Inmate Thinking Patterns: An Empirical Investigation

Mandracchia, Jon T.; Morgan, Robert D.; Garos, Sheila; Garland, John T.; Rodriguez, Amy D.

doi:10.1037/e512752007-001

Cited by 15 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As opposed to traditional conceptualizations of criminogenic cognitions, findings from Mandracchia et al (2007) indicate that criminogenic thinking appears to include both criminogenic and noncriminogenic thinking patterns, such as automatic thoughts and irrational beliefs (Beck, 1976, andEllis, 1992, respectively). As such, criminogenic thinking consists of an array of maladaptive cognitions that promote both mental health problems and criminal behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting Offenders’ Criminogenic Cognitions With Status Variables

Mandracchia

Morgan

2011

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Certain thinking styles promote criminal behavior, and these criminogenic cognitions are not engaged in equally by all offenders. It is imperative to know which offenders are engaging in more criminogenic thinking so their problematic thinking can be targeted and altered during correctional treatment programming. In doing so, correctional mental health professionals may help reduce recidivism. In the current investigation, the researchers sought to identify offenders most likely to engage in criminogenic cognitions on the basis of status variables (i.e., demographic, incarceration, and mental health variables) using data from 595 adult male incarcerated offenders. Findings indicate that younger offenders, less educated offenders, Black and Hispanic offenders, single (i.e., not in a relationship) offenders, offenders without a violent index offense, offenders with a psychological disorder, and offenders not participating in mental health services all endorsed higher levels of some types of criminogenic cognitions. These findings have important implications for correctional mental health care practice toward criminal recidivism reduction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…More detailed descriptions of the development of the MOTS and the MOTS-R are found in Mandracchia et al (2007) and Mandracchia and Morgan (in press). The MOTS-R is a 65-item self-administered survey with responses presented on a 5-point Likert-type scale; it is appropriate for respondents with at least a fifth-grade English reading ability.…”

Section: Mots-rmentioning

confidence: 98%

Predicting Offenders’ Criminogenic Cognitions With Status Variables

Mandracchia

Morgan

2011

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, three additional measures have appeared in the literature -- The Measure of Offender Thinking Styles (MOTS; Mandracchia, Morgan, Garos, & Garland, 2007), the Criminogenic Thinking Profile (CTP; Mitchell & Tafrate, 2011), and the Texas Christian University Criminal Thinking Scales (TCU-CTS; Knight, Garner, Simpson, Morey, & Flynn, 2006). …”

Section: Extant Measures Of Criminogenic Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mandracchia and colleagues (2007) factor analyzed 77 thinking patterns derived from the work of Yochelson and Samenow (1976), Walters (1990), Beck (1976), and Ellis (2001), but no data are available regarding its relation to criminal history, institutional misconduct, or subsequent offense. In a follow up report (Mandracchia & Morgan, 2010), canonical correlations indicated that the three factors of the MOTS (Control, Cognitive Immaturity, and Egocentrism) were negatively related to receipt of mental health services, and positively associated with longer sentences, more time served, and (surprisingly) greater education.…”

Section: Extant Measures Of Criminogenic Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability, Validity, and Predictive Utility of the 25-item Criminogenic Cognitions Scale (CCS)

Tangney¹,

Stuewig

Furukawa

et al. 2012

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theory, research, and clinical reports suggest that moral cognitions play a role in initiating and sustaining criminal behavior. The 25 item Criminogenic Cognitions Scale (CCS) was designed to tap 5 dimensions: Notions of entitlement; Failure to Accept Responsibility; Short-Term Orientation; Insensitivity to Impact of Crime; and Negative Attitudes Toward Authority. Results from 552 jail inmates support the reliability, validity, and predictive utility of the measure. The CCS was linked to criminal justice system involvement, self-report measures of aggression, impulsivity, and lack of empathy. Additionally, the CCS was associated with violent criminal history, antisocial personality, and clinicians’ ratings of risk for future violence and psychopathy (PCL:SV). Furthermore, criminogenic thinking upon incarceration predicted subsequent official reports of inmate misconduct during incarceration. CCS scores varied somewhat by gender and race. Research and applied uses of CCS are discussed.

show abstract

“…These instruments include the PICTS (Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles) (Walters, 2002 ), the Criminal Sentiments Scale (Shields & Simourd, 1991 ), the Measure of Offender Thinking Styles (Mandracchia, Morgan, Garos, & Garland, 2007 ), the TCU Criminal Thinking Scales ( Knight, Garner, Simpson, Morey, & Flynn, 2006 ), the Criminogenic Thinking Profi le (Mitchell & Tafrate, 2012 ), and the Criminal Cognitions Scale (Tangney et al, 2012 ). The instruments vary in length (from 80 items for the PICTS to 25 items for the CCS) and number of subscales (from 8 to 4).…”

Section: Antisocial Cognitions/thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%