The Clinical Utility of Personality Profiles of High-Risk Offenders in Rehabilitation

<p>Personality disorders are common among high-risk offenders. These disorders may have relevance for their risk of offending, and they are likely to present barriers to their engagement in rehabilitation programmes. Co-morbidity between personality disorders - and the high frequency of clinical disorders in general - in offender samples complicate research on personality disorder in offender rehabilitation. One approach to understanding this heterogeneity is to use cluster analysis (CA). CA is an empirical strategy which is used to identify subgroups (clusters) of individuals who have similar scores on the variables used in the analysis. It has been used to empirically identify different patterns of personality and clinical psychopathology among incarcerated offenders. Two profiles frequently emerge in cluster analytic research on offender psychopathology profiles: an antisocial/narcissistic profile and a high-psychopathology profile. However, previous research has not empirically examined whether the identification of these profiles has clinical relevance for offender rehabilitation; that is, whether the profiles are simply descriptive, or whether they can provide useful information for the management and rehabilitation of offenders. In the current research, I used data collected from high risk offenders entering prison-based rehabilitation programmes to investigate the clinical utility of psychopathology clusters. Using a self-report measure of personality and clinical psychopathology - the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III - I identified three clusters: a low-psychopathology cluster (26% of the sample), a high-psychopathology cluster (35% of the sample), and an antisocial/narcissistic cluster (39% of the sample). The high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters in particular resembled high risk clusters found in previous research. To determine whether the three clusters had clinical relevance, I investigated cluster differences in criminal risk, treatment responsivity, and self-report predictive validity. I found evidence for cluster differences in criminal risk: men in the high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters had higher rates of criminal recidivism after release compared to men in the low-psychopathology cluster. However, I found that regardless of psychopathology, men in all three clusters made progress in treatment, and there was little evidence that clusters that reported more psychopathology were less engaged, or made less progress. In the final study I examined cluster differences in self-presentation style and the predictive validity of self-report. Results indicated that offenders who reported high levels of psychopathology had a more general tendency for negative self-presentation, and their self-report on risk-related measures was highly predictive of criminal recidivism. Combined, the results of this research show that cluster analysis of self-reported psychopathology can generate a parsimonious model of heterogeneity in offender samples. Importantly, the resulting clusters can also provide information for some of the most important tasks in offender management: assessment and treatment. The results suggest the highest risk offenders tend to report higher levels of psychopathology, and that offenders who report extensive psychopathology also have highly predictive risk-related self-report. Perhaps one of the most reassuring findings of the current research is that even offenders who report high levels of psychopathology appear to benefit from rehabilitation.</p>

The Clinical Utility of Personality Profiles of High-Risk Offenders in Rehabilitation

<p>Personality disorders are common among high-risk offenders. These disorders may have relevance for their risk of offending, and they are likely to present barriers to their engagement in rehabilitation programmes. Co-morbidity between personality disorders - and the high frequency of clinical disorders in general - in offender samples complicate research on personality disorder in offender rehabilitation. One approach to understanding this heterogeneity is to use cluster analysis (CA). CA is an empirical strategy which is used to identify subgroups (clusters) of individuals who have similar scores on the variables used in the analysis. It has been used to empirically identify different patterns of personality and clinical psychopathology among incarcerated offenders. Two profiles frequently emerge in cluster analytic research on offender psychopathology profiles: an antisocial/narcissistic profile and a high-psychopathology profile. However, previous research has not empirically examined whether the identification of these profiles has clinical relevance for offender rehabilitation; that is, whether the profiles are simply descriptive, or whether they can provide useful information for the management and rehabilitation of offenders. In the current research, I used data collected from high risk offenders entering prison-based rehabilitation programmes to investigate the clinical utility of psychopathology clusters. Using a self-report measure of personality and clinical psychopathology - the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III - I identified three clusters: a low-psychopathology cluster (26% of the sample), a high-psychopathology cluster (35% of the sample), and an antisocial/narcissistic cluster (39% of the sample). The high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters in particular resembled high risk clusters found in previous research. To determine whether the three clusters had clinical relevance, I investigated cluster differences in criminal risk, treatment responsivity, and self-report predictive validity. I found evidence for cluster differences in criminal risk: men in the high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters had higher rates of criminal recidivism after release compared to men in the low-psychopathology cluster. However, I found that regardless of psychopathology, men in all three clusters made progress in treatment, and there was little evidence that clusters that reported more psychopathology were less engaged, or made less progress. In the final study I examined cluster differences in self-presentation style and the predictive validity of self-report. Results indicated that offenders who reported high levels of psychopathology had a more general tendency for negative self-presentation, and their self-report on risk-related measures was highly predictive of criminal recidivism. Combined, the results of this research show that cluster analysis of self-reported psychopathology can generate a parsimonious model of heterogeneity in offender samples. Importantly, the resulting clusters can also provide information for some of the most important tasks in offender management: assessment and treatment. The results suggest the highest risk offenders tend to report higher levels of psychopathology, and that offenders who report extensive psychopathology also have highly predictive risk-related self-report. Perhaps one of the most reassuring findings of the current research is that even offenders who report high levels of psychopathology appear to benefit from rehabilitation.</p>

Examining the Utility of the LSI-R in a Sample of Women who have Sexually Offended

The ability to identify factors predictive of recidivism among individuals who have offended is integral to properly targeting supervision and treatment focus. Instruments such as the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) show promise with general justice-involved females, but no study to our knowledge has assessed it with women who have sexually offended. The purpose of this study is to examine the utility of the LSI-R in a sample of 243 women from the State of Texas who have sexually offended. Results indicate that the total score was significantly related to criminal recidivism (Harrell’s C = .67) and any recidivism (Harrell’s C = .65). Analyses of the subscales indicated that criminal history and alcohol/drug subscales were significantly related to all forms of recidivism, while the education/employment and financial scales were significantly related to criminal recidivism and any recidivism. These results provide insight into risk assessment and treatment for women who have sexually offended.

Qualification of the repeated single offence: the case of hooliganism

In this scientific article is addressed the issue of qualifying the crime of hooliganism when it occurs in the position of repeated crime. It is argued that in order to be incident the aggravating circumstantial sign enshrined in letter a) paragraph (2) art. 287 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova it is not imperative that the perpetrator has previously committed an act of hooliganism in the standard version. The repeated single offense is a legal fiction. The offenses committed (forming the repeated offense) de facto represent a multiple offences, while de jure, artificially, form the content of a single offense. In any case, the repeated crime bears enormous similarities to the multiple offences (a form of the plurality of offences), deriving from the latter legal category. Repeated crime does not constitute a deviation from criminal recidivism (the other form of plurality of offenses). Repeated crime is not a form of plurality of crimes.

Criminal Histories and Rates of Recidivism Among Two Subtypes of Psychopathic Individuals

Although it is well established that individuals with psychopathic traits are a high-risk group for criminal recidivism, there is considerable evidence that psychopathy is a heterogeneous personality disorder comprised of two subtypes who differ on levels of negative affect (NA). However, few studies have examined differences in criminal histories, and fewer still have investigated differences in recidivism among subtypes of psychopathy. The current study compared criminal histories and recidivism rates between psychopathy subtypes differing in NA (high-NA vs. low-NA) within a sample of adult males incarcerated in state prisons. The high-NA and low-NA psychopathy subtypes did not differ on histories of total, nonviolent, or violent crime, and did not differ on rates of total, nonviolent, or violent recidivism. This finding highlights equally high levels of criminal risk associated with both subtypes of psychopathic individuals. Intervention strategies should be prioritized for both subgroups to effectively reduce the criminal costs associated with psychopathy.