Levels of Attribution and Change in a High-Security Correctional Population

Abstract

The goal of this research is to test the psychometric properties of the Levels of Attribution and Change (LAC) scale using a segment of a High-Security Federal correctional population. The LAC measures ten causal attributions of a given problem. The theoretical and empirical interrelatedness of these attributions are explored through a range of statistical techniques. The results suggest that the LAC is a reliable instrument that demonstrates concurrent validity. Offender attributions or explanations about the causes of their imprisonment are represented by two dimensions. One is predominantly external, and the other is predominantly internal. A more complex LAC attribution set is associated with measures of treatment motivation and criminal thinking style. The utility of the LAC as an indicator of treatment responsivity is discussed.

Mapping the Criminal Mind: Idiographic Assessment of Criminal Belief Systems

“…Eddie's scores on the LAC are summarized in Table 2. Three of the four LAC subscales on which Eddie attained above average scores (T-score > 50), Intrapersonal Conflicts, Chosen Lifestyle, and Insufficient Effort, were also the three subscales that Magaletta et al (2004) found loaded highest on their internal attributional factor composite. Based on these results, it would appear that Eddie possesses a moderately strong internal locus of causation with respect to his attributions for incarceration.…”

“…The Levels of Attribution and Change scale (LAC: Norcross, Prochaska, Guadagnoli, & DiClemente, 1984) is a 60-item self-report inventory that generates 10 subscale scores. Magaletta, Jackson, Miller, and Innes (2004) recently discovered that the 10 LAC subscales organized themselves into two general factors, internal attributions and external attributions, when administered to a group of 104 maximum-security inmate program participants. Eddie's scores on the LAC are summarized in Table 2.…”

“…Eddie completed the Outcome Expectancies for Crime measure (OEC: Walters, 2003) by indicating on a 7-point Likert-type scale the degree to which he believed he would receive 12 positive outcomes (acceptance, approval, control, excitement, freedom, love, power, prestige, purpose, respect, security, status) and 4 negative outcomes (death, jail or prison, loss of family, loss of job) were he to participate in a specific criminal act, which in Eddie's case was drug dealing. His (Magaletta, Jackson, Miller, & Innes, 2004).…”

The Latent Structure of the Criminal Lifestyle

“…The other five schematic subnetworks are attributions, outcome expectancies, efficacy expectancies, goals, and values. Validated measures already exist for attributions (Magaletta, Jackson, Miller, & Innes, 2004) and outcome expectancies (Walters, 2003b) for crime. Research that includes these two measures with the PICTS and/or LCSF could shed further light on the latent structure of the criminal lifestyle.…”