The psychological inventory of criminal thinking styles and level of service inventory-revised: Screening version as predictors of official and self-reported disciplinary infractions.

Walters, Glenn D.; Schlauch, Charles

doi:10.1007/s10979-007-9117-5

Cited by 40 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examination of the relationship between importation and deprivation characteristics and receipt of any type of disciplinary infraction, throughout one calendar year, revealed that an inmate's age at prison admission, gang affiliation status, number of received visits, and criminal offense conviction were significant predictors. Consistent with earlier research, which found that younger inmates engaged more frequently in misconduct behind bars (Griffin & Hepburn, 2006;McReynolds & Wasserman, 2008;Walters & Schlauch, 2008;Welsh et al, 2007;Wooldredge et al, 2001), younger inmates in the present study were also more likely to receive any type of disciplinary infraction. Race, educational level, and marital status were not statistically significant in either model.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Disciplinary Infractions Behind Bars

Tewksbury

Connor

Denney

2014

Criminal Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using data from one Midwestern state, this article investigates whether or not characteristics of importation and deprivation serve as predictors of receipt of institutional disciplinary infractions. The results of the logistic regression analyses indicate that both importation and deprivation factors were significant indicators of having received disciplinary infractions. Specifically, among 585 adult male inmates, data reveal that two importation measures and two deprivation measures were significant predictors of receipt of any disciplinary infractions. An inmate's gang membership status and conviction for a sex offense are also found to have been significant indicators of having or not having received at least one serious disciplinary infraction. Policy implications, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Disciplinary Infractions Behind Bars

Tewksbury

Connor

Denney

2014

Criminal Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Age has been predictive of criminal thinking in some studies (Mandracchia & Morgan, 2012;Palmer & Hollin, 2003;Walters, 2003;Walters, Frederick, & Schlauch, 2007) but not in others Walters & Schlauch, 2008). Race also has been used to predict criminal thinking, but produced mixed results.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Attitudes and Emotions Among Inmates

Wolff

Morgan

Shi

2013

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the relationship between behavioral health problems and criminogenic thinking, aggression, self-control, and hopelessness, controlling for other demographic and criminal behavior characteristics among incarcerated persons. Male (n = 3,986) and female (n = 218) inmates expected to be released within 24 months from prisons affiliated with a northeastern state department of corrections completed the Criminal Sentiments Scale-Modified, Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire Short-Form, Brief Self-Control Scale, and Beck Hopelessness Scale. Results indicated that behavioral health variables were significantly and substantially correlated with antisocial thinking, aggression, self-control, and hopelessness. For male inmates, serious mental illness and substance abuse problems significantly increased antisocial attitudes, aggression, and hopelessness scores and decreased self-control scores. In preparing incarcerated persons with and without mental illnesses for reentry to the community, it is critical to develop and implement evidence-based interventions that respond to attitudinal and emotional risk factors that predict relapse and recidivism.

show abstract

“…Some studies, however, have found no relationship between age and criminogenic cognitions in adult offenders. Walters and Schlauch (2008) found age to be uncorrelated with PICTS General Criminal Thinking (GCT) scores, and Mandracchia and Morgan (2010) found age to be unrelated to the three criminogenic cognitions styles on the Measure of Offender Thinking Styles (MOTS; i.e., control, cognitive immaturity, egocentrism). There appear to be no studies, however, in which age was found to be positively correlated with criminogenic cognitions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Offenders’ Criminogenic Cognitions With Status Variables

Mandracchia

Morgan

2011

Criminal Justice and Behavior

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

The psychological inventory of criminal thinking styles and level of service inventory-revised: Screening version as predictors of official and self-reported disciplinary infractions.

Cited by 40 publications

References 24 publications

Disciplinary Infractions Behind Bars

Disciplinary Infractions Behind Bars

Comparative Analysis of Attitudes and Emotions Among Inmates

Predicting Offenders’ Criminogenic Cognitions With Status Variables

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About