Does Change in Hostility Predict Sexual Recidivism?

Pettersen, Cathrine; Nunes, Kevin L.; Woods, Mandie; Maimone, Sacha; Hermann, Chantal A.; Looman, Jan; Spape, Jessica

doi:10.1177/0306624x14547033

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 74 publications

(112 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As expected, patients who were characterized by higher levels of impulsivity and hostility at the time of unconditional release were more likely to violently reoffend up to 5 years from release, which is in line with previous research (Douglas & Skeem, 2005;Spreen et al, 2014). However, in previous studies, the link between hostility and recidivism was mainly determined in a sample of sexual offenders (Firestone et al, 2005;Pettersen et al, 2015), while the current study demonstrates this relationship also in a sample of violent offenders. Moreover, the results showed that influence of risky network members is the strongest predictor Note.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 46%

The Role of Dynamic Risk and Protective Factors in Predicting Violent Recidivism: Intellectual Ability as a Possible Moderator?

Garritsen

Janković

Masthoff

et al. 2022

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated which risk and protective factors, based on the 14 clinical indicators of the Historical-Clinical-Future Revised, significantly predicted violent recidivism in a sample of 315 male forensic psychiatric patients. Additionally, it was investigated whether these associations were moderated by intellectual ability. Regarding risk factors, a stronger influence of risky network members, and higher levels of hostility, impulsivity, and addiction significantly predicted violent recidivism. Likewise, regarding protective factors, poorer social and labor skills, and a lower degree of patient’s acceptance of crime responsibility were significant predictors of violent recidivism. Contrary to our expectations, better coping skills and more insight into risky behaviors that can lead to relapse also contributed significantly to an increased likelihood of violent recidivism. Intellectual ability had no significant moderating effect on the associations between the factors and violent recidivism. The results offer an insight into which factors need to be prioritized during treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 46%

The Role of Dynamic Risk and Protective Factors in Predicting Violent Recidivism: Intellectual Ability as a Possible Moderator?

Garritsen

Janković

Masthoff

et al. 2022

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, studies published during the years following these reviews have utilized higher--quality methodologies, yet findings have remained decidedly inconsistent. For example, among studies examining change in sex offenders attending rehabilitation, one study reported that change scores predicted recidivism beyond static risk scores (Beggs & Grace, 2011), but this finding is balanced by non-significant results in both large sample (Barnett, Wakeling, Mandeville--Norden, & Rakestrow, 2013;Wakeling, Beech, & Freemantle, 2013) and small sample programs (Nunes, Pettersen, Hermann, Looman, & Spape, 2014;Pettersen et al, 2015;Woessner & Schwedler, 2014). Similarly, Olver, Kingston, Nicholaichuk, and Wong (2014) found only a few subscales predicted recidivism in their sample of sex offenders, while most pre--post measures did not; however, change in sexual deviance was a consistent predictor across two samples (Olver, Beggs Christofferson, et al, 2014).…”

Section: Meta--reviews Of Intra--individual Change During Rehabilitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can a Dynamic Risk Instrument Make Short-Term Predictions in "Real Time"? Developing a Framework for Testing Proximal Assessment of Offender Recidivism Risk During Re-entry

Lloyd¹

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Correctional psychologists have classified risk factors for criminal recidivism into static (non--changing, non--improving) and dynamic (theoretically changeable) domains. By definition, a dynamic risk factor is a variable that can change across time, and as it changes, offenders' likelihood of recidivism must logically change in This dissertation is organized to allow readers to focus their attention on the goals relevant to their interests. Chapter 1 reviews prior literature on dynamic risk, and describes the theoretical reasons why repeatedly measuring dynamic variables should enhance decision--making within correctional supervision. Chapter 2 addresses the statistical modeling of re--assessment data by (a) describing a researcher's choice of statistical models when attempting to analyze re--assessment data, and (b) introducing the features of the Cox regression model with time--varying predictors. Chapter 3 describes the dataset used within this dissertation, as well as the measurement and procedures of the study from which the dataset was drawn.The remaining chapters address whether it is meaningful for an agency to continually re--assess offenders with a purportedly dynamic risk measure. Chapter 4 describes the initial descriptive results of the re--assessment data, and presents the basic prediction models using Cox regression with time--varying predictors. Chapter 5 specifically addresses model--building strategies for testing the hypothesis that distal assessments (i.e., initial baseline scores) will demonstrate weaker predictive validity compared to models that include more proximal assessments (i.e., re-assessments).In conclusion, Chapter 6 provides a general discussion of the results drawn from the analyses, comments on the implications of the findings, and proposes some directions for future research. Chapter 1: Theory, Literature, and HypothesisVariables that are statistically associated with future criminal offending are termed risk factors, and the assessment of an individual's risk factors plays a critical hypothesized schemas (Simons & Burt, 2011). In turn, the schemas were related to interpretations of situations (perceived provocations and opportunities), and these interpretations were directly related to criminal delinquency . Further, Simons and Barr (2014) demonstrated that delinquents who engaged in high--quality romantic relationships in young adulthood simultaneously reduced their criminal behavior, and that simultaneous changes in social schemas could account for approximately one--third of the partnership--crime reduction effect. In summary, this set of research suggests that background features indirectly influence all stages of criminal involvement (onset, repeat offending, and cessation) through social schemas (pro--crime perspectives), which directly impact criminal action, if they are accessible to the individual in an immediate situation.

show abstract

“…Although it is not their primary purpose, psychological treatment programs where risk assessments are completed before and after treatment are well-suited to this kind of research. Studies that have taken this approach have found some support for the hypothesis that reassessment improves prediction, with post-treatment dynamic assessment scores demonstrating stronger or incremental predictive validity over pre-treatment scores (Beggs & Grace, 2010;de Vries Robbé, de Vogel, Douglas, & Nijman, 2015;Hudson, Wales, Bakker, & Ward, 2002;Pettersen et al, 2015;Wakeling, Beech, & Freemantle, 2013). However, the effects have not been strong, and a meta-analysis of attitudes supportive of sexual offending, (Helmus, Hanson, Babchishin, & Mann, 2013), found no significant difference in the predictive accuracy of assessment scores from before and after treatment.…”

Section: Pre-and Post-treatment Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of How Change in Dynamic Risk and Protective Factors Affects the Prediction of Imminent Criminal Recidivism

Davies¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Dynamic risk and protective factors are changeable, psychosocial variables associated with an increased or decreased likelihood of future criminal behaviour. These variables have an important role in correctional psychology. In particular, they are increasingly central to the management and supervision of individuals released from prison. The changeable nature of these variables means that, with frequent reassessment, the likelihood of recidivism can be monitored during the release period, and intervention can be more carefully targeted to an individual’s needs. However, research has yet to clearly demonstrate that reassessment of dynamic risk and protective factors can accurately track the likelihood of recidivism over time. Further, relatively little is known about how these variables change over time, and how change is associated with recidivism. This thesis set out to investigate whether reassessment of a dynamic risk assessment tool—the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry (DRAOR; Serin, 2007; Serin, Mailloux, & Wilson, 2012)—would enhance the prediction of imminent recidivism among a large sample of high-risk men (n = 966) released from prison on parole in New Zealand. The analyses addressing this question were divided into three primary sections: 1) an investigation of whether a single proximal assessment was a more accurate predictor of imminent recidivism than a single baseline assessment completed shortly after release; 2) an investigation of whether a single proximal assessment was a more accurate predictor of recidivism than a series of aggregated measures across multiple time points, and; 3) an investigation of whether several different measures of intra-individual change demonstrated incremental predictive validity over the most proximal assessment. This approach represented a replication and extension of the framework set out by Lloyd (2015) in a recent thesis for testing whether reassessment of dynamic risk and protective factors enhances the prediction of imminent recidivism. Across all three sections, results provided consistent evidence that the most proximal assessment was the most accurate predictor of imminent recidivism. The most proximal assessment was a significantly more accurate predictor than a baseline assessment, and neither aggregation nor measures of intra-individual change clearly improved predictive accuracy. These results highlight the importance of reassessment for monitoring changes in the likelihood of recidivism over time and have important implications for community correctional agencies who are tasked with managing individuals released from prison, particularly those deemed to be the highest risk of recidivism. The results also have theoretical implications for the concepts of dynamic risk and protective factors and their role in the process leading to recidivism. A better understanding of the recidivism process should lead to intervention strategies that are more effective at reducing recidivism.</p>

show abstract

Does Change in Hostility Predict Sexual Recidivism?

Cited by 6 publications

References 74 publications

The Role of Dynamic Risk and Protective Factors in Predicting Violent Recidivism: Intellectual Ability as a Possible Moderator?

The Role of Dynamic Risk and Protective Factors in Predicting Violent Recidivism: Intellectual Ability as a Possible Moderator?

Can a Dynamic Risk Instrument Make Short-Term Predictions in "Real Time"? Developing a Framework for Testing Proximal Assessment of Offender Recidivism Risk During Re-entry

An Investigation of How Change in Dynamic Risk and Protective Factors Affects the Prediction of Imminent Criminal Recidivism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About