Problems in the measurement of dynamic risk factors in sexual offenders

Beech, Anthony R.; Wakeling, Helen C.; Szumski, Filip; Freemantle, Nick

doi:10.1080/1068316x.2015.1109095

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, the policy emphasis is on effecting control of individual sex offenders rather than the broader socio-structural contexts which impinge upon offending behaviour and personal motivations for change. In practice, the scientific calculation of risk tends to focus on individual offender proclivities, including static and dynamic risk factors (see generally, Beech et al, 2016), rather than the underlying relational or situational contexts of risk management. In fact, far from being ‘predatory’ or ‘preferential’, the majority of sexual offending is opportunistic or situational in nature (Farmer et al, 2016; McAlinden, 2012).…”

Section: Deconstructing the ‘Risk’ Of Sexual Offendingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualising ‘risk’: Towards a humanistic paradigm of sexual offending

McAlinden

2021

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within Western criminal justice traditions, the ‘risk’ paradigm has become the defining logic of contemporary laws and policies on sex offender management. This article critically examines the limitations of current technocratic and algorithmic approaches to risk in relation to sexual offending and how they might be addressed. Drawing on nearly two decades of theoretical and empirical research conducted by the author, it applies the learning on sex offender reintegration and desistance to advance a ‘humanistic’ paradigm of sexual offending. The paper attempts to counter some of the dangers of algorithmic justice and shift risk-based discourse away from its predominantly ‘scientific’ origins. It argues that such a move towards a more expansive and progressive version of risk within criminal justice discourses would better capture the realities of sexual offending behaviour and its real-world governance.

show abstract

Section: Deconstructing the ‘Risk’ Of Sexual Offendingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualising ‘risk’: Towards a humanistic paradigm of sexual offending

McAlinden

2021

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It draws its practice guidelines, methods and guiding ideas primarily (and narrowly) from conceptually thin risk management models such as Bonta and Andrews (2017) General Personality and Cognitive Social Learning Perspective (GPCSP) (Ward et al 2007). While some areas of correctional psychology like sexual offending have developed a comprehensive range of explanatory theories (e.g., Beech and Ward 2017;, practitioners largely rely on risk management models in their day to day clinical work. In other words, there is a reliance on content "light" theories to structure assessment and clinical work with individuals who have been convicted of crimes (Ward 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Theories identify the causes of crime-related phenomena such as addiction or poor emotional control, and thereby provide assessment and therapeutic targets. An example of lack of attention to theory construction in forensic psychology is the failure to demonstrate that within treatment changes in dynamic risk factors (hypothesized causal factors; DRF) are responsible for reduced recidivism rates (e.g., Cording et al 2016;, ongoing questions about their theoretical coherence (e.g., Beech et al 2016;Ward and Fortune 2016) and the relatively modest effect sizes for correctional interventions (e.g., Klepfisz et al 2016;Schmucker and Losel 2015). A legacy of this lack of attention to a deeper theoretical analysis of dynamic risk factors is that we are not sure exactly how therapy is contributing to reduction in recidivism and even when treatment is effective, it does not appear to operate in the way we think (e.g., DRFs are not always reduced).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why theory matters in correctional psychology

Ward

2020

Forens Psychiatr Psychol Kriminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary forensic psychology is characterized by a relative lack of attention to theory building and conceptual analysis. In my view, this neglect of theory amounts to theoretical illiteracy and represents a significant obstacle to the explanation of crime and its management. In this paper I explore the problem of theoretical illiteracy for forensic psychological research and practice. First, I discuss why theory is important in science and the dangers of ignoring it. Second, I review the role of theory in addressing the myriad of practical problems facing human beings. Third, I outline three strategies to increase researchers and practitioners' appreciation of theory construction and development: adopting a more comprehensive model of scientific method, epistemic iteration, and promoting model pluralism. Fourth, I examine two examples of core concepts from correctional psychology, that of dynamic risk factors and classification, and demonstrate how the above strategies can be used to address problems with these constructs. Keywords Classification • Theoretical illiteracy • Dynamic risk factors • Protective factors • Treatment Zur Bedeutung von Theorie in der Vollzugspsychologie Theorie-Illetrismus und therapeutische Ineffektivität Zusammenfassung Die forensische Psychologie ist derzeit durch ein relatives Defizit an Aufmerksamkeit für Theoriebildung und konzeptuelle Analyse gekennzeichnet. Aus Sicht des Autors läuft diese Vernachlässigung auf einen Theorie-Illetrismus hinaus und stellt ein erhebliches Hindernis für die Erklärung von Straftaten und deren Bewältigung dar. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird das Problem des Theorie-Illetrismus für die forensisch-psychologische Forschung und Praxis untersucht. Zunächst wird diskutiert, warum Theorie in der Wissenschaft wichtig ist und welche Gefahren entstehen, wenn sie ignoriert wird. Zweitens wird die Rolle der Theorie beim Umgang mit den zahllosen praktischen Problemen, mit denen Menschen konfrontiert sind, untersucht. Dann werden 3 Möglichkeiten skizziert, wie Forschende und konkret Praktizierende die Theoriebildung und-entwicklung besser einschätzen können: die Annahme eines umfassenderen Modells wissenschaftlicher Methodik, die epistemische Iteration und die Förderung des Modellpluralismus. Viertens werden exemplarisch 2 Schlüsselkonzepte aus der Justizvollzugspsychologie überprüft: dynamische Risikofaktoren und Klassifikation. Dabei wird aufgezeigt, wie die beschriebenen Strategien eingesetzt werden können, um Probleme mit diesen Konstrukten anzugehen.

show abstract

“…It has recently been suggested that "the theoretical legitimacy of incorporating dynamic risk factors into the domain of treatment depends on their causal status" (Ward & Fortune, 2016a, p. 80). Researchers who are interested in the relationship between dynamic risk factor (DRF) change, treatment, and recidivism are increasingly noting that the current conceptual understanding of DRF is impacting on the quality of research (Beech, Wakeling, Szumski, & Freemantle, 2016;Cording et al, 2016;Klepfisz, Daffern, & Day, 2016;Serin, Lloyd, Helmus, Derkzen, & Luong, 2013;van den Berg, Smid, Schepers, Wever, van Beek, Janssen, & Gijs, 2018). There is concern that DRF may just be 'symptoms' or 'proxies' of underlying causal processes, rather than established causes themselves (Klepfisz et al, 2016;van den Berg et al, 2018;Ward & Fortune, 2016b).…”

Section: Chapter Two: Empirical Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond dynamic risk factors: Towards a comprehensive explanation of offending

Heffernan¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>The current conceptualisation of dynamic risk factors (DRF) for criminal offending is problematic. There have been significant conceptual issues highlighted in this domain, however, until recently addressing these has not been a priority for researchers. Instead, research has predominantly focused on the success of DRF in predicting reoffending and the effectiveness of treatment programmes that target these factors. DRF are typically defined as aspects of individuals and their environments that are associated with an increased likelihood of reoffending, and they are widely considered ‘plausible causes’ of criminal behaviour. It is acknowledged that this definition encompasses a wide range of individual characteristics, social processes, behaviours, and environmental features, and that these vary in their ability to explain and predict offending. The more recent interest in features that reduce risk has prompted similar discussions about the concept of protective factors (PF). Given the frequent use of, and interest in, these foundational concepts it is timely to investigate them in depth, and to address two key issues. First, both DRF and PF are broad category labels that encompass a diverse (and largely unspecified) range of psychological and contextual features and processes. Second, without a clear understanding of what exactly these constructs are, it is difficult to effectively link them to correctional research and practice. I will begin this thesis by setting out the problems with the reliance on DRF to explain offending. I will do this by exploring recent empirical findings concerning their relationship with recidivism and outlining numerous conceptual problems which make DRF poor candidates for causal explanation. I will then suggest a shift in focus, from these crime correlates to human nature and agency, and argue that this perspective is essential in explaining any behaviour. I will present a preliminary model based on agency and demonstrate the utility of this perspective in reconceptualising DRF as aspects of goal-directed behaviour. Next, I will develop a framework for continuing this theoretical research and adding depth to theories of agency. Finally, I will discuss the implications of agency theories for forensic interventions, including their integration with widely used rehabilitation models. I will conclude with an evaluation of the approaches developed throughout this thesis and make some suggestions for future research. This research holds promise in directing the field away from the otherwise inevitable theoretical ‘dead end’.</p>

show abstract

Problems in the measurement of dynamic risk factors in sexual offenders

Cited by 18 publications

References 62 publications

Reconceptualising ‘risk’: Towards a humanistic paradigm of sexual offending

Reconceptualising ‘risk’: Towards a humanistic paradigm of sexual offending

Why theory matters in correctional psychology

Beyond dynamic risk factors: Towards a comprehensive explanation of offending

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About