The classification of crime and its related problems: A pluralistic approach

Carter, Ethan; Ward, Tony; Strauss‐Hughes, Annalisa

doi:10.1016/j.avb.2020.101440

Cited by 19 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To emphasize that the discussions made throughout this paper are not exclusively tied to gang research, we briefly turn to consider the applicability of our discussions in relation to several examples with varying levels of similarity to gang research. These include examples of pluralist advancements in correctional classification (Carter et al, 2021), forensic psychology (Ward, 2019), and the study of psychopathology (Clack & Ward, 2020; Hawkins-Elder & Ward, 2021; Ward & Clack, 2019).…”

Section: Epistemic Pluralism and Conceptual Strategy Selection In The...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidently, correctional classification (Carter et al, 2021), forensic psychology (Ward, 2019), and gang research share considerable practical and epistemic connection due to similarities in the target systems studied (e.g., individuals who have offended, offense types), and the kinds of practical tasks pursued in correctional/forensic settings (e.g., risk assessment, treatment, risk management). Relevantly, Carter et al (2021) advocate for the justification of correctional classification systems in relation to stakeholder goals .…”

Section: Epistemic Pluralism and Conceptual Strategy Selection In The...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Epistemic pluralism and the justification of conceptual strategies in science

Wegerhoff

Ward

Dixon

2021

Theory & Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, epistemic pluralism has received considerable endorsement as an approach to constructing scientific explanations and pursuing empirical research programs. In this article, we briefly discuss the advantages of an epistemically pluralist approach before outlining our own model of epistemic pluralism. The model we present emphasizes the specific considerations that occur when determining and justifying the selection of conceptual strategies and how conceptual strategies work together to provide task-relevant insights. By clarifying these constraint relationships, we highlight the kinds of systematic considerations that must be taken into account when selecting conceptual strategies for research tasks. We present a case study based on gang research to demonstrate how such considerations occur and the epistemic and pragmatic benefits of doing so.

show abstract

Section: Epistemic Pluralism and Conceptual Strategy Selection In The...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Epistemic Pluralism and Conceptual Strategy Selection In The...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Epistemic pluralism and the justification of conceptual strategies in science

Wegerhoff

Ward

Dixon

2021

Theory & Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, the theoretical commitment to model pluralism within explanation expounded by this thesis has the potential to promote a corresponding approach to classification: a taxonomic pluralism in which multiple methods of classifying EDs are recognised and incorporated, each dedicated to the achievement of particular epistemic or practical goals (Carter et al, 2020;Sullivan, 2017). Like explanation, classification is a task that can be undertaken with many different goals or interests in mind.…”

Section: Classification and Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 94%

The Explanation of Disordered Eating: A Metatheoretical Approach

Elder¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Eating disorders are an increasingly serious global health problem, resulting in substantial physical and mental health costs for sufferers and their families, and for society as a whole. There has been considerable research aimed at understanding and treating these conditions. Despite this, treatment for disordered eating remains relatively poor, leaving many with ongoing suffering. Although there are many reasons why this may be the case, a possible contributor not investigated by the literature is the quality of the theoretical explanations underpinning these treatments. In this thesis, therefore, I set out to examine the quality of the current dominant explanations for disordered eating upon which best-practice treatments are based. Upon evaluation, these explanations are found to be significantly lacking in quality, leading to subsequent weaknesses in their interventions. Underlying these specific problems, I identify three common meta-theoretical issues with these explanations: (1) the poor selection and description of explanatory targets, (2) the use of single explanatory models as complete explanations (i.e., the One Best Model perspective), and (3) the lack of systematic method informing their construction. In the remainder of the thesis, I propose solutions for each of these, arguing for (1) more appropriate selection and compositional explanation of explanatory foci, (2) transition away from a unified approach to explanation toward model pluralism, and (3) the development and application of a guiding methodological framework for explanation in psychopathology. Each of these solutions represents a significant shift in our approach to understanding and explaining psychopathological conditions. Their application to the specific problem area of disordered eating is likely to result in explanations for these conditions that are more valid, comprehensive, and fruitful, thereby providing superior platforms for clinical intervention and research.</p>

show abstract

“…Practice itself primarily entails the application of CBT (Bonta & Andrews, 2017). Its defining principle is namely to intervene upon the cognitions (attitudes or thinking patterns supportive of offending) of the individuals attending programs, and equip them for cognitive self-management, thereby driving more prosocial behaviours outside correctional contexts (Berman, 2004;Strauss-Hughes et al, 2020). This reflects the traditional model of cognition that characterises correctional science, which portrays behaviour as driven primarily by brain-bound 'cognitive processes', maintaining a chronic divide between cognition and affect (Ward, 2017).…”

Section: The Rnr and Enactivismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As is to be outlined in later chapters, the development of the RNR was significant in that it provided a practice framework grounded in empirically verified principles (risk, need and responsivity) in an era where substantial doubt was being cast on the efficacy of rehabilitation (Sarre, 2001). However, critics have since noted fundamental theoretical flaws within this framework, concerning the nature of its explanatory tools, its exclusive focus on criminal outcomes and dependence on crime-based categories, which leaves considerations of agency a mostly excluded aspect (Carter, Ward & Hughes, 2020;Dent, Nielsen & Ward, 2020;Ward, 2020). These limitations underly the modest efficacy reported of current practice, including its relatively weak effect sizes in terms of reducing criminal behaviours, as well as substantial issues with motivation and non-completion of individuals who have offended (Day, 2021;Klepfisz, Daffern & Day, 2016;Lipsey & Cullen, 2007).…”

Section: Chapter One: Introduction and Outlinementioning

confidence: 99%

Enactivism and Correctional Science: An Analysis of Forensic Treatment of Agency in a Neoliberal Climate

O'Neill¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>In correctional practice, as primarily informed and driven by the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) practice framework of Bonta and Andrews (2017), theoretical explanations of agency bear significance in their representation and consequent treatment of ‘criminal’ agents. Due to a state of ‘theoretical illiteracy’ however, this domain remains largely divorced from the insights offered by current affective science (Ward, 2019). The purpose of this paper is to outline key principles offered within an ‘enactive’ paradigm; a contemporary strand of cognitive science that depicts cognition as embodied, embedded and enactive, ultimately submitting a relational cognitive-affective agency, constituted of habits of bodies and minds (Maise & Hanna, 2019; Ward, Silverman & Villalobos, 2017). Enactivism offers various elements that contrast with traditional internal ‘cognitivist models’ of agency, which inform mainstream correctional practice; these include the active, affective and social nature of cognition, which as is illustrated, lends emphasis to the impact of prevalent ideologies, through institutions, upon agents (Maise & Hanna, 2019). In this project I outline current correctional treatment of agency, as it stands in contrast to insights offered by enactive accounts, and as embedded in a broader neoliberal context. Therefore I provide some critical examination of the relationship between psychological theory and neoliberal ideology, specifically focusing on principles of individualism and self-governance it is purported to cultivate. In conclusion I maintain that the RNR provides a thin representation of agency that is driven by an internal and limited perspective of functioning that precludes aspects essential to the personhood of agents including its active, affective and phenomenological nature. As embedded in a neoliberal context, I argue that this significantly limits rehabilitative practice, and reifies an abstraction of mindedness from material and social contexts. A pluralistic approach to rehabilitation is therefore necessary, including the enactive and related perspectives expounded in this piece, in order to provide explanation and therefore practice beyond entrenched normative assumptions of agency and human function.</p>

show abstract

The classification of crime and its related problems: A pluralistic approach

Cited by 19 publications

References 38 publications

Epistemic pluralism and the justification of conceptual strategies in science

Epistemic pluralism and the justification of conceptual strategies in science

The Explanation of Disordered Eating: A Metatheoretical Approach

Enactivism and Correctional Science: An Analysis of Forensic Treatment of Agency in a Neoliberal Climate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About