Arson & Fire Setting Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Arson

  • criminal damage act
  • criminal justice system
  • fire & rescue service
  • Police 2012/13
  • FRS England/Wales
  • 3 cats
  • violent offence?
A
  • legal term from Criminal Damage Act- whether life endangered.
  • Criminal Justice System define as “property offence”.
  • Fire & Rescue Service- “arson fire” deliberate/malicious ignition suspected not necessarily proven.

Police 2012/13- 19,306 cases arson reported

FRS England/Wales- 45% fire attended were deliberate- however it’s hard to count.

3 categories:
1- Simple Arson.
2- Arson with Intent Danger Life.
3- Reckless Arson.

Arson violent offence from Psychological perspective depends:
1- Motivation
2- Psychological Characteristics of perpetrator.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Fire Setting

A

-broader- all instances of setting fire, irrespective if resulted in criminal charges.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Literature Caveats

  • Brett 2004
  • Daykin & Hamilton 2012
A

terms poorly defined- A & FS often used interchangeably.

  • differing methodologies.
  • operationalised poorly/differently per paper.
  • intent often hard to gauge.

Brett 2004- big fire just small fire that got out of control.

maj of literature done on convicted arsonist- very small population of arsonists.

Daykin & Hamilton 2012- detection & conviction is very low.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Common myths

  • pyromania
  • Rice & Harris 1991
  • Lindberg et al 2005
  • sex
  • Rice & Harris 1991
  • Prins et al 1985
A

Pyromania- mental disorder. Most serial arsonists not pyromaniacs.

  • very specific DSM-V criteria needed very low reported rates.
  • criteria include: pleasure/gratification/relief from fire setting. -no monetary gain. -tension or affective arousal before the act.

Rice & Harris 1991- <1%
Lindberg et al 2005- 3%

Sexually motivated fire setting- it’s very very rare.
Rice & Harris 1991- 6/243 males in psychiatric institution.

Prins et al 1985- 133 arsonists on parole board- 0 sexually motivated.

-some research link b/w sexual abnormality in general rather than specifically related to fire setting.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Arson Recidivism (repeated acts)

  • Brett 2004
  • Hurely et al 1969
  • Koson et al 1982
  • Rice & Harris 1991
  • Virkkuen et al 1996
A

-rates vary.
Brett 2004- 4 - 60%
Hurely et al 1969- 10%
Koson et al 1982- 38%

Issues- variation in definition of recidivism
Rice & Harris 1991- “lighting multi fires”.

Virkkuen et al 1996- “within defined follow-up period”.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Characteristics of arsonists

-Dickens & Sugarman 2012

A

Dickens & Sugarman 2012- summary:
-male, low socio-e status, unemployed, low educational lvl, single, 18-35 y/o, mental illness/personality disorder, low self-esteem, lack assertiveness & appear anxious, low IQ.
Predisposing factors?- family history- antisocial behaviour & childhood disturbances.

  • quite general could apply to many subgroups of offenders.
  • issue what treatment?- hard Q, treat like other offenders?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Characteristics of arsonists

  • Gannon & Pina 2010
  • Labree et al 2010
  • Rasanen et al 1995
  • Stewart 1993
A

Gannon & Pina 2010- FS often poor communicators/social difficulties- use as coping mechanism or solve prob.

Labree et al 2010- arsonists v other severe criminals.
- increased Impulsivity, decreased Superficial Charm, decreased Juvenile Delinquency on PCL-R.

Rasanen et al 1995- suicide more common arsonists v other criminals. 75% reported suicidal thoughts.

Stewart 1993- female fire starters less common but same characteristics as male.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Subtypes

  • Lindberg et al 2005
  • Ducat et al 2015
  • Harsley
  • Fritzon et al 2001 -ASM
A

Lindberg et al 2005- Pure & Non-Pure arsonists.
-define them.

Ducat et al 2015- non-pure most common & male more common.

Harsley- maybe pure are diff to other offenders compared to non-pure- therefore maybe tailor treatments to subtype.

Fritzon et al 2001- Action System Model

  • categorises arsonists- 4 pattern matrix
  • act on Instrumental (external) or Expressive (internal)
  • -to get
  • Objects (external) or Persons (internal).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Typologies

A

-early attempts categories often due to motivation in 1950s = many probs with these typologies- led development of Multi-Factor Theories and Single Factor Theories (ITs).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Single Factor Theories: ITs

-O’Ciardha & Gannon 2012 (5)

A

Implicit Theories- based on Cognition
-ITs= Belief System- influence how act/interpret the world.

O’Ciardha & Gannon 2012- ided 5 ITs for fire setters
(only paper of this nature)
-it’s common like fire but need other characteristics.

1- Dangerous World- hostile ppl, can’t be trusted.
2- Normalisation of Violence- acceptable way deal with ppl.
3- Fire Powerful Tool- send clear msg.
4- Fire Fascinating- thrilling, soothing, mesmerizing.
5- Fire Controllable- escape in time or only affect intended target.

(1,2,= more general, 3,4,5= fire specific).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Multi-Factor Theories (2)

  • Jackson
  • Fineman
A

-until recently only 2 viable theories of fire setting.

1- Jackson’s Functional Analyses 1987
2- Fineman’s Dynamic Behaviour Model 1995
=a lot overlap b/w both.
-both view arson as product of development experiences & reinforcement contingencies, including previous experiences of fire.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Functional Analysis Model- Jackson et al 1987

  • (4)
  • Gannon & Pina 2010
A
  • attempt explain Recidivist arson as well as 1st time offenders.
  • certain antecedents + certain consequences = repeated fire setting.

1- Antecedents

  • a- Psychological Disadvantages (neglect, low self-e)
  • b- Dissatisfaction with Life (depress/anx)
  • c- Social Ineffectiveness (nobody notices or cares)

2- Specific Psychosocial Stimuli- e.g. previous exposure to fire- can be diff to unpick.
-e.g. mum throw fav toy into fire= lead belief- fire powerful tool, good hurting ppl, destructive.

3- Triggering Stimuli- e.g. undesired situation.
-interpersonal prob- lost job/broke up- then fall back on belief.

4- Consequences- provide pos/neg reinforcement.

  • e.g. gain attention, protection or feel better.
  • draws on SLT- pos/neg reinforcement- cycle repetition.

Gannon & Pina 2010- limitation is unclear which combination of factors culminates in facilitating other forms of fire setting.

  • talks about social influences & self-control.
  • some components are speculatory
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Fire Setting (M-TTAF) 2012

  • (2 tiers)
  • (5 prototypical)
  • Dalhuisen et al 2017
A

-theory knitting approach of 2 theories + added more.

2 tiers:

  • i- background factors relevant to fire setting.
  • ii- proposes 5 prototypical fire setting trajectories:

1- Anti-Social Cognition- general criminal lifestyle with no specific fire interest.

2- Grievance- motivators revenge/retribution, no particular interest in fire.

3- Fire Interest- fascinated by fire- psychological arousal.

4- Emotionally Expressive/Need for Recognition- cry for help, self-harm/suicide, need social recognition- communication includes political acts.

  • 2 sub categories:
  • i- unable voice needs through other means IMPULSIVE.
  • ii- use fire to comm NOT IMPULSIVE- may preplan fire setting to enhance status.

5- Multi-Faceted- general criminality but also interested in fire.

Eval
Dalhuisen et al 2017- test validity MTTAF.
-389 fire setters, hospital Netherlands- found partially valid but would benefit from more theoretical basis.
–need more diverse & larger sample but found it useful guide & prioritise aspects of treatment.

better over Jackson
1- organises current research into dynamic risk factors
2- unification distal & proximal factors contributing FS
3- id key factors associated recidivist arson
4- trajectories- general criminality & fire specifc

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Recent Research

-Horsley 2018

A

Horsley 2018- qualitative, sample 13 convicted arsonists
-interviews, audio-recorded, transcribed, analysed using Ground Theory.

  • explored experiences of illegitimate fire use
  • -anti-socially/malicious (legit= non-violent/prosocial)
  • model is work in progress.

(see model)

  • impact on arousal lvl, release of emotion, provided resolution to prob= relatively short-term.
  • talked if fire setter & themselves were diff ppl- very separate.
  • impacted both pos & neg on their self-esteem.
  • hate arson label due how think ppl perceive them
  • -impact self-esteem, lead minimization & distance themselves.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Treatment

-Rice & Chaplin 1979

A

Rice & Chaplin 1979- social skills training in hospitalized male arsonists.

  • Behavioural Role-Playing- sig improvements.
  • -1 year follow up= no further fire setting behaviour.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly