about other people? That’s a tough one. But yeah, I guess, I really do… but I don’t let my feelings get in the way… I mean, I’m as warm and caring as the next guy, but let’s face it, everyone’s trying to screw you… You’ve got to look out for yourself, park your feelings. Say you need something or someone messes with you… maybe tries to rip you off… you take care of it… do whatever needs to be done… Do I feel bad if I have to hurt someone? Yeah, sometimes. But mostly it’s like… uh… [laughs]… how did you feel the last time you squashed a bug?

- A psychopath doing time for kidnapping, rape, and extortion

Chronic Antisocial Behavior

The criminalized lifestyle of psychopathy

Impulsive

Poor Behavior Controls

Need for Excitement

Lack of Responsibility

Early Behavior Problems

Adult Antisocial Behavior

The total pattern of the psychopath’s personality differentiates him from the normal criminal. His aggression is more intense, his impulsivity more pronounced, his emotional reactions more shallow. His guiltlessness, however, is the crucial distinguishing trait. The normal criminal has an internalized, albeit, warped set of values. If he violates these standards he feels guilt.

- McCord and McCord. The Psychopath: An Essay on the Criminal Mind

Assessing Psychopathy

Three possible means of assessing psychopathy:

1.) Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare,1991, 2003) and the Screening Version (SV; Hart, Cox,& Hare, 1995)

2.) Self-Report Inventories

3.) DSM-5 Antisocial Personality Disorder Criteria

Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R)

Scored using file information & semi-structured interview

Each item follows 3-point scale: 0, 1, or 2

Scores range from 0 to 40

A minimum score of 30 required for diagnosis; 25 often used for research purposes d/t low balling F1

Factors – 2, 3, or 4 ?

2 factors (Interpersonal and affective characteristics; Chronic antisocial behavior)

3 factors (Arrogant and deceitful interpersonal style, Deficient affective experience, Impulsive and irresponsible behavioral style; Cooke and Michie, 2001)

4 facets (Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle, Antisocial; PCL-R 2^nd ed.; Hare, 2003)

Zero if the item isn’t present.

Standard error of measurement is 24.

Antisocial behaviour isn’t apparent to psychopathy.

North American Male Offenders

(Hare, 2003)

PCL-R 4-Factor model

(Hare, 2003; Hare & Neumann, 2008, 2010)

Assessing Psychopathy via Self-Report

Self-Reports: Test taker reports on their own feelings, thoughts, beliefs, perceptions, attitudes, behavior etc.

Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised

Self-Report Psychopathy (SRP)-4 generated by the PCL-R

Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TPM)

MMPI (Pd scale, RC4), PAI (ANT scale) doesn’t measure factor 1

Medium to large associations (r = .30-.50) between SRIs and PCL-R

Problems:

1.) Old measures primarily assess Factor 2

2.) SRIs inadequately control for deceitfulness

3.) Psychopathic persons lack insight into emotional and personal characteristics

People who are psychopathic believes their own lies.

Assess them indirectly.

1. Diagnostic confusion

(Psychopathy/APD)

2. Capital Sentencing?

3. Mad or bad?

Is Psychopathy similar to

antisocial personality disorder (DSM-5)?

Pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation for the rights of others, since age 15, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:

Failure to conform to social norms

Deceitfulness

Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead

Irritability and aggressiveness

Reckless disregard for safety of self or others

Consistent irresponsibility

Lack of remorse

People who have gotten diagnosed with psychopathy also have underlying antisocial personality disorder

Psychopathy and the DSM

Psychopathy is NOT a formal entry in the DSM-5

DSM-5’s Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is NOT the same as psychopathy (however, clinicians and researchers tend to use the two terms interchangeably!)

APD almost synonymous with criminality (e.g., Factor 2).

Emphasis on persistent criminality rather than personality

Limits the usefulness of APD in forensic settings

Up to 80% of inmates in Canadian penitentiaries qualify for APD, but only 15-30% qualify for psychopathy

Can the PCL-R be used to assess risk for institutional violence in capital sentencing hearings?

Several jurisdictions in the US have death penalty for murder

Concerns that the PCL-R may be used to argue death penalty for high scoring persons, d/t their risk for continued violence

One argument: predictive validity for institutional violence is poor and field reliability is weak

Counterargument: Meta-analyses demonstrate PCL-R has satisfactory predictive validity for institutional violence and field reliability, particularly when not administered in adversarial contexts

People have been sentenced to death but got diagnosed for PCL-R and has gotten the death penalty to they don’t make being in prison worse.

Can the PCL-R be used to assess risk for institutional violence in capital sentencing hearings?

Field reliability:

Interrater agreement between independent raters of a tool on a common case in a practice setting

PCL-R field reliability?

Overall ICC = .69 (k = 13) two independent people ratings

Canada ICC = .87 (k = 4)

USA ICC = .60 (k = 6)

ICC lower in high stakes proceedings than routine correctional samples

Issue of adversarial allegiance

PCL-R ratings biased depending on the side retaining the clinician, bias in the side that Is retaining the information (sometimes called the higher gun)

Critique of “poor” field reliability (actually “good” to “excellent”)

People who are retain by the district attorney are at higher risks

Can the PCL-R be used to assess risk for institutional violence in capital sentencing hearings?

Predictive validity for institutional violence?

Four previous meta-analyses and a new one*

Olver et al. (2020) d = .39 (k = 9) *

Hogan & Ennis (2010) d = .52 (k = 12)

Campbell et al. (2009) d = .36 (k = 12)

Guy et al. (2005) d = .35 (k = 22)

Salekin et al. (1996) d = .92 (k = 3)

Mean unweighted d = .51, median d = .39

PCL-R/SV robust small to medium effects for predicting institutional violence; weak predictor not substantiated

New literature was bad

*new studies examined not included in previous meta-analyses

Mad or bad?

Psychopathic individuals meet legal and psychiatric standards of sanity.

Psychopathic persons are not psychotic or “crazy”.

Comorbidity with major mental illness is rare.

Understand the law and can be held accountable for their actions.

People with psychopathy can plead for insanity but they believe they are above the law and they know the law they just don’t care

You can have remorse but still qualify as psychopathy

“Psychopaths know the difference between right and wrong, they just don't give a damn.”

Psychopathy as a Risk Marker for Violence and Crime

Psychopathy, Violence, and Crime

Hare and McPherson (1984):

Rviewed over 500 inmate files and scored PCLs.

85-97% of psychopaths - at least one violent crime.

Approximately 50-75% recidivism rate for non-sexual violence.

Ppsychopathic persons more likely to commit acts of assault, vandalism, kidnapping, armed robbery, fighting, and to have used a weapon.

More likely to have prior and future convictions for crimes of violence.

No more likely to commit murder or sexual assault than non psychopathic men.

Homicides are emotional charged events and if you don’t have the emotional regulation, they aren’t committed by psychopaths.

Psychopathy, Violence, and Crime

Additional key findings:

Early age of onset of criminality, persistence, and diversity of offending.

High risk group to commit acts of violence, both in and outside of prison.

Psychopathic violence tends to be dispassionate, cold-blooded, predatory, instrumental, or sadistic.

Violence is motivated by revenge, monetary gain, or sadism

More likely to have male & stranger victims.

When they commit violent acts its usually someone they know

Recidivism Predictive Accuracy of PCL-R:

Results from Meta-analyses

Biological Markers for Psychopathy

Amygdala dysfunction (Tiihonen et al., 2000; Kiehl et al., 2001)

Reduced amygdala response to processing words of negative valence, fear responses, have low levels of anxiety.

Orbitofrontal Cortex (OFC) dysfunction (hypoarousal)

“Acquired psychopathy” following lesions

Aversive conditioning and instrumental learning?

Genetics?

2005 study of 3,687 7-year old twin pairs discovered that “psychopathic tendencies are strongly inherited”.

Other systems… Neurochemical correlates ?

e.g., noradrenergic system, 5-HIAA

Autonomic underarousal and diminished startle reflex

Left hemisphere language organization

Reduced right ear advantage on dichotic listening task

Psychopaths are goal-oriented for their own needs.

Subtypes of Psychopathy

Subtypes of Psychopathy

More than 70 years ago, psychiatrist Ben Karpman proposed psychopathy was a heterogeneous syndrome

Idiopathic (primary)

“a virtually incurable case…”

Symptomatic (secondary)

Many possible ways to get a high score on the PCL-R; might it be possible for there to be different ways for someone to be psychopathic?

Subtypes of Psychopathy

Number of subtypes generally range from about 2-4

Most common distinction is primary (emotionally stable) and secondary (aggressive, unstable)

Also a pseudopsychopathic variant

i.e., highly antisocial but lacking factor 1 features

Comparing and Contrasting Primary and Secondary Subtypes

Primary

Low anxiety, high fearlessness

Low emotional distress

High narcissism

Less responsive to intervention

Larger neurobiological component

Higher proportion in Caucasian persons

Classic psychopathic person

Secondary

Characterized by high anxiety

Other types of emotional distress and mental health concerns (e.g., depression)

More responsive to treatment

Higher proportion in ethnic minorities

Greater aggression, delinquency, institutional infractions

Usually have problems with emotional regulations

Treatment of Psychopathy

Evidence, Issues, and Controversies

Therapeutic Pessimism

Cleckley, 1941

“…we do not at present have any kind of psychotherapy that can be relied upon to change the psychopath fundamentally.” p 438-439

Suedfeld & Landon, 1978

‘‘review of the literature suggests that a chapter on effective treatment should be the shortest in any book concerned with psychopathy. In fact, it has been suggested that one sentence would suffice: No demonstrably effective treatment has been found’’ (p. 347)

Harris & Rice, 2006

‘‘…no effective interventions yet exist for psychopaths. Indeed, some treatments that are effective for nonpsychopaths actually increase the risk represented by psychopaths.’’ (p. 563 in Patrick, 2006 Ed.).

Therapeutic Community (TC) Treatment and

Violent Recidivism (Rice et al., 1992)

“The present results strongly suggest that the kind of therapeutic community described in this article is the wrong program for serious psychopathic offenders”.

Rice, Harris, Cormier, 1992, p. 408.

“At a practical level, the treatment of psychopaths has an interesting history, short on quantity and long on lore… Close examination of the treatment studies of psychopaths shows that most treatment efforts have failed to attend to the principles of effective correctional interventions”

Simourd & Hoge (2000, p. 269)

Quantitative Evaluation of

Treatment Efficacy

Salekin (2002)

Meta-analysis of 42 treatment studies on psychopathy

Few empirical investigations & fewer follow up studies

Provided some evidence of positive txt effects:

“60% of patients benefitted from therapy”

Some methodological issues (Harris & Rice, 2006)

“little scientific basis for the belief that psychopathy is an untreatable disorder” (p. 79)

Why have earlier studies produced

negative outcomes?

Characteristics of

Ineffective Programs?

Little or no staff supervision

Put psychopathic men in charge of running programs

Over-treating the offenders

Mixing high and low risk offenders

Failure to target criminogenic need

Inappropriate therapeutic foci

Unresponsive interventions

Nude encounter groups

LSD used to reduce defensiveness

Quantitative Evaluation of

Treatment Efficacy

Salekin et al., 2010

Updated 2002 meta-analysis – added 9 new studies

Much improved study designs and intervention

Structured risk/psychopathy assessment & outcome evaluation, use RNR principles

Long term follow up

Some with positive treatment effects

Reduction in violence and reoffending with treatment.

Literature definitely moving in the right direction…

Regional Psychiatric Centre

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

RNR Principles in Action ABC/Clearwater

Risk

Higher risk clients are referred to higher intensity services

High base line risk on Violence Risk Scale (VRS) and Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offense version (VRS-SO)

Need

Criminogenic needs prioritized for treatment

VRS and VRS-SO identify areas to intervene in programming and are reassessed to evaluate changes in risk

Responsivity

Tailor treatment delivery to unique client features using CBT methods

VRS and VRS-SO identify clients’ readiness to change

Psychopathy as a Responsivity Issue: Negative Therapeutic Correlates

Psychopathy has many negative therapeutic correlates; investigations of PCL-R facets with txt outcomes.

Affective facet of the PCL-R uniquely associated with….

Decreased treatment progress

Increased dropout

Weaker working alliances, especially the bond between client and therapist

Noncompletion rate for high psychopathy men 15-25%; that’s 75-85% successful completion rate!

A Two Component Model for the Treatment of Psychopathic Clients

Objectives in Treatment of Clients with Psychopathic Traits

Reduce risk for violence and sexual violence through treatment and risk management interventions

What to Change?

Using PCL-R as the operational definition of psychopathy

Change Factor 1 ? Change interpersonal/affective traits

Change Factor 2 ? Change lifestyle/antisociality (criminogenic issues)

Change both ? Interaction of F1 and F2?

The focus of change should be on something

Likely to be changeable

Positive change lead to reduction in violence

How much can F1 & F2 change?

Psychopathy: Effects of Age

Harpur & Hare, 1989

To what extent are F1 and F2 linked to violence?

Predictive Accuracy of Violence Risk Tools

(Yang, Wong, & Coid, 2010)

There is not much evidence that Factor 1 changes over the adult lifespan (Harpur & Hare, 1994)

OR that it predicts violent and sexual recidivism well (Hawes, Boccaccini, & Murrie, 2013; Yang, Wong, & Coid, 2010).

The role of Factor 1?

A responsivity issue

Two Component Model for the Treatment of Psychopathic Clients

(Wong & Hare, 2005; Wong et al., 2012; Wong, 2013)

Component 1 – Interpersonal Component

Manage Factor 1 as a responsivity issue

Component 2 – Criminogenic component

Target criminogenic needs (linked to Factor 2) as per the risk and need principles

Therapy interfering behaviors among

clients with psychopathic traits

Manipulative behavior, lying, conning

Irresponsibility

Staff splitting

Glibness, superficial charm

Flirtatious, sexualized, inappropriate behaviors

Attempts or threats of self harm

Anger, abusiveness, aggression, and intimidation

Component 1 (Interpersonal):

Treatment Implications

Manage treatment interfering behaviors (as responsivity characteristics) to ensure program integrity

Careful staff selection, training, support & supervision

Team work & team coherence

Build working alliance, use motivational interviewing approaches

Boundary maintenance

Monitor offender activities

Component 2 (Criminogenic):

Treatment Implications

Treatment should focus on changing PCL-R Factor 2 (antisociality) characteristics to reduce violence

Use dynamic risk assessment tools to assess criminogenic needs

Use CBT/skills training to address thoughts, feelings and behaviors linked to violence/sexual violence

Some illustrative data from the

Clearwater and ABC Programs

VRS-SO Assessed Treatment Change and Sexual and Violent Recidivism in a High Risk Treated Sexual Offense Sample

(Olver & Wong, 2009)

156 treated men with sexual offense history attended Clearwater Program

High intensity, CBT/RNR based program

VRS-SO used to assess risk and change in treatment

PCL-R used to assess psychopathy (M = 20.2, SD = 7.4)

Followed up a mean 10 years post-release

Outcome (sexual and violent recidivism) data obtained via CPIC

Relative contributions of the PCL-R and VRS-SO measured therapeutic change in predicting sexual and violent recidivism: Logistic regression

(Olver & Wong, 2009)

Relative contributions of the PCL-R and VRS-SO measured therapeutic change in predicting sexual and violent recidivism: Logistic regression

(Olver & Wong, 2009)

VRS Assessed Treatment Change and Violent Recidivism in a

High Risk, Psychopathic Sample

(Lewis, Olver, & Wong, 2013; Olver, Lewis, & Wong, 2013)

152 treated violent federally sentenced men attended the Aggressive Behaviour Control (ABC) Program

High intensity, CBT/RNR based risk reduction treatment

VRS used to assess risk and change in treatment

94% VRS score >50; mean score =61

(DSPD VRS mean score = 61 [Kirkpatrick et al., 2009])

64%, PCL-R >25

27% PCL-R > 30; sample mean PCL-R = 26

(DSPD mean 28.3 [Kirkpatrick et al., 2009])

Followed up mean 5 years in community

Outcome data (violent recidivism) obtained via CPIC

Any new violent conviction and any new community violent conviction

Relative contributions of the PCL-R and VRS measured therapeutic change in predicting violent recidivism: Cox regression survival analysis

Relative contributions of the PCL-R and VRS measured therapeutic change in predicting violent recidivism: Cox regression survival analysis

Violent Recidivism as a Function of Treatment Change and Psychopathy

Olver, Lewis, & Wong (2013)

Data from CSC Ontario Region

Some General Conclusions

No evidence that appropriate correctional treatment makes psychopathic clients worse.

Risk reduction assessed during treatment linked to reductions in sexual and violent recidivism.

Risk reductions were evident among clients with significant psychopathic traits.

Overview

• Economic crime: a brief taxonomy
• Financial crime where goal is centered around monetary gain
• Does not typically involve violence but does involve manipulation
• We are victims of attempted fraud everyday

White collar crime

• Psychopathy in the corporate world

Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs (OMGs)

• The "big four"
• OMG and Crime

RNR implications of economic crime and OMG membership

Economic crime: A very brief taxonomy

• Crimes against poverty
• Theft under 5,000 vs. Over 5,000
• Stealing bike, hockey cards, car, etc.
• Possession of property obtained by crime
• Owning something that was obtained illegally
• Guilty by association
• Auto theft... Canadians cars showing up in Ghana and Dubai
• Break and enter (B&E) (can be violent if involves indictable offences)
• Opportunistic other offenses like sexual assault

Fraud

• Fraud, identity and identity fraud, forgery
• Phishing ect.

Offenses relating to currency

• E.g., counterfeiting

Possessing and trafficking of illegal good or services

• E.g., drugs weapons, humas
• Sex trafficking, black market, etc.
• Outlaw motor gangs very involved with this!
• Procuring possession for the purpose of distribution

The "Babe Ruth" of white collar crime

Ponzi Scheme

• Pay oldest investors with money from new investors
• But perhaps stolen from Brooklyn bookkeeper William Miller
• Investors reportedly lost 20 million in 1920 dollars ( 225 million in 2011)
• Died in poverty

Take investments from people you cannot possibly capitalize on

• Pocket the money and tell them that you will invest it
• Get other investors and pay back the original investors with new investors cash
• Pocket more and more money, get more and more investors, not actually investing the money

More Modern "Monsters"!?

Bernie Madoff (2009)

• Prominent figure
• Former chair of Nasdaq stock exchange
• Did this close to 30 years, embezzled more than 30 million dollars
• Stock market whisperer! Viewed as financial mogul

Ponzi Scheme

• Attracted investors with high returns paid initially by subsequent investors
• One of the largest frauds in US history
• Worth an estimated 800 million of stolen cash

Is Bernie a psychopathy

• PCL-R is just one measure of psychopathy
• Some people that score 29 are scarier than those who score in the high 30's
• Bernie has a lot of the factor one characteristics with much antisocial behaviour. However, he is not impulsive and does not lack long-term goals!
• Called white collar psychopathy: has interpersonal features (grandiose, deceitful, and manipulative

Ragatz, Fremouw, & Baker (2012)

• White-collar had lower score on lifestyle criminality but scored higher on some measures of psychopathology and psychopathic traits compared with non-white-collar offenders

Less empirical research on "white collar psychopaths)

According to Babiak and Hare, white-collar psychopaths are not apt to become serial rapists or murderers. Rather, they are prone to being "sub criminal" psychopaths; smooth-talking, energetic individuals who easily charm their way into jobs and promotions, but who are also exceedingly manipulative, narcissistic and ruthless. The purpose of the B-Scan to address this.

B-scan 360

• Uses ratings made by others to measure psychopathic traits in the workplace
• Preliminary research supports a four-factor model consistent with the PCL-R four factor model
• Antisocial: other forms antisocial

B-scan Self

• Self report measure of corporate psychopathy
• Replicated four factor model
• Facets consistent with other measures of self-reported psychopathy (SRP-III) and were positively correlated with the dark triad and negatively correlated with the FFM agreeableness and conscientiousness
• Know the dark triad components
• Negatively correlated with conscientiousness

Ellsworth Fersch's observation of Jeffrey Skilling (Fersch, 2006)

• Fersch commented on Jeffrey Skilling himself
• Skilling pleaded guilty
• Possessed the traits of a corporate psychopaths: lacking guilt and remorse, superficial and glib, manipulative, ruined thousand of lives, told lie after lie
• Untenable financial security packages put together, people investing enormous amounts of money, they manipulated stock results
• Selling off stocks that people invested in before hand, people held onto them when the market tanked, skilling got out while others held on
• Different than Ponzi Scheme: take money and invest it, but in risky complex package that are doomed for failure. When things are about to go south, they take them all out, and manipulate the stock to make it good

The "Smartest guy in the room" !?

Enron (2001)

• Institutionalized fraud
• Projected profit lines on future imaginary investments
• Executive and traders funneling millions to themselves while company investments tanked.....
• Lied to the world at large and their staff
• Employees left pensionless

Kenneth Lay

• 45 years for securities and wire fraud
• But died of a heart attack before he could start serving this sentence

Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs

Motorcycle Clubs

• One-percent motorcycle club (1% MCs)
• Deviant biker group not fitting into any setting, most menacing and trouble 1%
• Human trafficking, weapons trafficking, extreme acts of violence usually towards other gang member, sometimes public victims in rivalries
• Label invented, but not longer used, by Hell's Angels
• Deviant biker group that do not fit in any settings
• Engage in criminal, deviant, or unconventional behaviour
• A.k.a outlaw motorcycle gang or OMGs

The "big four" 1%ers

• The hell's angels (HA)
• The outlaws
• Bandidos
• The pagan

All have unique patches

A bit of History...... Hell's Angels

• Founded March 1948, Bishop family, war immigrants in Fontana, California over 70 years ago
• Amalgamation of other MC members, names comes from US WWII flying squadron
• Primarily ride Harley Davidson Motorcycles aka "HA", "Red and White", "81"
• Insignia is " death's head" from past president of SF chapter
• Patches akin to military medals after doing criminals things
• 256 chapters (some estimates > 400): 65 in US and 191 in 27 other countries. Largest and most organized out of all groups do memorize these details

A big of History... Pagans

• Founded by Lou Dobkin 1959, Prince George County Maryland (Northeastern USA)
• Blue denim jackets; patch Norse fire giant Surtur sitting on the sun wielding a sword
• Active in 13 US states; generally located in North East
• Most secretive and does not list chapters; no chapters outside US
• Also have ties with Italian Mafia. White supremacists, and Aryan Brotherhood
• Rivals to HA: losing ground historically
• Grew progressively violent in 60s and 70s
• Most active in drug trafficking but also a miscellany of violent instrumental crimes

A bit of history.... The outlaws

• Formed in McCook, Illinois (Suburb Chicago) 1935; incorporated as American Outlaw Association (AOA)
• Activites limited in WWII
• Around for almost 90 years
• 1950s logo- small skull with crossed pistons; black western style t-shirt and black leather pants
• Main rivals are HA: ADIOS ("Angels Die in Outlaw States)
• 80 chapters in 20 states and 116 chapters in 14 countries
• Many are rival with hells angels

A bit of History.... The Bandidos

• Formed 1966 by Don Chambers, Houston Texas
• Named after Mexican Bandits who lived by own rules; recruited members from biker bars and southern Texas cities
• 70s over 100 member including may Vietnam war vets
• Motto " We are the people your parents warned you about"
• 5000 members 210 chapters 22 countries
• Mostly Caucasian and Hispanic; African American not admitted
• 72 chapters in 14 US states and 81 chapters in 12 countries
• Main rivals HA
• 1994-2001
• Mutual homicides a recurring phenomenon around the globe
• Rock machine Montreal merged with Bandidos in 2000; prompted by turf war against HA

Some Notes

• Primarily white, male, ride American "iron", inclusion and exclusion criteria for membership
• Wear at least three-piece patches, fierce loyalty to the club, presumed to engage in criminal exploits, 1%ers Radical Clubs
• Concern with power and identity as modern outlaws and social outcast. Maintain an image of being dangerous, unpredictable, and reckless. Brotherhood, ' joys of motorcycling, and respect for mechanical skills core value.
• Well equipped and high tech; have own IT and computer experts. Well financed, some quite wealthy, wield considerable influence. Often operate as gangs oriented toward criminal profit. Staff on dark web doing cryptocurrency. People on the top are smart, sophisticated, and well controlled

Biker Criminality

Content Analysis Research

• Researchers gone through different criminal activities, did content analysis and organized into four categories

Spontaneous Expressive acts

• Violent crimes directed at rivals (e.g., bar fights)
• Spurred on by drugs and alcohol; can affect bystander

Planned aggressive acts

• Directed at rival groups, planned by established chapters (e.g., clubhouse bombings, drive byes shootings, targeted murders)
• Often, civilian victims are the unintentional targets

Short-term instrumental acts

• Thefts and other economic crimes of opportunity (e.g., motor cycle thefts)

Ongoing instrumental enterprises

• Long term financial criminal dealings (e.g., drug production/distribution, firearms trafficking, prostitution, stolen luxury car ring)

Frequencies of crime?

• Barker and Human (2009)
• Content analysis of 631 newspaper articles on the "big 4" from 1980-2005
• Outlaws n = 347
• HA n = 209
• Bandidos n = 50
• Pagans n = 25
• Fewer Bandidos and Pagans

Type of criminal Activity by OMG Quebec Biker War (1994-2001)

• Between Hell's Angels and Rock Machine (patched over to or joined Bandidos)
• Very public and violent
• Public mayhem (open shootings in street, cars getting blown up, people getting shot)
• Happening in downtown Montreal
• Worst organized crime war in history
• 160 murders including 11 year old boy (bar bomb)
• 175 attempted murders
• 200 wounded
• Disappearance of 15 bikers
• Boucher was the main orchestrator

Bandidos Shedden, Ontario Massacre

• Bandidos chapter in Toronto until Shedden massacre (2006) led to deaths
• Eight men murdered ( six full patch members of Bandidos), found in four vehicles in farmer's field. Found dead in farmers fields. Mole in the group.
• Killed by other Bandidos assassination style
• One person infiltrated group and planned clubhouse meeting, then were ambushed by other Bandidos. Assassination style, left in vehicles. Farmers saw bunch of random vehicles with dead bikers

Omg Affiliation and Crime Klement (2016)

• Danish study of 297 outlaw bikers and 181,931 controls from police intelligence database (PID)
• Compared to ordinary Danish citizens bikers had 5-10x
• Overall convictions
• Property crimes
• Violent crimes
• Drug crimes
• Weapons offenses
• Traffic crimes
• Days sentence prison time (30X)
• After controlling birth year and age of criminal onset (i.e., compared to other offenders)....... Few difference between bikers and general offenders prior to the PID
• Higher rates of overall convictions and days prison time following detection by police for bikers

OMG Involvement and intimate Partner violence

• Not uncommonly problems with violence toward women
• Some members have predisposing characteristics that place them at risk
• Women punished with sexual, physical or emotional abuse if they don't follow expectations
• Violence and abuse as a deterrent and control mechanism; especially if behaving in a way that tarnishes reputation or status of men

Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Implications

Assessment

• There are few or no specialised for different categories of economic crime
• LSI variant (e.g., LSI-R or LS/CMI) tapping Central Eight will suffice ( will work the best)
• PCL-R useful adjunct

Never use the PCL-R as the main assessment tool

• OMG affiliated offenders specifically
• Same as above
• Specialised violence risk tool (e.g., VRS, VRAG, HCR-20 – to be discussed in detail during violent offenders section; chapter 8).

Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Implications

Central Eight domains particularly salient for OMGs?

• All have relevance
• Special salience?
• Antisocial peer
• Substance abuse
• Antisocial personality pattern
• Antisocial attitudes
• Entrenched gang member = high risk, high need, high responsivity

Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Implications

Treatment/Intervention Considerations

• Leaving the gang; safety and feasibility considerations
• Transnational organizations
• Structured and complex: RNR on an organizational level
• Legitimate employment
• Vocational and/or educational upgrading
• Development of new noncriminal supports
• Targeting violence, addictions, antisocial attitudes through formal programming

Defining Substance Use Disorder (SUD)

Abuse

• Generally high volume/frequency of consumption with associated negative personal, social occupational, legal or other consequences

Dependence (tolerance, withdrawal, cravings)

• A substance use syndrome characterized by tolerance and withdrawal symptoms an "addiction" so to speak) and associated lifestyle and behavioural features (e.g., time obtaining substance)
• An SUD involves elements of both for any licit and illicit psychoactive substance

Frequently Abused Substances linked to crime

• Cocaine and its variant (e.g., crack)
• Opioids (e.g., heroin, morphine)
• Amphetamines (e.g., crystal meth)
• Non-prescription medication (e.g., oxycontin, Ritalin)
• Hallucinogens (e.g., ecstasy, psilocybin)
• Cannabis products
• Other synthesised compounds (e.g., Fentanyl)
• Inhalants (e.g., glue, gas, hairspray)
• Alcohol
• Can be natural or synthetic and have sedative or stimulant properties

Substance Abuse as a predictor of Recidivism results of meta-analysis

• One of the central eight
• Moderate effect size for prediction of general recidivism
• Small effect for violent recidivism
• Very small effect for sexual recidivism
• Substance abuse is criminogenic and has relevance
• Most risk assessment tools have item content pertaining to substance abuse

Substance use crime-link: why substance abuse is criminogenic

SUB in correctional populations

• Very high base rate of SUD
• Federal correctional populations (CSC)
• Approximately 70% past problem
• 51% current problem
• 75% of female inmates past or current injection drug users
• 70% of offender release suspensions involve drugs or alcohol (dirty urine screen)
• Provincial correctional populations

Common Mechanism and examples

1. Substance use (intoxication or withdrawal) as a direct cause of crime

• E.g., alcohol fueled assaults or murders
• E.g., impaired driving, accidents, and fatalities
• E.g., seeming bizarre, violent or reckless behaviour associated with heavy use of illicit drugs (E.g., stimulants) and/or mixing of substance
• E.g., crimes of criminal negligence

1. Crime committed (often under the influence of substances) motivated by obtaining substances

• E.g., robbery to obtain quick money for crack
• E.g., property crimes (B&Es) for goods to sell to purchase crystal meth

1. Criminal transactions are committed in the production, possession, and distribution of illicit substances

• E.g., trafficking in crystal meth, fentanyl, cocaine
• E.g., adulterating substance with lethal compounds

1. Substance use as part of an antisocial lifestyle

• Exposure to criminal drug subculture, exposure to antisocial peers, high risk situation linked to crime
• E.g., prostitution

1. Substance used to facilitate commission of offence

• E.g., lacing a drink with rohypnol to commit sexual assault

Substance abuse in corrections

Profile of substance using populations in CSC

Highest risk individuals

• Often polysubstance abusers
• Early exposure
• Early onset of use
• Serious medical concerns
• E.g., cirrhosis, kidney disease, bleeding ulcers, HIV, brain injury/illness
• Linked to commission of crimes via common pathways

Substance use in custody

• Contraband
• Brought in by staff, visitors or offender
• E.g., smuggled in, thrown over the fence, etc.
• Manufactured in custody
• Prison brew
• 2003: 8,732 litres seized
• Misuse of prescription medication muscling/selling of medication
• Muscling/selling of medication
• Stockpiling medication for use

Correctional Substance Management

Search and seizure approaches

• Urine screens
• 11% of offenders test positive
• Most frequent THC, Benzodiazepines, opiates, and cocaine
• Drug dogs
• Staff/visitor entry/exit screening searches
• Body cavity search with just cause
• Perimeter security measures (e.g., netting over exercise yards)
• Drug detection technologies (e.g., ion scanners, x-ray machines)

Correctional Substance Abuse Treatments Approaches

Some examples:

• National substance abuse program
• Methadone maintenance treatment
• Drug treatment courts

National substance Abuse Program (NSAP)

Some elements if NASP interventions

• Understanding the link between substance use and crime
• Problem-solving skills
• Coping skills training
• High risk identification skills
• Structured relapse prevention
• Goal-setting in treatment
• Motivational interviewing/enhancement techniques
• Stress management training

NSAP CSC 2009 Evaluation

• Large scale evaluation by 11 members of CSC's evaluation branch of all their core programs including NSAP, among other programs
• Participants who enrolled in a given program were compared against participants of the same demographic who did not enrol in a given program on a range of community and institutional outcomes
• It cost about 7 million to run all of NSAP in 2006-2007
• Decreases in returns to custody (RTC) equate to cost savings from reincarceration

Here's what they found for NSAP

• NSAP: High and Moderate intensity Program outcomes
• NSAP and AOSAP: Outcomes for Aboriginal Men
• NSAP maintenance outcomes statistics
• Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT)
• 11% of male and 16% of female correctional inmates reported pre-incarceration history of opioid injection
• MMT a form of opioid maintenance therapy (OMT)
• Reduce mortality, heroin use, HIV and HCV transmission
• MMT administered to offenders with history of opioid addiction
• Example of harm "reduction"
• Other examples of harm reduction
• Bleach to clean needles decrease spread of infectious disease
• Needle and syringe exchange (not available in CSC)

Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT)

• McSwain, Farrell-Macdonald, Cheverie, & Fischer (2013)
• Retrospective examination of CSC's MMT program
• Examined return to custody (RTC) outcome among 856 federal offenders with problematic opioid use

Three groups

• MMT-C: continue MMT treatment post release (n= 161)
• MMT-T: discontinued treatment post release (n= 481)
• MMT-N: non-MMT treated control group (n= 241)

Return to custody as a function of methadone maintenance condition

drug treatments Courts (DTCs)

• Provide judicially supervised treatment as an alternative to incarceration for individuals with a substance-use problem linked to their criminal activities
• Example of "therapeutic jurisprudence"
• The courtroom as a mechanism for rehabilitative and therapeutic progress
• Accused must choose between DTC and typical criminal system processing
• Ideally individual receives drug and alcohol treatment in tandem with regular appearances before the court to "check in"
• Intensive supervision and drug testing to monitor compliance
• Positive reinforcement for compliance; sanctions for non-compliance
• Intensive and demanding; often 2x week
• DTC team assembled that monitors the client's progress
• Treatment usually lasts a year
• RNR based: problem solving skills, motivational interviewing, goal setting, cognitive restructuring, coping skills training
• Must achieve a minimum period of abstinence (e.g., 3 months) and abide by community conditions (e.g., residence)
• If graduate, given lesser sentence for charges pled guilty to on admission

DTC Meta-analysis (Gutierrez & Bourgon, 2012)

• 96 studies that examined recidivism outcomes from DTCs
• Most (> 90%) US studies
• Only 25 studies met threshold of scientific acceptability
• 4-8% reduction in recidivism
• More RNR principles followed = greater decrease in recidivism
• Generally modest recidivism reduction with DTCs

Some conclusion on the Assessment and Treatment of Substance Problems Linked to Crime

• One of the central Eight risk factors
• Tends to be criminogenic for a range of problem behaviours
• Can be tied to a number of problems issues for the offender
• Usually ancillary services and core programs available in custody and the community on release
• Understanding the link between substance use and crime is key
• Also important to address factors that lead to drug/alcohol use in treatment
• Coping strategies and supports in place to avoid/prevent relapse
• NSAP, MMT, and DTCs all demonstrated links to reduction in recidivism
• Greater adherence to RNR = greater reductions
  

Definition of Juvenile Delinquency

• Juvenile Delinquency: a class of law defying behaviours that violate a criminal code perpetrated by individuals that have not yet reached adulthood
• Young person: at least 12-years of age and under 18 years old
• Contrasted with antisocial behaviour
• Most crimes are property crimes (88%)
• Theft, break & enter, shoplifting, possession of stolen goods, etc.

Youth Criminal Justice Act (2003)

• Current legislation in force calling for differential treatment of young people who violate the law
• Emphasis on protection of society and acceptance of responsibility
• Greater emphasis on legal rights of the youth
• Youth held accountable for criminal acts
• Disposition in youths is more lenient than sentencing with adults
• Least possible interference in freedom required for the protection of society

YCJA Includes some special provisions:

• Use of alternative measures
• Restorative justice
• Mediation
• Intensive rehabilitative custody and supervision (IRCS)

Intensive rehabilitative Custody and Supervision (IRCS, section 42 of the YCJA):

• Provision for youths committing particularly serious crime (e.g., murder aggravated sexual assault)
• Must have mental illness, psychological disorder, or emotional disturbance
• Youth willing to receive treatment services in YO system
• Program to address youth's needs within YO system must exist
• Combined custodial sentence and period of community supervision
• Money allocated for treatment services
• Psychologist designed to provide IRCS assessment/treatment services

Risk factors in the onset and development of Delinquency:

Social Risk Factors

• Poverty and social inequality
• Peer associations
• High crime, low SES neighbourhood

Familial Risk Factors

• Single-parent household
• Marital discord
• Abuse/neglect
• Familial stress
• Parental psychopathology

Developmental Risk Factors:

• Early misbehaviour
• Early onset of delinquency
• Low psychometric intelligence
• Disruptive behaviour disorder
• Group of behavioural disorders in which there are patterns of ongoing uncooperative, defiant and hostile behaviours towards authority figures that seriously impacts a child's daily functioning

Youth are not mini adults!

• Physical, emotional, and social development
• Neurodevelopmental factors
• Prominence of family/parental support vs. Marital
• Prominence of school vs. Work
• Different justice systems
• Different trajectories of offending

DSM-5 criteria:

1. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

• Inattention
• Hyperactivity
• Impulsivity

1. Oppositional Defiant Order
2. Conduct Disorder

• Aggression towards people/animals
• Destruction of property
• Deceitfulness and theft
• Serious violations of rules

Disruptive Behavioral Disorders and Risk for Future Criminality

Problem:

• DSM-5 criteria for Conduct Disorder (CD) is too broad to be of much value
• Same problem as with antisocial personality disorder (ASPD/APD) in prison inmate populations

Risk for Future Criminality

• Uncomplicated ADHD has a tenuous link to future criminality
• CD consistently found to be a strong predictor of future antisocial behaviour (e.g., 50% to 70% of CD youths rearrested as adults)
• Co-occurrence of ADHD and CD very problematic
• Fledgling psychopathy (Lynam, 1997)
• More likely to receive ASPD/APD diagnosis in adulthood
• More frequent, serve, and varied pattern of criminal behaviour

CD Subtypes

Severity Specifier

• Mid, moderate, severe
• Callous-unemotional (CU) traits (e.g., Frick et al.,2014)
• Early versions of the DSM favoured observable behaviours (psychopathy CU traits, excluded from CD, APSD-referenced as "associated features)
• CU traits now included in DSM-5
• With limited prosocial emotions

Psychopathy vs. CU traits

Juvenile Psychopathy

Facets

• Affective
• Interpersonal
• Behavioural
• Antisocial

Tools

• PCL-YV

CU traits

Affective

• Callous
• Lack of remorse/guilt
• Unconcerned about performance
• Unemotionality

Tools

• E.g., APSD, ICUT

Stability of Juvenile Offending: Youth Criminal Trajectories

Youth Criminal Trajectories

Stability of Criminal behaviour

• Situational and temporary vs. Stable and persistent
• Participation in delinquency almost a "normal" part of teen life

Moffitt (1993) proposed two subtypes of young offender:

• Life-course persistent (LCP)
• Adolescence-limited (AL)

Youth Criminal Trajectories

Life-course Persistent (LCP) Offenders

• " across the life course, these individuals exhibit changing manifestations of antisocial behavior: biting and hitting at age 4, shoplifting and truancy at age 10, selling drugs and stealing cars at age 16, robbery and rape at age 22 and fraud and child abuse at age 30" ( Moffitt,1993, p.679)
• Early onset of offending
• Pattern of more frequent, varied, and diverse offending
• Tends to be life-long

Adolescence Limited (AL) offenders:

• Offending generally limited to teenage years
• Can abandon criminal activities when prosocial options become available
• Offenses often to show autonomy from adult control

Moving beyond a 2 sub-type model?

Day et at. (2012)

7 different trajectories identified with respect to:

1. Age of onset
2. Number of offenses
3. Length of criminal career

Risk Assessment with Justice Impacted Youth

Why do risk assessment with justice involved youth?

• Promote public safety
• Assist in judicial sentencing decisions
• Identify need for services
• Decisions within custodial settings

How do we do risk assessment with Justice involved youth?

• Some similar considerations as with adults, some important differences e.g., YCJA
• Use of standardized forensic assessment measures
• Youth adaptations of adult measures

Summary of Adult and Youth Adapted Risk Measures

Youth level of service/case management inventory (YLS/CMI)( Hoge & Andrews, 2003)

Risk/Need Assessment Tool

• 42 items risk-need measure derived from LSI
• Possible scores from 0 to 42: low, medium, high, very high
• 8 criminogenic areas:

1. Offense history
2. Peer relations
3. Personality/behaviour
4. Attitudes
5. Family circumstances/parenting
6. Education
7. Leisure/recreation

Structured Assessment of Violence Risk for youths (SAVRY)(Borum, Forth & Bartel, 2002)

• 24 items clinician rated measure designed to appraise youth risk for violence
• Historical (10)
• Individual/clinical (8)
• Social/contextual (6)
• Protective factors (6)
• Not a risk scale
• Structured professional judgement (SPJ) tool

Psychopathy checklist: Youth Version

(PCL:YV)(Forth, Kosson, & Hare, 2003)

• Derived from Hare's (1991, 2003) adult measures
• 20 items rated on 0,1,2-point scale
• Possible scores range from 0-40

Predicts Recidivism:

• General recidivism (e.g., Gretton et at., 2001)
• Violent Recidivism (e.g., Brandt et al., 1997; Forth et al., 1990; Catchpole & Gretton, 2003)
• And long-term offending (e.g., Gretton et al, 2004)

Facets of the PCL: YV (Forth, Kosson, & Hare, 2003)

Issues in Assessing Juvenile Psychopathy (Edens & Vincent, 2008; Olver & Stockdale, 2010)

• Are some of the traits "normative'?
• Concerns over labeling
• Do not use a standalone took
• Using the PCL:YV to inform service delivery
• High PCL: YV scores as responsivity issues
• Awareness of gender, cultural, and developmental issues
• Females? Ethnic minorities? Early vs. Late adolescence?

Long-term follow-up of the PCL: YV

(Stockdale, Olver, & Wong, 2010)

PCL: YV rated archivally and predictive accuracy for recidivism examined:

• 161 male (n=88) and female (n= 73) young offenders
• 63% Indigenous Youth
• Referral to community clinic for assessment and/or treatment
• Followed up 7 years
• Prediction of youth and adult recidivism examined as a function of gender, age, and ethnicity

Recidivism:

• Any new offense: 71%
• Any violence: 45%

Average PCL:YV score:

• Males = 22
• Females = 21
• No significant difference

Long-term follow-up of the PCL: YV

(Stockdale, Olver, & Wong, 2010)

• PCL:YV predicted general and violent recidivism- including female and indigenous youth, as well as youth of varying age groups
• Better at predicting youths versus long-term adult recidivism
• Stability of juvenile psychopathy? Malleability of risk?

The violence risk scale-youth version (VRS-YV)

• Designed to integrate the assessment and treatment of violent youth
• Assess risk for future violence
• Identify targets for violence reduction treatment
• Assess readiness to engage treatment
• Evaluate reductions in risk from treatment

Examination of the VRS-YV

• Structure of the VRS-YV
• 4 Stable, 19 dynamic items
• 0-3 rating scale
• Modified stages of change model used to identify change on treatment targets
• VRS-YV rated archivally on a sample of 147 youth charged or convicted for violent offenses, followed 7 years in the community

VRS-YV (Total) Prediction of Specific Categories of Recidivism Outcome

VRS-YV Dynamic Risk Profile

Violent recidivism rates at VRS-YV risk levels

Kaplan-Meier Survival Curves:

General recidivism rates at VRS-YV risk levels

Conclusions regarding the VRS-YV

• Showed excellent discrimination of youth violent recidivists from no recidivists
• Predicted a range of recidivism criteria, including youth and adult offenses
• Ongoing evaluation needed to evaluate its sensitivity to assess change

Youth Risk Assessment Meta-analysis

• K= 49 studies across 44 independent samples
• N= 8,746
• 83% males, 17% female
• 59% white, 16% Aboriginal, 12% African American, 15% other

Recidivism - 29 month follow-up (SD = 24)

• 50% general
• 46% nonviolent
• 28% violent
• 13% sexual

Gender and Ethnicity within Study Comparisons on Youth Adaptations of the LSI for General and Violent Recidivism

(Olver et al., 2009)

Conclusions from Meta-analysis

• Each instrument significantly predicted general and violent recidivism to comparable degrees
• No clear winner, even though within study comparisons
• Probably not much to be gained in predictive accuracy; usage decisions may depend on other intended uses
• E.g., identify treatment targets, assist in community supervision, identify responsivity issues, etc.
• Youth adaptations of the LSI predicted for male and female youths, aboriginal and non-aboriginal youths

Youth correctional Treatment

Protective Factors

• Protective factors: factors associated with an amelioration of risk for criminal behaviour and/or recidivism

Hoge, Andrews, & Leshied (1996)

• Positive peer relations
• Good school achievement
• Positive response to authority
• Effective use of leisure time
• The above factors found to be inversely related to recidivism and linked to compliance with disposition (e.g., probation order)

Linking Risk Assessment to Treatment Services

• Assessing youth as low, medium, or high may be helpful, but is insufficient in and of itself
• Risk is dynamic (i.e., it can change)
• High risk calls out for high intensity services
• Goal is violence prevention versus mere prediction

Effective Interventions

• Follow principles of risk, need & responsivity
• Tend to be cognitive-behavioural in nature
• Emphasis on changing antisocial behaviour through changing the way an individual thinks
• E.g., changing criminally oriented thoughts, promoting convectional values (e.g., for school, work) etc.

Evidence Supported Interventions

Stop Now and Plan (SNAP) program (Koegl et al. 2007)

• Cognitive-behavioural (CB), community-based program for boys and girls, 6-12 years with CD symptoms
• Teaches children emotional regulation, self-control and problem solving, parents also learn SNAP skills and CB parenting techiques
• Evidence of effectiveness in CDN context
• Trials in remote Cree communities in Quebec
• Engagement, attendance, logistical challenges, & stigma
• Decreased aggression & delinquency (Koegl et al., 2007)

Youth Inclusion Programs - 11-14 years

• Neighborhood-based programs
• Create safe place for youth, activities, teach skills
• Fewer arrest, school expulsions (Morgan et al., 2003)

Multisystemic Therapy (MST) - 15-17 years

• Family, community-based treatment model
• Improve parental discipline, decrease association with negative peers, improve school performance, develop positive support network
• Reductions in long-term rate of arrest between 25-70% (MST: Multisystemic Therapy, 2010)

Parent Training Approaches

• Outline house rules
• Enforce contingency consequences
• Monitoring and supervision
• Use problem solving strategies

Problems:

• Relies on parents to implement the treatment
• High attrition

Most likely to be effective when:

• Families work with the therapist/agency
• Families are targeted early

Boot Camps (a.k.a "Shock Incarceration")

• Strict military style of program characterized by grueling exercise, physical labor, punishment for infractions
• Goals are to foster greater personal responsibility, improved attitudes toward authority, and better self-respect
• Strong lay public and media appeal

No demonstrable reductions in recidivism in comparison to no-treatment control

Ineffective Intervention

Problem with boot camps

• Generally under funded
• Poorly implemented
• Do not usually address criminogenic needs
• High attrition (50%)
• Can be abusive, punitive, anti-therapeutic

Youth Correctional Treatment

Findings from Meta-analyses

Youth Correctional Treatment Meta-analyses

Lipsey (1992)

• Meta analysis of approximately 400 young offender treatment outcome studies
• Effect? Any treatment = .10; Behavioural/skills-based= .20

Dowden & Andrews (2000)

• Meta analysis of 35 treatment outcome studies for violence (adult and youth)
• Largest effects (i.e., reduction in recidivism observed in from programs adhering to risk, need, and responsivity).

Introduction to Violent Offending

• Violent Offending:
• “Actual, attempted, or threatened harm to a person or persons” (Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997).
• Extends to sexual and domestically violent offenses
• This lecture series will focus primarily on nonsexually motivated violence

Introduction to Violent Offending

A Brief Taxonomy

Homicide

• Murder, attempted murder, manslaughter

Assault

• Common assault, aggravated assault, assault causing bodily harm, assault with a weapon, etc.
• Spousal assault, sexual assault etc.

Threats

• Uttering threats, criminal harassment

Robbery

• Armed robbery, robbery, attempted robbery, robbery with violence
• Extortion, kidnapping, forcible confinement, arson (if intended to kill or injure)

Introduction to Violent Offending

Murder

• Killing someone when intended to cause death, or meant to cause bodily harm that would likely result in death
• Is fortunately quite rare - about 2 per 100,000 persons

Examples

• First degree murder – CCC Sec 231 (1)
• Life sentence, parole eligibility after minimum 25 yrs
• Second degree murder – CCC Sec 231 (2) (20-life)
• Life sentence, parole eligibility after minimum 10+ yrs
• Manslaughter – CCC Sec 236
• Sentence minimum 5 yrs only when committed with firearm, otherwise, no minimums

Categories of Criminal Code Offenses:

• Rate per 100,000 Canadians
• Rate of Robbery and Serious Assault per 100,000 Canadians
• 2015 Homicide Rate by Province and Territory
• Rate of Attempted Murder and Homicide per 100,000 Canadians

Theoretical Perspectives on Violence

Overview

• Biological
• Psychodynamic
• Evolutionary
• Social Learning/Cognitive
• Psychopathological
• Other

Genetics

Neuroanatomy/Physiology

• Prefrontal dysfunction

Neurochemistry

• Androgens, 5-HT

Psychophysiology

• Low HR

Drive theories

Freud/Psychodynamic

• Hydraulic model->pressure would build and build if there was no routine for the aggression
• Weak ego/superego
• Control Theories
• Aggressive impulses comes from the ID

Evolutionary

• Solution to adaptive problems
• Parental investment into offspring
• Sexual selection

Social Learning/Cognitive Models

• Cues, responses, rewards
• Media violence
• Intergeneration transmission (family members use violent behavior)
• Hostile attribution bias

Psychopathological

• Psychological/biological dysfunction
• Psychotic symptomatology

Integrated Approaches

Biosocial Model of Violence (Raine, 2002)

• Biological risk and social risks from enviornment and genetics
• Bio proective factors (good general health, good relationship)
• Soc. Protective factors ( good living situations)

Two-Path Model of Criminal Violence

• Neurodevelopment insults (brain trauma, low IQ)
• Psychopathy (physical abuse, family violence, parental alcholism)
• Antisocial parents ( childhood aggression)
• All leads to crimial violence

A General Personality and Social Psychological Perspective on Criminal Conduct (Andrews & Bonta, 1998-2010)

• Apply more to criminal behavioir
• Combination of social and biological factors
• Family of origin, neighborhood, gender, age and ethnicity are all factors towards crime

Violence Risk Assessment

• Should include use of structured risk assessment measures rate via file and interview
• A risk assessment tool is not the same thing as an assessment
• Should be comprehensive, multiple methods, multiple domains of functioning, multiple information sources, critical appraisal of information, and include assessment of responsivity considerations

Revisiting the Generational Framework

First generation

• Unstructured clinical judgment
• Over Predicting violence

Second generation

• Static empirical actuarial measures

Third generation

• Dynamic measures: Structured professional judgment (non-numeric) and mechanical tools (numeric) and includes dynamic natural tools

Fourth generation

• Dynamic tools with explicit linkage of assessment and intervention, evaluation of change, case follow through from intake to case closure

Violence Risk Assessment Tools

Second Generation

• Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) and the VRAG-Revised (VRAG-R)
• Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG)
• SIR

Third Generation

• Historical Clinical Risk-20 Version 2 (HCR-20 V2)
• LSI-R

Fourth Generation

• HCR-20 V3
• Violence Risk Scale (VRS)
• LS/CMI

Where does the PCL-R stand?

• It defies classification within Bonta’s (1996) generational framework
• Parts of it are static, others possibly dynamic, ultimately designed to measure a personality construct associated with antisocial behavior
• Mechanical tool

VRAG (Harris, Rice & Quinsey, 1993)

• Developed at Mental Health Centre Penetanguishine (yep, the home of that therapeutic community program for psychopathy…)
• 12 items differentially weighted based on how well each predicts violent recidivism
• Possible scores range from -26 to +38 and are organized into 9 “bins”
• 618 forensic patients from Penetang
• Followed up an average 6.7 years post release
• 31% violent recidivism
• Rated on long list of variables
• Variables that best discriminated violent recidivists from non-recidivists were included in the final instrument
• Stronger predicting items received heavier weights
• Final tool r = .44 with violent recidivism

VRAG has received some tough press…

• Critiques…
• Sample unrepresentative
• Item weights unrepresentative
• Algorithm is ungeneralizable
• Risk bins are unreplicable
• PCL-R explains all the risk variance: it is a scale within a scale
• Cannot track and measure change

SORAG (Quinsey, Rice, Harris, & Cormier, 1998)

• 14-item tool developed from the same tradition as VRAG but designed to assess risk for general violence among sex offenders
• Better predictor of general violence (AUCs = .70s) than sexual recidivism (AUCs = low .60s)
• Similar item content, but also an item reflecting deviant sexual arousal
• Possible scores range from -27 to +51 arranged into 9 bins
• As with the VRAG, PCL-R is the most heavily weighted item and tends to contain the most predictive power…

VRAG-R (Rice, Harris, & Lang, 2013)

• It is a streamlined recalibrated revision intended to replace the VRAG and SORAG
• It doesn’t have the PCL-R as an item anymore
• Antisocial facet (facet 4) of the PCL-R has been substituted instead
• Bins are not as extreme as observed with predecessors
• Still 12 items, still 9 bins…
• Score range -36 to +46
• Quinsey and colleagues working on a VRAG-R renorming project

VRAG-R (Rice, Harris, & Lang, 2013)

• Construction and validation sample of 1,261 forensic patients combined across several Penetang samples
• 50% rate of violent recidivism over a mean 21-year follow-up
• AUC = .75 for VRAG-R prediction of violent recidivism

VRAG-R Calibration: Actual Rates of Violent Recidivism for the 9-Bins and Estimated rates of Violent Recidivism Associated with Individual Scores

Historical Clinical Risk-20 (HCR-20)

• Developed at Simon Fraser University (SFU) by Chris Webster, one of his graduate students (Kevin Douglas) and two colleagues (Stephen Hart and Derek Eaves) in 1995
• Intended for use with mentally ill forensic patients to forecast violence risk
• Version 3 released in 2011

HCR-20 (continued)

• Webster had a number of efforts leading up to this.

HCR-20: Three components:

Historical = Past (10 items)

• E.g., prior violence, employment problems, diagnosis of psychopathy, substance issues

Clinical = Present (5 items)

• E.g., Negative attitudes, active symptoms of psychosis, treatment noncompliance

Risk = Future (5 items)

• E.g., Unrealistic plans, exposure to destabilizers, stress

HCR-20 (continued)

• An SPJ tool
• Rate each item, but do not sum them; examine the pattern or configuration of items to inform a risk rating
• Items rated on a 3-point scale (not present 0, possibly present 1, present 2)
• If scored actuarially, possible scores range from 0 to 40
• HCR-20 V2 (Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart 1997)
• Essentially a third generation tool
• Intended to link assessment and treatment and to inform case conceptualization

HCR-20 (continued)

• HCR-20 V2
• Translated into over 20 languages and used internationally
• Use extends to all offender populations, with and without mental illness
• Good predictive accuracy, and strong interrater reliability
• Dozens of replications

HCR-20 (continued)

• Douglas, Ogloff, Nicholls, and Grant (1999)
• Inaugural HCR-20 prediction study
• 193 civilly committed patients coded on HCR-20, followed up an average 1.7 years in the community
• HCR-20 moderate to high predictive accuracy for a range of violent outcomes post release (AUC values below)

HCR-20 (continued)

• HCR-20 V3 (Douglas, Hart, Webster, & Belfrage, 2011)
• Purely non-numerical SPJ tool
• Same basic structure (H-C-R) and item content of V2, with some alterations
• Discriminates between the “Presence” of an item and its risk “Relevance” (e.g., having a history of employment instability (i.e., present), but this has no direct link to violence (i.e., low relevance))
• Likely makes this a fourth generation tool

Violence Risk Scale (VRS)

• Developed in Saskatoon SK at the RPC by two psychologists, Stephen Wong and Audrey Gordon in 1998
• Sought to develop a treatment friendly tool that could inform treatment planning and detect and measure change

VRS (continued)

• Violence Risk Scale (VRS; Wong & Gordon, 2000)
• 6 static items
• Essentially assess severity and density of violence history
• 20 dynamic items
• Treatment targets
• Potential to change
• Items are related to violent recidivism
• Item content overlap with central eight or are violence specific

VRS (continued)

• Each item is scored on a 4-point ordinal scale (0,1,2,3)
• The higher the score, the stronger the link to violence
• Dynamic items with 2 or 3 ratings are considered to be criminogenic needs and prioritized for services
• Items with 0 or 1 ratings are low risk areas or possibly strengths

VRS (continued)

• Change evaluated through the transtheoretical model of change (i.e., stages of change)

Stages of Change (SOC)

• Precontemplation
• Contemplation
• Preparation
• Action
• Maintenance

VRS (continued)

• SoC rated at pretreatment on 2 or 3-rated items, and then rerated at posttreatment
• Progression from one stage to the next receives a 0.5 point deduction per item

VRS (continued)

• A dynamic empirical actuarial tool ( i.e., dynamic items, summed to yield risk scores, linked to recidivism percentages)
• Possible scores range from 0-78
• The capacity of the VRS to inform treatment, evaluate changes in risk, and to guide case conceptualization and case management make it a fourth generation tool (Campbell, French, & Gendreau, 2009)

VRS: Early Validation Work

Wong and Gordon (2006)

• VRS rated archivally on heterogeneous sample of 918 violent federal offenders from CSC Prairie region
• Followed up 4.4 years, 31.3% new violent conviction
• Average score was 41 (out of a max 78) with a standard deviation of 16
• AUCs = .71 to .75 for dynamic and total scores (i.e., high predictive accuracy for violent recidivism)

Violent and Non-Violent Reconviction at VRS Risk Level

VRS Change Scores and Violent Recidivism (Lewis, Olver & Wong, 2013)

• 154 male federal offenders received violence risk reduction treatment from the Aggressive Behavior Control (ABC) Program at the RPC
• 6-month program based on CBT and RNR.
• Sample... High risk and personality disordered
• 94% VRS score >50 (mean score = 61; 1.5 SDs above mean)
• 64%, PCL-R >25
• 27% PCL-R > 30; sample mean PCL-R = 26
• Followed up 5 yrs in community
• Outcome variables: violent and nonviolent recidivism
• VRS change score correlated -.26 with violent recidivism

Violent and Nonviolent Recidivism Rates as a function of Levels of Therapeutic Change (VRS)(Lewis et al., 2013)

Summary of VRS Prediction Studies(Olver & Wong, 2017)

Which Instrument Performs the Best?

• Yang, Wong, and Coid (2010)
• Multilevel modelling meta analysis
• Control for sample and setting characteristics along with other moderators
• 28 studies that examined 2 or more risk instruments over a 10-year catchment period (1999-2008) covering 9 tools

Predictive Accuracy of Violence Risk Tools (Yang, Wong, & Coid, 2010)

Which Instrument Performs the Best?

• Yang, Wong, and Coid (2010)
• The instruments all pretty well predict violent recidivism the same (and do a good job of it) and have overlapping but slightly different purposes
• All can assess baseline risk for violence
• Dynamic tools can identify targets for intervention
• Certain dynamic tools can track and measure change

Violence Reduction Treatment

Dowden and Andrews (2000)

• Meta-analysis of 35 violent offender treatment outcome studies.

General results:

• Behavioral/social learning treatment programs were associated with substantially larger treatment effects than those produced by non-behavioral approaches.
• Programs adhering to principles of effective correctional programs found enhanced reductions in violent offending.
• It didn’t just look at violent offendingit liked at any type of violence

The importance of the principles of the principles of effective correction treatment for violent recidivism reduction:

Mean effect sizes for each level of type of treatment:

• More principles followed less recidivism

Criminogenic and non-criminogenic needs rank ordered by mean effect size when and when not targeted:

Violence Reduction Treatment

Papalia et al. (2019)

• Meta-analysis of 27 violent offender treatment outcome studies (general violence, adults only); N = 7,062
• Done in Australia
• All violent reduction offending
• Can draw more stable conclusions

General results:

• Odds Ratio (OR) = .69 (measure of effect size)
• Treatment associated with 31% decreased odds of violence
• For every 100 randomly selected untreated men who violently reoffend, only 69 treated men would also violently reoffend

Papalia et al. (2019) Meta-Analysis

The ABC Program and the Violence Reduction Program

ABC/VRP

• 6-month high-intensity program
• High-risk, high-need violent persons
• Cognitive-behavioral (emphasis on relapse prevention)
• Changing thoughts and behaviors linked to violence

Primary objective:

• To decrease the frequency and intensity of aggressive behaviors in high risk-high needs violent persons.
• Decreasing violence

ABC/VRP (cont’d)

Interdisciplinary Treatment Team:

• Clinical (program delivery) team includes Psychologist(s), Social Worker(s), Occupational Therapist(s), Recreational Therapist(s), Nursing, Aboriginal Programs Officer, Aboriginal Elder, Psychiatrist
• Interdisciplinary team also includes Parole Officer and Correctional Officer who function in Correctional Case Management and Operational roles
• Managed by Program Director (Clinical) and Associate Program Director (Administrative and Operational)

Target Population

• Federally incarcerated male offenders with the prairie region
• High risk, high-need violent offenders (unable to have needs met in parent institution)
• Significantly history ( non-sexual) violence and/or significant institutional maladjustment
• Impulsive and/or volatile behavioural responding
• Under or over controlled coping styles that tend to culminate in aggression
• Diagnose with Axis I or severe Axis II

Program Participant Profile

• Highly resistant to treatment
• Distrustful
• Disruptive institutionally
• Prior program failure or refusal participate in correctional programs
• Cultural diversity (especially giveen the high incidence of aboriginal offenders in Prairie provinces)
• Lower intellectual functioning
• Functional diversity

ABC Program: Treatment Efficacy

Wong, Vander Veen et al. (2005)

• Examined the efficacy of the ABC program in reducing institutional violence and other infractions
• Sample of 31 men admitted from the Special Handling Unit (SHU), a supermax facility for offenders deemed unsafe to house in regular institutions
• Need to reintegrate to a lower security institutions for humane, correctional, and financial reasons

Institutional Offense Rates (# per month):

• 36-mth pre vs. 36-mth post RPC comparisons (Wong, Vander Veen et al., 2005)

ABC Program: Treatment Efficacy

Wong, Vander Veen et al. (2005)

• 80% of program completers were reintegrated to a lower security facility without relapsing or being returned to the SHU within a 20-month follow-up

ABC Program: Treatment Efficacy

Di Placedo, Simon et al. (2005)

• Examined the efficacy of the ABC program for reducing community recidivism among treated and untreated gang affiliated members
• Men were all violent federal offenders
• Matched on age, offense history, and SIR score

Violent and Nonviolent Recidivism among Treateed and untreated men

Definition of Sexual Aggression/Assault/Violence

• Any actual, attempted, or threatened sexual contact with a person who is non-consenting, or unable to give consent (Boer et al., 1998).
• Paraphilias: DSM Criteria
• Recurrent, intense, sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors generally involving:
• Nonhuman objects (e.g., fetishism)
• Suffering or humiliation of oneself or sexual partner (e.g., sadism, masochism)
• Children or nonconsenting persons (e.g., pedophilia, voyeurism, frotteurism)

Common and Uncommon Paraphilia

• Pedophilia
• Exhibitionism
• Sadism and masochism
• Fetishism
• Zoophilia and bestiality
• Necrophilia
• Klismaphilia (enemas)
• Ampotemnophilia (amputations)
• Coprophilia (feces); coprophagia (ingestion)
• Urophilia (urine)
• Telephone scatologia (obscene telephone calls)
• Many factors influence base rates of sexual recidivism such as sexual offense victim profile, a history of prior sex offenses, and age

What do we know about Sexual Violence Risk Assessment?

• Results of meta-analysis have identified common sets of static and dynamic variables that predict sexual violence
• Two broad domains
• Sexual deviance
• Atypical or illegal sexual interests and compulsive or hyperactive sexual behavior/arousal
• Antisociality (aka general criminality)
• Broad propensity for rule violation – essentially the Central Eight
• Other domains
• Sexual offense supportive attitudes
• Intimate/relationship skills defecits

Sexual Violence Risk Assessment Measures

• Empirical Actuarial – Static (second generation)
• Rapid Risk Assessment for Sexual Offense Recidivism (RRASOR)
• Static-99/99R
• Static-2002/2002R
• Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool (Mn-SOST-R)
• Empirical Actuarial – Dynamic (third and fourth generation)
• Stable 2000/2007 (3^rd gen)
• Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offense version (VRS-SO) (4^th gen)
• Structured Professional Judgment (SPJ) (third generation)
• Sexual Violence Risk-20 (SVR-20)
• Estimate of Risk for Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR)
• Risk for Sexual Violence Protocol (RSVP)

What do we know about Sexual Violence Risk Assessment?

Which are better?

• Static instruments or dynamic ones?
• Both do a pretty good job
• Static actuarial measures (e.g., Static 99) Mean d = .67, k = 81, N = 24,089
• Dynamic (e.g., Stable 2007; VRS-SO) Mean d = .66, k = 29, N = 5,838

What do we know about Sexual Violence Risk Assessment?

What’s the difference?

• Purely static measures
• Are limited in their ability to inform treatment
• May overlook important domains of risk (i.e., not comprehensive enough)
• Are unable to capture changes in risk (e.g., through treatment
• When assessing risk relevant change it is critical to account for baseline risk level.
• The dynamism of risk underscores the necessity of using dynamic instruments with populations that may have been exposed to credible change agents.

Incorporating Change Information into Risk Appraisals

How to Use Change Information in Sexual Violence Risk Assessment

Rationale:

• Low, medium, high not very informative
• Best if you can use exact scores
• But recidivism rates unstable at extreme scores
• Use logistic regression to estimate rates of recidivism
• More clinical utility and practicality for decision-making purposes, while reducing bias

How to Use Change Information in Sexual Violence Risk Assessment

• Four samples of treated sex offenders with VRS-SO and Static-99R ratings (N = 913)
• Minimum 10-years of offending opportunity
• 5 and 10-yr LR generated estimates for sexual and violent recidivism
• Risk scores entered into LR equation
• Excel spreadsheet computes risk estimate
• 🡪 VRS-SO Calculator

Sexual Violence Risk Assessment:

Some Conclusions

• Several risk factors, both static and dynamic identified
• Several measures developed to provide a structured and systematic appraisal of risk
• Base rates tend to be low so prediction is difficult
• Research suggests measures, on average, capable of predicting AUC .65 to .75 (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2009)
• No evidence that any given measure has superior accuracy in predicting sexual recidivism
• Goal to treat and manage risk to prevent recidivism

Does Sexual Offense Treatment Work?Findings and Issues in Sex Offender

Treatment Outcome Research

How do we find out if sex offender treatment works?

• Most common methodology is the single treatment outcome study
• Treated sex offenders compared to a comparable control group of untreated offenders
• Reduced recidivism in treated offenders supports treatment efficacy
• Meta-analysis has become the gold standard
• Quantitative review of several single treatment outcome studies

Findings and Issues in Sex Offender

Treatment Outcome Research

• Majority of sex offender treatment programs currently operating in North America are cognitive-behavioral in nature (Marshall, 1999).
• Other characteristics (Marshall, 1996; 1999; Wormith & Hanson, 1992)
• Psychoeducational (teaching people skills)
• Group focus ( supportive atmosphere and challenging. good at holding eachother accountable)
• Homework assignments
• Multi-modal (address many criminogenic needs)
• Opportunities for individual therapy

Findings and Issues in Sex Offender

Treatment Outcome Research

• Current sex offender treatment approaches
• Cognitive behavioral focus employing principles of relapse prevention

Sample interventions may include:

• Modifying deviant fantasies and interests
• Challenging sex offender attitudes and cognitions
• Increase understanding of offense cycle and factors contributing to offending
• Addressing dysfunctional relationships and intimacy deficits
• Anger management, assertiveness deficits, substance abuse concerns
• Increasing social supports
• Developing community supports and relapse prevention plan
• arousal reconditioning

Findings and Issues in Sexual Offense Treatment Outcome Research

• “Current” correctional treatment in general:
• Tends to follow principles of Risk, Need, Responsivity (Andrews et al., 1990)
• Knowledge of “what works” in sex offender treatment has improved …and so has the rigor of our methods to evaluate it

Single Treatment Outcome Study: SOTP Effectiveness

• Single Treatment Outcome Study (Between subjects design)
• Compare two or more groups: intervention and control
• Different participants in each; one receives the intervention (independent variable), the other does not

Issues?

• Need to ensure groups are comparable on variables that could influence the outcome (i.e., dependent variable)
• Random assignment if feasible
• Matching groups on key variables
• Statistical controls of key variables

Single Treatment Outcome Study: SOTP Effectiveness Olver, Marshall, Marshall, & Nicholaichuk (2020):

• Compared three treatment conditions on sample of over 1,100 men serving federal sentences for sexually violent offenses who were followed up a uniform 8 years in the community
• (follow-up time being one variable that was controlled)
• 1. No sexual offense treatment program (SOTP)
• 2. Treatment as usual (standard prison based SOTP; group CBT)
• 3. Rockwood CBT strength-based group program

Single Treatment Outcome Study: SOTP Effectiveness

• put people into risk pockets that will account for their risk

SOTP Effectiveness: Rates of 8-Year Sexual Recidivism for No Treatment, Treatment as Usual, and Rockwood Program:

• high risk rockwood has lower rates

Results of Meta-Analysis: SOTP Effectiveness Gannon et al. (2019)

• Meta-analysis of 47 sexual offense treatment program (SOTP) studies
• N = 41, 476
• Adult male populations
• Odds ratio (OR) the primary effect size for analysis
• Treatment effect 🡪OR < 1.0 (95% CI below 1.0)
• No treatment effect 🡪 OR ≥ 1.0 (95% CI includes 1.0)
• Negative treatment effect 🡪 OR > 1.0 (95% CI above 1.0)
• How to interpret?
• OR = 0.70 🡪 30% decrease in the odds of sexual recidivism associated with SOTP or group membership in SOTP moderator

Treatment-Control Comparisons across Meta-Analyses

Conclusions on Global Findings:

• Significant ES, with or without outlier, for all three outcomes
• Remarkable continuity in ES magnitude and observed rates of sexual recidivism for treatment-control group comparisons across studies
• Substantial ES heterogeneity
• Underscores need for moderator analyses

Supervision Provided for SOTP Services:

• supervision had the biggest affect compared to no supervision

Service Quality for SOTP Services

• good service has low recidivism rates

Program Moderator Conclusions

• Promising and Most Promising programs associated with largest reductions in sexual recidivism
• Larger ES associated with supervision of service delivery
• Program interventions?

Arousal conditioning (most programs) 🡪 larger ES

Cycle of Violence

1. Tension Building Stage

• Abuser escalates in whatever form of abuse he has been using: possessive smothering, verbal harangues, physical brutality
• Victim is in survival mode, caters to his every whim, desperately trying to avoid the inevitable
• Jealous is huge during this stage

Cycle of Violence

2. Acute Battering or “Explosive” Stage

• Abuser continues to punch and kick harder and faster to the point of exhaustion
• The release of energy lowers tension levels, and the abuser becomes addicted to this form of release
• Victim’s response is to protect self in any way possible

Cycle of Violence

3. Contrition/Remorse Stage

• Alienated victim – attempts to get her back
• Victim agrees to stay or return, hopeful

Tactics of Abusive Men

• control partner through
• intimdiation
• emotional abuse
• isolate parnter
• minimize or blame victim for abuse
• use children
• male privilege
• Econmic abuse/control
• use coercion/threats
• all strategies are designed to undermine and control partner so that partner will not abandon abuser

Characteristics of the Abusive Personality

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD)

• A pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity beginning in early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more of the following):
• Afraid of abondoament
• born out of the history of pain

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD)

• Frantic efforts to avoid abandonment
• Unstable and intense relationships
• Identity disturbance
• Impulsivity
• Recurrent suicidal/self-mutilating behavior
• Affective instability
• Emptiness
• Inappropriate, intense anger
• Paranoid ideation or dissociative symptoms

BPD/BPO & IPV

• Theoretical connection exists between BPD/BPO and IPV.
• Gunderson (1984):

1) Involvement in intense and unstable relationships in which the significant other is undermined and manipulated

2) Intolerance of being alone combined with increasing abandonment anxiety

3) Intense anger, demandingness, and impulsivity, often linked to substance abuse or promiscuity

• the person needs someone to claim as home

The Abusive Personality (APB)

• A syndrome of affective, behavioral, and phenomenological traits that predispose men to assault their wives.

Dutton et al. (1996; 1998)

• Administered battery of measures to assaultive males and controls
• Abusive males scored higher on:
• BPO symptoms, chronic anger, trauma symptoms, fearful attachment, childhood abuse.
• symptoms are broader than BPD

1. Borderline Personality Organization

• Abusive males evidenced comparable scores to males dx as borderline.

2. Chronic Anger

• Abusive males scored high on anger/hostility, a strong predictor of abuse.

3. Childhood Trauma

• Abusive males scored high on trauma measures and similar personality profiles as PTSD victims

4. Guilt/Shaming Experiences

• Public scolding, random punishment, generic criticism.
• Shame thought to drive Contrition Phase

5. Fearful Attachment

• Abusive males most likely to have insecure relationship attachment
• Preoccupied and Fearful

In Summary: The Abusive Personality is…

• A repertoire of borderline traits, intense anger, trauma symptoms, and a fearful attachment style characterized by devaluation of self and other. These traits make for an insecure and unstable person who is at risk for inflicting serious physical and psychological harm on their spouse.

A Typology of Abusive Men

Types of IPV Perpetrators

• Family Only Aggressors

Low levels of anger, depression, jealousy. Least likely to be violent outside home.

• Generalized Aggressors

Most likely to be violent outside home. Violence most likely associated with alcohol use and severe. settle arguements through violence and are highest on psychopathic.

• Emotionally Volatile

Highest levels of depression, anger, and jealousy. Most psychologically abusive and least satisfied in relationships. High antisocial and BPD.

Explanations for IPV by Abusive Men

Disengagement of internal standards (Bandura, 1991)

• Cognitive distortions used to justify abuse

Redefining the behavior

• Moral justification
• Palliative comparisons (did hit them but didn’t break bones)
• Euphemistic labelling ( we fight, i got carried away)

Displacement of responsibility

• Externalizing responsibility
• Diffusion of responsibility
• taking the blame off the abuser and putting it on something/someone else
• spreading accountability thin

Distort the consequences

• Minimization
• Ignoring
• making something smaller than it actually is

Blame the victim

• Blaming the victim
• Dehumanization
• “this person deserves it” “ she had it coming”

have a scheme for these types of relationships. Treatment involes attacking the distortions

Etiology of IPV

Etiology of IPV

Sociological-Feminist Theories

• SA reflects an underlying system of patriarchal values that support male dominance and female subordination.
• its a mans home and whatever happens stays in the home
• thinks their partners are property

Social and Structural Theories

• Alienating conditions within society create frustration and stress and thus, increase potential for acting out violently.
• society is to blame

Social Learning Theories

• Children are exposed to domestically assaultive behavior and this behavior is role modeled and later reperpetrated.
• learned behaviour, they learn to be violent from watching it happen

Integrative Social-Learning Attachment Model

• Violence and abuse in the family models assaultive behavior and contributed to the formation of the abusive personality.

IPV Risk Assessment

Assessing Risk For IPV

• Same considerations apply as for sexual violence risk assessment, general violence risk assessment, and general recidivism risk assessment
• Including the use of structured tools: These are developed the same way as tools for sexual, violent, and general recidivism assessment i.e., from collections of risk markers linked to IPV Correlates of Intimate Partner Violence
• relationship might end when spouse goes to jail
• central eight applies
  Hanson et al. (1997) (N= 997)
• Conduct disorder
• Prior convictions
• Hostility (BDHI)
• Attitudes
• Alcohol abuse (Central eight)
• Drug abuse (central eight)
• BDI
• Poor self-concept
• Violence family of origin
• Poor relationship adjustment
• Arguments initiated
• Worried about other men

Propensity for Abusiveness Scale (Dutton, 1995)

• 29-item self-report inventory designed to appraise risk for spousal violence.
• Scores reflect severity of traits of ABP.
• basically a lot of problems associated with violent personality

Three factors:

Recalled negative parental treatment

Affective lability

Trauma symptoms

• Abusive males (59.2) vs. controls (44.7)
• Correctly classified 82% males into high and low abusiveness.
• Based on Dutton’s theory; PAS not frequently used…

Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA)

(Kropp, Hart, Webster, & Eaves, 1995)

• The original structured professional judgment (SPJ) tool
• Developed by the same group as the HCR-20
• 20 items developed through theory and research linked to IPV
• Items rated 0, 1, 2

Criminal History (general)

• Past assault of family members
• Past assault strangers/acquaintances
• Past violation cond. Release

Psychosocial Adjustment: Recent… (Central Eight Variables)

• Relationship problems
• Employment problems
• Victim/witness family violence
• Substance abuse
• Suicidal/homicidal ideation
• Psychotic/manic symptoms
• Personality disorder (anger, impulsivity)

Spousal Assault History (History of inimate partner violence and dynamic factors)

• Past physical assault
• Past sexual assault/sexual jealousy
• Past weapon use/death threats
• Recent escalation in violence
• Past violation “no contact” order
• Denial/minimization of spousal assault
• Spousal assault attitudes

Alleged (Current) Offense

• Severe and/or sexual assault
• Weapon use/credible death threats
• Violation of “no contact” order

SARA Research

(Kropp & Hart, 2000)

• SARA ratings analyzed on six samples of adult male offenders (N = 2,681).

SARA ratings:

• Positively correlated with the VRAG, PCL:SV, and SIR
• 102 men followed up on release (50% recidivism)
• AUC = .60

SARA Research

(Helmus & Bourgon, 2011)

• Meta-analysis of 9 IPV risk tools, focusing on the SARA
• k = 8 studies, n = 2,174
• AUC = .63 for IPV recidivism
• A SARA V3 has just been released in the past year. Psychometric research is forthcoming.

Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment (ODARA)

(Hilton, Harris, Rice, Lang, Cormier, & Lines, 2004)

• Developed by the VRAG folks at Penetang!
• Actuarial IPV risk measure
• Designed to be rated by frontline responders to domestic incidents (e.g., police)
• 13-binary items (rated 0-1)
• Possible scores range from 0-13
• Anything above 7 is high risk
• most items are static in nature

ODARA Research

Inaugural study (Hilton et al., 2004)

• 589 domestically violent offenders identified from police records
• Followed up nearly 5 years post release
• 29.7% of men reoffended with a ne IPV offense
• Rated on large collection of variables from archival records used to create ODARA
• ODARA total score AUC = .77

DVRAG

• The ODARA was expanded by Hilton et al. (2008) by adding the PCL-R as a 14^th item …called the DVRAG
• Domestic Violence Risk Appraisal Guide
• Rated on 346 men
• AUC = .70
• (ODARA AUC = .65 by contrast)

Which IPV Tool Works Best?

• Meta analysis by Hanson, Helmus and Bourgon (2007), updated by Helmus & Bourgon (2011), and subsequently by van der Put et al. (2019) examined predictive accuracy of IPV risk tools for IPV recidivism.

Which IPV Tool Works Best?

• As with the sexual violence and general violence risk assessment literature, they all pretty well predict comparably
• Broadly moderate predictive accuracy
• DA and DVSI do a bit worse
• Also have overlapping but slightly different purposes

The Duluth Model

Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP; 1980):

• Intensive, 6-month group
• Cognitive-behavioral approach
• Pro-feminist psychoeducational material
• Learn about the specific nature of their abuse and the impact it has on significant others
• Learn more egalitarian ways of conducting themselves in intimate relationships

Key assumption: violence is instrumental - used to control others!

The Duluth Model

Five Objectives:

• Facilitate appreciation that behavior is a means of controlling others
• Increase understanding of causes of violence
• Increase motivation to change
• Accept responsibility
• Explore non-controlling and non-violent ways of relating

How are these objectives achieved?

The Duluth Model

Structure:

• Weekly goal - check-in
• Video vignettes - depicting controlling/abusive behavior; a woman’s perspective
• Personal disclosures
• Control log - facilitates analysis of 6 key elements of an abusive act and alternatives to that act
• Role Plays - to teach/reinforce non-controlling behavior
• Strategies/skills training for non-violence
• In last phase of treatment, participants develop a behavior cycle and relapse prevention plan based on history of abusive behavior
• Crime Cycle: Identify pattern of abuse and the specific events, thoughts. and feelings that trigger it
• Relapse Prevention Plan: Develop plan involving internal and external coping strategies with which to intervene prior to becoming abusive

The Duluth Model In sum,

• Ultimate goal of this model is to replace the abusive tactics commonly used by spousal assaulters with the non-controlling, non-violent tactics that couples frequently used in egalitarian relationships.
• Goal is achieved through analyzing specific abusive behavior, examining behavior as tactics of control, exploring and practicing non-controlling and non-violent behavior.

Cognitive Behavioral Approaches

• Violence as a learned phenomenon that can be unlearned
• Violence occurs because it is functional for the user (i.e., has been reinforced)
• Reducing bodily tension
• Gaining victim compliance
• Ending an uncomfortable situation
• Generate feelings f power and control
• CBT identifies pros and cons of violence
• Involves skills training to develop alternatives to violence
• Problem solving
• Communication/assertiveness skills
• Anger management
• Time outs
• Perception checks
• Address attitudes and values toward women and use of violence with women

Treatment Outcome

• Addresses question as to whether IPV programs can reduce IPV recidivism
• Single treatment outcome studies

Babcock, Green, & Robie (2004)

Meta- Analysis of DV Interventions

• Meta analysis of IPV/DV treatment outcome studies in reducing recidivism
• K = 22 studies, 36 ES computed
• Deluth (k = 19) and CBT (k= 11) most common txts
• Rates of IPV recidivism?
• 21% based on police reports
• 35% based on partner reports

Meta-analysis of Treatment Outcome on

Police Reported IPV Recidivism

(Adapted from Babcock et al., 2004)

Meta-analysis of Treatment Outcome on

Partner Reported IPV Recidivism

(Adapted from Babcock et al., 2004)

Outcome Research Conclusions

Conclusions from Babcock et al. (2004)

• Overall small effect size (d = .18 or 9% recidivism reduction) for treatment in reducing IPV recidivism
• No clear evidence for relative superiority of one program over another, but most evidence for Deluth and CBT
• Both generated small effects

IPV Treatment Attrition

• Men referred to IV treatment have big problem with drop out (aka attrition)
• Highest rates of attrition compared to all offender programs (Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2011)

IPV Treatment Attrition

(Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2011)

IPV Treatment Attrition

• Men who fail to complete IPV programs have significantly higher rates of IPV recidivism, violent recidivism, and general recidivism (Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2011)

Mental Disorder and Crime PSY 230. 3 (04)

Backgrounder on Mental Illness

• Schizophrenia and other psychotic illnesses
  • Hallucinations
  • Delusions (faulty reality)
  • Disorganized behavior/thinking
  • Negative symptoms
• Bipolar Disorder
  • Alternating episodes of mania and depression
• Unipolar Mood Disorders
• Major depressive episodes, persistent depressive disorder

Myths, Misconceptions, and the Media

• The mentally ill have long been stigmatized as prone to violent behavior as seen in literature, the media, folklore, and common sense.
• Shakespeare, Taming of the Shrew, Henry the Sixth
• 17% of American prime-time dramas contained a character who was mentally ill (Gerbner et al., 1981).
• 73% of mentally ill characters are portrayed as violent (vs. 40% of “normals”).
• 23% of mentally ill characters were shown to be homicidal (vs. 10% of “normals”).

The Case of Johnnie Baxstrom

• In 1966, Johnnie Baxstrom challenged a ruling to civilly commit him on the grounds that he posed a risk for future violence since he had a mental disorder.
• The case of Baxstrom set a precedent which sparked the release of 976 institutionalized mentally ill patients.
• Over a 2-year follow-up, 20% of the “Baxstrom patients” were rearrested, 11% were reconvicted, and only 2% committed a violent offense

Relationship between Crime and Mental Disorder

Relationship between Crime and Mental Disorder

• Monahan (1993): two paradigms for investigating the relationship between violence and mental disorder (can also be applied to general criminality):
• Crime among the disordered
• Disorder among the criminally active

Violence and Crime Among the Disordered

• Several studies have examined the base rates of violence and general criminality in psychiatric populations compared to non-psychiatric controls.
• Hodgins (1993): Swedish Metropolitan Project
• Examined base rates of violence and general crime in a sample of 15,117 persons born in Stockholm, 1953.
• Residents followed up for 30 years.
• Hodgins et al. (1996)
• Similar methodology as above, only with Danish sample
• 358,180 persons born b/w 1944 and 1947

Base Rates of Violence and Crime:

Swedish and Danish Census Data

Violence and Crime Among the Disordered

Epidemiological Catchment Area (ECA) Study (Swanson et al., 1990; Swanson, 1994)

• Sample of 10,059 respondents from geographically diverse locations.
• DSM-III-R diagnoses made using Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS).
• Violent incidents in the current and previous year recorded.
• 55.5% of violent respondents met criteria for a DSM disorder.
• 19.6% of non-violent respondents had a DSM disorder.

Estimated Probabilities of Violence for Different Psychiatric Diagnoses

Mental Disorder Among the Violent or Criminally Active

• Alternative paradigm
• Examining base rates of mental disorder in violent or incarcerated populations (i.e., prison inmates)

Mental Illness in Canadian Corrections

Mental Disorder, Recidivism, and Crime

Rezansoff, Moniruzzaman, Gress, and Somers (2013)

• BC Corrections
• 31,014 provincial offenders followed up 3 years post release
• 39% no diagnosis
• 21% nonsubstance related mental disorder (NSMD)
• 10% substance use disorder (SUD)
• 23% dual diagnos
• SUD + mental disorder
• 7% Unknown

Mental Disorder, Recidivism, and Crime

Mental Disorder, Recidivism, and Crime

• Several studies have found certain diagnoses to be associated with a greater number of criminogenic needs = higher risk (Skeem et al., 2014; Kingston et al., 2015, 2016)
• PD, SUD, and DD largest number of positive associations with criminogenic need
• These studies have also found particularly high prevalence of PD and SUD
• Any PD: ≈ 50-75%
• ASPD: > 50%
• SUD: ≈ 50-75%

Conclusions on Association between Mental Disorder and Crime/Violence

• Base rates of crime/violence are consistently higher among mentally disordered populations.
• Base rates of crime/violence are particularly high amongst substance abusers.
• Males are consistently higher risk(i.e., have higher base rates of crime/violence).
• Major mental disorder has higher prevalence among offender samples than the general public.
• PDs (especially ASPD) and SUDs particularly common in offender populations.

Relationship between Crime and Mental Disorder

Violence and Psychosis

• Psychosis as a possible cause of violence
• Psychosis serves a focusing role by providing a clear motivation for violence (Link & Stueve, 1994)
• Threat Control Override
• Principle of “rationality within irrationality”
• Psychosis destabilizes decisions and behavior
• Leads to disorganized/impulsive violence and crime
• Psychosis serves a disinhibiting role in violence
• Negative symptoms block inhibitions to act violently

Violence and Psychosis

Douglas, Guy, and Hart (2009)

• Meta analysis of 204 studies examining association between psychosis and violence
• Psychosis associated with a 49% to 68% increase in the odds of violence
• Finding held up across gender and country
• Several moderators (i.e., lots of variability) among studies
• Effects were largest in:
• Community settings (350% increase or 3.5X odds of violence)
• MUCH smaller effect in correctional settings (27% increase)
• Patients with schizophrenia diagnoses
• Positive symptoms
• Psychotic patients were compared to non-mentally disordered, non-offenders
• No significant effect when compared against other antisocial individuals

Relationship between Crime and Mental Disorder

Risk factors for recidivism among mental health correctional populations

• Psychopathological Theory
• Mental disorder symptomatology would constitute the strongest predictors of recidivism (e.g., depression, anxiety, delusions)
• General Personality Cognitive Social Learning (GPCSL)
• General criminogenic needs and other variables transcend different correctional populations, and tend to be the strongest predictors of recidivism (e.g., criminal attitudes, peers)

Predictors of Recidivism in mental health correctional populations

• Bonta, Blais, and Wilson (2014)
• Meta analysis of predictors of violent and general criminal recidivism among mental health correctional samples specifically
• (Update on Bonta, Law, & Hanson, 1998)
• 126 studies on 96 unique samples and 23,900 offenders
• Douglas et al. (2009) examined studies of mentally ill patients across a range of samples and settings; not just offenders
• In correctional settings, psychosis associated with a 27% increase in the odds of violence, much smaller than civil psychiatric (69% increase) or community settings (350% increase)

Predictors of Recidivism in mental health correctional populations

Predictors of Recidivism in mental health correctional populations

• The Central Eight predict recidivism in mental health correctional samples
• NSMD, and psychosis specifically, are weaker predictors in offender samples
• PD, ASPD, and psychopathy are predictive
• They embody collections of criminogenic needs or directly represent criminogenic needs (e.g., antisocial personality pattern)
• Severe mental disorder
• Likely has modest criminogenic relevance
• May interact with other criminogenic predictors
• Is an important responsivity consideration

Relationship between Crime and Mental Disorder

Treatment of Mental Health Correctional Populations

• Absence of controlled treatment studies specifically targeting mental health correctional populations
• Most programs are no different than those provided for non-offending psychiatric patients
• Medication
• Inpatient treatment

Two Promising Developments:

• Recognition that treatment of mental health correctional pops should attend to the general offender rehabilitation literature
• Importance of providing treatment/support post hospitalization/release is being given more attention E.g., Bow Unit, RPC

Treatment of Mental Health Correctional Populations

Mental Illness as a Need and Responsivity Issue:

• As a need issue
• Certain mental illnesses and mental illness symptoms are criminogenic
• Treated through medication, therapy, and community supports (e.g., employment, housing, family psychoeducation)
• As a responsivity issue
• Mental health symptoms can undermine engagement in treatment if left untreated

E.g., cognitive and attentional deficits of active psychotic symptoms, interpersonal problems with staff and patients

Treatment of Mental Health Correctional Populations

• So the RNR principles should apply at least in theory
• …Remarkably little research has actually examined this

Treatment of Mental Health Correctional Populations: General Conclusions

• A modest, yet consistent and significant relationship exists between crime/violence and mental illness.
• Prevalence rates of crime/violence appear to be highest in the most severe mental disorders.
• Risk for crime/violence is greatest when mental disorders are comorbid with substance abuse.
• In the absence of a criminal history and other criminogenic markers, mental disorders are likely poor predictors of violence and other types of crime.
• Risk factors derived from a general personality cognitive social learning model are the strongest predictors of violence and general criminality
• Dearth of controlled treatment studies

Justice Impacted Women and Girls

Some famous (or infamous) examples:

• The “Ken and Barbie Killers” (Ontario ~ early to mid 1990s)
• Paul Bernardo (“Scarborough Rapist”) and;

Karla Homolka

• Testified as a witness against her husband
• Received a 12 year sentence (plea agreement)
• For the deaths of two teenage school girls
• As well as the rape and death of her own sister!
• Killed and Murder two 13 year old girls
• Would entice the girls and would watch paul commit these crimes
• Her PCL score has been released (24)

Case remains controversial

• E.g., dubbed the “deal with the devil” - videotapes surfaced post
• E.g., romantic relationship with lawyer
• E.g., release and community reintegration in Quebec (2016)

Some famous (or infamous) examples:

• The Reena Virk Case (British Columbia ~ late 90s to mid 2000)
• Virk was swarmed, beaten, drowned by teenagers including:

Kelly Ellard

• 15-years old at the time of the offense
• Raised to adult court
• Convicted of 2nd Degree Murder
• Sentenced to Life

Case controversy

• E.g., 3 trials: guilty; appeal with subsequent mistrial; guilty
• E.g., denied day parole as continues to “minimize” crime
• Pregnant in custody (2016)

Some famous (or infamous) examples:

Serena Nicotine (Saskatchewan)

• At age 12 drowned a 3-year old in a hotel pool
• Brutally murdered a 58-year old group home operator in North Battleford with another teenage girl (1997)
• Stabbed 15 times with a kitchen knife and beaten with a cast iron pan
• Has since been involved in several hostage takings while in custody
• Tortured correctional officer with lit cigarettes and broken scissors, pulled through it from being offered McDonald’s
• Has FASD, has problems with attention and impuslivity

And recently in the news...

Do these women share any common features ? How do they compare to men in the criminal justice system ?

• Public attention is periodically drawn to sensational cases
• Lots of girls has higher levels of violence
• Only more recently have female offenders become more “empirically visible”

True or False?

• More men commit crime than women

Statistical snapshot

• In 2014/2015, Canadian women accounted for 15% of overall correctional admissions to provincial/territorial correctional services.
• They accounted for a higher proportion of community admissions (20%) than custody admissions (13%)
• Women made up a small share of admissions to both remand and sentenced custody in the provinces and territories - 13% and 11% respectively and 7% federally.
• In 2014/2015, just over three-quarters of Canadian youth admitted into correctional services were male (77%); 23% were female.
• The findings were about the same for both custody and community supervision.

True or False?

• Women are more likely to commit offenses involving property or drugs as opposed to violent offenses(true)

Canada’s only female dangerous offender or DO:

• Renee Acoby
• Once they go into jail for one offence they usually get more conventions which leads to more jail time
• Got DO due to her violence

True or False?

• Violence perpetrated by girls and women has increased in recent years (complex answer)

Violence and aggression by women

• While the rate of charges for violent crimes may fluctuate and/or increase, this may be because
• the numbers of women committing violent offenses is proportionally so small (CSC, 2013)
• While rates of “simple” assault may fluctuate/increase, rates of serious violent offenses has remained stable

Societal changes?

• E.g., decreased reluctance to charge and prosecute women

Definitional changes?

• E.g., relational aggression (Crick and colleagues)

A few seminal Canadian studies...

Simourd & Andrews (1994)

• Examined 60 studies that produced 464 correlations between risk factors and delinquency (grouped into 8 risk factors)
• The rank order of the predictive strength of the risk factors for males and females was identical.
• Likewise the magnitude of the correlations were comparable for each risk factor.
• Conclusion: Risk factors that are important for male delinquency are also important for females.. delinquency.

Risk factors for women and girls

A few seminal Canadian studies...

• Rettinger (1999)
• 441 provincially sentenced female offenders
• LSI/LSI-OR + survey data
• Gender-specific variables (e.g., abuse hx., self-harm hx.) did not discriminate recidivists from non-recidivists for general recidivism. Exception: problematic childhood.
• Self-injury behavior predicted violent recidivism.
• Conclusion: Support for the use of the LSI to determine risk and need for incarcerated and community-sentenced women.
• The more problematic the childhood more likely to recommit

If there are common risk factors can we use the same assessment tools for male and female correctional populations ?

• The short answer – it depends who you ask!
• “...the assessment of psychopathy is not valid for women offenders. As a result, the use of instruments designed to assess psychopathy are not sanctioned.”CSC MEMORANDUM (2000)
• Can general neutral be used to assess recidivism

But what does the research say?

• A “homegrown” example (Stockdale, Olver, & Wong, 2010):
• 2 main camps...

Gender neutral risk assessment

Gender Informed risk assessment

2 main camps (cont’d)

Gender neutral

• Risk assessment instruments developed on samples composed predominantly of male cases and based on gender neutral theories of crime apply to women and girls
• E.g., the LSI family of tools

Gender informed

• Proponents argue that gendered pathways to crime impact the validity of risk assessment instruments and gender neutral tools are missing key female specific risk-need factors
• Certain risk factors that apply to both genders may be more relevant to females
• Female-specific risk-need tools developed from “the ground up” for women and girls are required
• E.g., the Women’s Risk Need Assessment or WRNA (Van Voorhis and colleagues)

But what are female specific factors?

Potential female specific risk/need factors identified in the research literature include:

• financial stress
• Internalizing mental health symptoms
• self injurious behavior
• victimization histories
• relationship dysfunction
• family factors
• parental stress
• child custody issues
• housing safety
• poor self efficacy

Example: NSSI and female offenders

• Klonsky and Muehlenkamp (2007) refer to non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) as deliberate bodily disfigurement or harm without suicidal intent and for non-socially sanctioned reasons. E.g., head banging, cutting, burning
• Women in custody are more likely than males to engage in NSSI (e.g., Blanchette & Brown, 2006)
• and to do so more than one time

Barrett, Allenby, and Taylor (2010)

• CSC survey; N=178 female offenders
• 43.6% reported engaging in self-harming behaviors
• Women incarcerated for violence more likely to engage in self-harm

But what does the research say?

Another “homegrown” example:

• Stewart (2011)
• Rated four risk assessment instruments (the LSI-R, the LS/CMI, the VRS, and the SIR) on N=101federal female offenders and examined relationships with several outcome measures (e.g., general and violent recidivism)
• Also explored the incremental predictive validity of several gender informed variables (e.g., history of abuse, economic concerns, childcare concerns, self-harm/suicidality)
• 4 risk assessment instruments performed well (AUCs from .650 to .842)
• Few of the gender-informed outcomes correlated with outcome except for childhood emotional abuse which was related to violent recidivism (.687)
• This combined with substance abuse appeared the most promising composite gender-informed predictor(s)

But what does the research say?

• Sample results from meta-analysis - youth risk assessment (Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2009):

But what does the research say?

• Sample results from meta-analysis - adult risk assessment (Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2014):

Gender as Risk-Need or Responsivity ?

Class discussion

Correctional treatment approaches ?

Past and present Canadian approaches and controversies

Prison for Women (P4W)

P4W (cont’d)

• Maximum security environment for women regardless of security level
• Women were geographically separated from local support systems
• Inadequate conditions, no gender or culturally informed programs
• CSC established a Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women in 1989
• Published report entitled “Creating Choices” in 1990
• Recommended closure of P4W
• Creation of smaller, regional facilities, and an Aboriginal Healing Lodge
• Between 1995 and 2004 5 new regional facilities and 1 lodge (in SK) were opened across Canada

P4W (cont’d)

The Honourable Louise Arbor

• Commission of Inquiry into Certain Events at the Prison for Women” (1996)
• Lengthy segregation
• Male emergency response team; role in strip searches
• Violent confrontations
• Ruled that many of the women’s concerns were valid
• On May 8, 2000 the last inmate was transferred out of P4W

Moving on...

Since the 1990s CSC has developed gender-informed programs, the most recent programs

include:

• Engagement Programs*
• Moderate Intensity Programs*
• High Intensity Programs*
• Self-Management Programs*
• Women’s Modular Intervention
• Women’s Sex Offender Program
• Social Integration Program for Women
• Parenting Skills Training Program
• * Indigenous specific program available

Moving on, but how far ?

The Ashley Smith case

• Ontario Coroner’s Inquest into the death of Ashley Smith, a young woman under suicide watch at Grand Valley Institution for Women
• Strangled herself with a strip of cloth while guards watched via video monitor for 45 min (October 2007)
• Coroner’s jury returned a verdict of homicide (December 2013)
• Advanced 104 recommendations to the Coroner
• Suggested ways in which CSC could better serve female inmates including those with mental health concerns
• Indefinite solitary confinement should be banned

Mental health needs of female offenders

• According to CSC estimates, 62% of incoming women required further mental health evaluation (post initial screening)
• High rates of lifetime substance dependence
• Those with substance dependence also exhibited symptoms of another lifetime psychiatric disorder (Derksen et al., 2013)
• High rates of concurrent disorders

Do programs for women and girls work?

Some promising results

However, more rigorous evaluations of new programs are needed...

Results from meta-analysis Dowden & Andrews (1999)

• Reviewed 26 treatment programs for female offenders
• Programs adhering to risk and/or need principles reduced criminal recidivism by 19 to 26%
• Programs adhering to the general responsivity principle reduced recidivism by 25 to 27 %

Gobeil, Blanchette, & Stewart (2016)

• 22 000 women offenders (37 studies)
• Odds of community success were 22 to 35 % higher for women who participated in correctional interventions
• Gender informed and gender neutral program produced similar effects...

So, where does this leave us ?

Thoughts, take home messages, and question

Justice Impacted Indigenous Persons:

Too Risky to Use, or Too Risky Not to? Lessons Learned from Over 30 Years of Research on Forensic Risk Assessment with Indigenous Persons

The Context and the Controversy

• Indigenous persons are vastly overrepresented in Canadian Corrections

– Minority groups are actually overrepresented in correctional settings all over the world

• Represent 4% of the national population

– …25.2% of the federal offender population in 2018-2019 (28.8% of custody pop)

• Up from 18.9% in 2010-2011 (Corrections and Conditional Release Statistical Overview 2020)

The Context and the Controversy

Salient Social/Contextual/Historical Issues (see R v. Gladue, 1999; Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2015)

• Elder Gerry Oleman’s 5 Rs

– Colonial past; residential school abuse

– Cultural erosion (religion)

– Over-policing (RCMP)

– Racism and discrimination within justice system and broader societal level

– Social plight/destitute communities (reservations)

The Context and the Controversy

Indigenous peoples (Perrault, 2011; Public Safety Canada, 2014; Scrim, 2010)

• More likely to be victims of abuse and trauma

• More likely to be victims of violent crime

• Social plight (e.g., poverty, unemployment, education, racism, addictions)

• Medical/health concerns

The Context and the Controversy

Indigenous persons in correctional contexts (Bonta, Rugge, & Dauverge, 2003; Olver, 2016; Rugge, 2006; Stewart & Wilton, 2019)

• Tend to score higher on conventional risk tools

• More likely to be classified as high risk

• Have higher rates of recidivism

The Context and the Controversy

• Ewert v. Canada (2015)

• Impugned tools

– Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R)

– Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG)

– Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG)

– Static-99/99R

– Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offense version (VRS-SO)

The Context and the Controversy

• Plaintiff/Defense expert (S.D. Hart)

– Impugned tools biased against Indigenous persons and their use had resulted in harm to Ewert

• Arguments raised about rigid and culturally insensitive use of actuarial tools along with insufficient psychometric research in form or quality

• Crown’s expert (M.E. Rice)

– Tools are equivalent across racial/cultural groups given the heterogeneity of construction and validation samples that are heavily represented by Indigenous persons

The Context and the Controversy

Core psychometric issues

• Structural invariance

– Are the constructs measured by a test organized the same way from one group to another?

• E.g., Does the PCL-R 4-factor model hold up between ancestral groups?

• Predictive Invariance

– Does the instrument predict equivalently between two different groups?

• E.g., Does the PCL-R/Static-99R/etc. have good predictive accuracy for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous persons?

Structural Invariance: Multigroup CFA

Predictive Invariance: Recidivism Prediction Metrics

• Effect size metrics (cont’d)

– E.g., Group M score = 22, SD = 8

• d = .50 à 8 x .50 = 4 pts diff between violent recidivist and nonrecidivist

– (e.g., recidivist M = 24, non-recidivist M = 20)

• What happened?

Decision Chronology

The Context and the Controversy

• Some of the main issues that arose out of Ewert V. Canada (2015)

– The number of replications were too few and far between

– The samples were small-ish and the studies were underpowered

– Need for larger, representative samples

• Created an impetus to combine samples into a large aggregate to test foundational propositions drawing Indigenous non-Indigenous comparisons for impugned tools

• Some of my observations from Ewert v. Canada (2015)

– Extreme stances adopted by opposing side; missing/omitted works.

– Perpetuation of false narratives that certain tools performed poorly and were de facto culturally biased (e.g., SIR scale)

– Languaging of psychometric differences (even minute) in test properties as “cultural” differences

– Conflating ethnoracial heritage and culture

– A tendency to ignore or dismiss prior research findings that had merit; and to overlook the nuances.

– Assumption from Plaintiff – absence of evidence of validity/reliability was presumed evidence for absence of validity/reliability

Further Developments in Risk Assessment with Indigenous Persons

• CSC in the process of evaluating and updating Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) process for federally sentenced Indigenous men and women

• Began in 2021 as an updated literature review commissioned by CSC from an advisory subgroup to inform the process, structured as a systematic review and a series of targeted meta-analyses.

• Submitted for publication June 2021, accepted October 2023

Results from Meta-Analysis

Meta-Method

Olver, Stockdale, Helmus, Woods, Termeer, & Prince (2024)

• K = 91 studies, 88 documents

– 57 refereed journal articles

– 17 government reports

– 11 graduate theses/dissertation

– 4 unpublished data/ms under review

– 2 conference presentation

• Spanned 22 instruments and 15 risk factor predictor domains

– Indigenous, N = 59,693; non-Indigenous/White, N = 237,729

Meta-Method

• Primary unit of effect size for aggregation purposes

– Standardized mean difference Cohen’s d

• Difference between recidivists and nonrecidivists on risk scores reported in standard deviation units

• d = .20 small, .50 medium, .80 large

• AUC equivalents (Rice & Harris, 2005) = .56 small, .64 medium, .71 large

– Why d?

• Less impacted by fluctuations in base rates

• Most readily converted from other metrics (e.g., rpb) using applicable formulae including base rate info

• Readily computed from M and SD of recidivists and nonrecidivists

• Readily translated to AUC

• Easily interpreted

Meta-Method

• Reported fixed and random effects

– FE most stable with small K (i.e., < 30), but influenced by very large samples

• Orwin’s fail safe N computed to determine # studies with no effect (d = 0.00) required to reduce d < .20 (i.e., small effect)

• ES magnitudes directly compared (Q statistic) for Indigenous and non-Indigenous/White subgroups

Forensic Assessment Measures Included in Meta-Analysis

• Indigenous samples scored higher on average by more than ½ SD across measures

• Group differences tended to be larger on certain general-risk need tools, general violence risk measures, and those that heavily weighted general criminal history.

• Smaller differences on PCL measures and youth variants of some tools.

• Nonsignificant differences on measures of risk change.

• All measures significantly predicted their targeted recidivism outcomes (general, violent, sexual, IPV) across ethnoracial groups

• Most effect sizes tended to be medium in magnitude

– (i.e., d = .50-.79, AUC = .64-.70)

– Frequently in same class/magnitude of prediction effect sizes and/or differences in ES not significantly different

• ES diff significant in 16/45 (35.6%) direct comparisons of d/AUC between groups

• LS measures the largest volume of empirical support

– d/t large K and n, many ES diffs significant b/w groups

• SPIn/YASI largest effects

• SFA and DFIA-R had weakest effects

• More frequent ES disparities and evidence of potential bias for static tools

• Smaller disparities in prediction effects for youth variants of tools (e.g., YLS/CMI; VRS-YV; SAVRY; PCL: YV)

• PCL measures (R and YV) remarkable continuity between groups and across outcomes

• VRS/SO change measures associated with decreased recidivism across groups

– VRS change < general and violent recidivism

– VRS-SO change < sexual recidivism

Some Conclusions and

Future Directions

Conclusions

• Static tools must be supplemented with dynamic tools; to not do so is committing an act of social injustice

– Greatest potential for ethnoracial bias in static tools

• Conduct reassessments of risk using dynamic measures

– Guide service delivery, track and measure changes in risk

• Assess protective factors

• Further research needed on cultural specific risk factors

– Cultural engagement/connectedness

Samples and Subgroups

• Generalizing from a large sample can be problematic for any and all constituent subgroups

– Results of meta-analysis of ES for VRS-SO, PCL-R, and VRS generated substantively same findings as performing analyses on a large single combined sample

• To be human is to be diverse

– Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity abounds; cautions of generalizability apply to all groups

The Threshold of Scientific Acceptability and the Meaning of Differences

• Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence

• What is the threshold for acceptable psychometric properties?

– Do the properties have to be identical or do they need to be robust across samples and settings?

– E.g., Medium effect sizes for risk classification, identifying treatment needs, evaluating change, and making release decisions

Harming when Intending to Help

• Not having the option of using a particular brand of tools (e.g., actuarial, SPJ, etc.) for their designated purpose may possibly disadvantage evaluators, decision making bodies, or correctional clients?

– E.g., Dynamic tools to track and quantify change, inform conditional release, community supervision, residential placements, reductions in security, ETAs/UTAs, release planning etc., etc.

– Case conceptualization training can assist in integration of multiple and even disparate findings

Placing the use of Actuarial Tools into Context

• All assessment as SPJ; or “actuarially informed”

– SPJ vs. actuarial as an artificial dichotomy

• The structure of a test does not constrain its use

• Case conceptualization training can assist in integration of multiple and even disparate findings

• An assessment instrument is not an assessment

The Misuse of Psychological Instruments

• All tools have the potential for misuse, particularly with vulnerable or marginalized populations

– E.g., use of static tools only could perpetuate adverse consequences for justice involved Indigenous persons

• The potential for misuse should not be the sole basis for governing decisions about whether to employ a given test

– Underscores the necessity of training and professional discretion

– Use of dynamic tools and integrating multiple measures with evidence of less bias

Indigenous Correctional Treatment Approaches

Indigenous Correctional Treatment Approaches

• Indigenous persons for several years now in CSC have access to traditional spiritual practices, Indigenous literacy classes, sweat lodge ceremonies, drumming circles, etc.

• Many of these programs are offered with Indigenous healing lodges

• 10 operated at the federal level 7 additional ones exist across Canada in provincial jurisdictions.

• Integration of CBT-based approaches with traditional Indigenous-specific approaches to healing

• Includes strengthening a reconnection to Indigenous cultural heritage

• Two models reviewed here:

• Indigenous healing lodges

• Integrated Indigenous correctional programs

Indigenous Healing Lodges

• Largely minimum security facilities that provide correctional services to Indigenous clients in a manner that respects Indigenous cultures. These services are often provided in traditional

• Environments designed specifically for Indigenous persons.

• Culturally appropriate services and programs (including Elder services) incorporating Indigenous values, traditions and beliefs.

• Goal to address factors that led to incarceration and prepare for community reintegration.

• Needs addressed through teachings and ceremonies, contact with Elders, and interaction with nature.

• Example of “Two eyed seeing”

o Integration of traditional holistic healing approaches with Western treatment approaches for the benefit of all

• Often experience spiritual growth due to reconnecting with Indigenous ways of knowing and being (e.g., sweat lodge, pipe, and Sundance ceremonies), engage in the process of recovery

Integrated Indigenous Correctional Treatment Approaches

• Integration of mainstream corrections treatment with Indigenous cultural rituals, beliefs, and practices within a correctional setting

• Indigenous men and women have option of completing core programming or Indigenous specific stream; may result in transfer to an Indigenous healing lodge

• Common threads of participation in cultural activities, service delivery by Indigenous staff, and support from family and community.

• Examples include Pathways, Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model, In Search of Your Warrior, and Tupiq

Integrated Indigenous Correctional Treatment Approaches

1. Pathways Initiative

o Elder-driven program that enables the Indigenous person to follow healing as a way of life.

o Completely immersive 24-7 adheres to the Medicine Wheel as a teaching tool (i.e., physical, spiritual, emotional, and intellectual components that create the whole (healed) person)

2. Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model (IICPM; previously Aboriginal ICPM, or AIPCM)

o RNR merged with Indigenous-specific program considerations

o minimum 50% Elder involvement, meets other cultural/spiritual needs

o Purpose to reconnect with Indigenous identity, promote healing, increase prosocial skills, decrease criminogenic needs

o High (108–117 sessions) and moderate (62–70 sessions) intensity IICPM streams

o Primarily group with some individual sessions and a weekly ceremony.

o Multi-target (i.e., targeting Central 8) or sexual offense specific (i.e., general and sexual-offense-specific criminogenic needs).

3. In Search of Your Warrior (ISYW)

o No longer in operation, but was a high intensity Indigenous specific violence reduction program that integrated Indigenous teachings and cultural practices with mainstream RNR interventions

4. Tupiq

o Inuit specific sexual offense treatment program, integrating Inuit cultural practices and beliefs with sexual offense specific treatment targets and intervention approaches

Effectiveness of Indigenous Correctional Treatment Approaches

• Positive self-reports of increasing comfort and engagement with Inidgenous staff and that culturally based programs enabled them to trust people more, stay out of trouble better, and deal more positively with their problems

• Outcome evaluations of Indigenous healing lodges have been highly variable from no effect to a positive treatment effect (i.e., reduced recidivism)

• Promising results for ISYW (Trevathan et al., 2005) and Tupiq (Stewart et al., 2015)

o Decreased violent and general recidivism

• AICPM/IICPM vs. standard ICPM vs. no intervention (Baffoe et al., 2019)

o Indigenous ICPM and standard ICPM better than no services

o No difference between Indigenous and standard variants in returns to custody for Indigenous persons