Readings Flashcards
Gannon et al.m (2019)
conducted a meta-analysis assessing the effects of SPECIALIZED sexual offender treatment AND tests the effects of staff and program factors which MODERATE the effectiveness of treatment:
what were their hypothesis and their results?
Compares sexual offender, general violence, and domestic violence specialized treatments.
(A) specialized treatments are more effective than offense non-specific treatments.
(B) biggest reductions in recidivism will be in sexual offending treatments.
(C) predict that treatment being administered by qualified clinicians and supervised by clinicians will be more effective.
Results:
(A) Supported. Specialized treatments are more effective than offense non-specific treatments.
(B) Not Supported. Domestic and sexual offending specific treatments performed equally as well (i.e., quality of this study meant that the reductions in recidivism for domestic violence are higher than previous studies).
(C) specialized treatment administered by a qualified clinician and supervised by a qualified clinician had better treatment outcomes. Having a qualified and non-qualified clinician supervising the treatment reduced the effectiveness of treatment because they provided conflicting information.
Offense-Specific Recidivism
offense-specific recidivism is reduced more by specialized treatment.
i.e., relative reductions in offense specific recidivism:
sexual offender (i.e., 4.2 absolute and 32.6% relative), domestic violence (i.e.,absolite 8.7% and relative 36.0%) and general violence (i.e., absolute 9.3% relative 24.3%)
All treatments influenced non-offence-specific recidivism (violent and general)
general violence programs were associated with significant offense-specific and non-offense specific recidivism.
Gannon et al.m (2019)
Previous literature on sexual offending, general violence, and domestic violence treatment effectiveness:
Sexual Offending:
community programs more effective than prison-based programs.
specialized treatments for sexual offending are more effective than general models.
mews et al. (2017) found that sexual offending treatment increased the risk of recidivism (due to poor treatment integrity, administered by non-clinicians).
Domestic Violence:
VERY small effect sizes.
Inconsistent effect sizes are found across studies (i.e., CBT and Duluth Models).
General Violence:
…
Gannon et al. (2019)
Treatments more effective if?
Sexual Offender Specific:
higher treatment quality,
shorter treatment length (i.e., less than 100 hours),
longer treatment length (i.e., over 200 hours),
group-based treatment rather than a mixed group or individual treatment (where the psychologist is consistently present),
arousal conditioning (behavioral attempts to restructure arousal),
absence of polygraph (i.e., undermines treatment alliance).
*community and prison-based treatments were effective
*supports that adherence to RNR principles reduces sexual recidivism.
Domestic Violence:
treatment is lower quality (more education-based),
Duluth model rather than CBT based (not because feminist model but is a psychoeducational CBT model),
treatment is provided in a single situation (i.e., treatment integrity).
Non-offense Specific Violence:
(violent and general)
qualified psychologist administers treatment,
treatment is supervised,
the absence of conflicting psychologist/non-psychologist supervision associated with violent recidivism.
*program and staff variables NOT associated with greater recidivism reductions for general recidivism
- impacts all (3) treatment types
- All treatments influenced non-offense-specific recidivism.
Olver (2020)
Long-term outcome assessment of the effects on subsequent re-offence rates of a PRISION-BASED (CBT-RP) sex offender treatment program with STRENGTH-BASED elements:
Summary of what they did and their hypothesis:
compared three treatment groups: rockwood (i.e.,CBT-RNR-strength-based), SOTP, untreated group of males.
Used Modified Brief Actuarial Risk Scale (BARS-M) to control for baseline risk among the three groups.
Controlled for demographic and confounding variables.
Two forms of recidivism were measured (sexual and violent) and survival analysis was conducted to assess the time after release to recidivsm.
*both are prison based treatments for male sexual offenders but SOTP (i.e., is a risk avoidance model, inflexible and adhered strictly to the treatment manual and supervised by a clinician) delivered at multiple sites but the rockwood program is a strength-based RNR CBT program delivered at one prison, more flexible, with weekly supervision sessions with an evolving treatment
manual.
*SOTP treatment targets were focused on developing relapse prevention plans. Rockwood developed strength-based post-prison plans of maintaining prosocial behaviour.
Olver (2020) previous literature
mixed findings on the effectiveness of treatment some show that community-based treatments are more effective than prison based treatments but Gannon et al. (2019) and Olver (2020) found that prison based treatments are effective.
Olver (2020) Prison-Based treatment:
Results:
(A) Group comparisons:
men in no treatment groups were higher risk and younger than rockwood group.
rockwood group had higher child-victims and SOTP had higher adult victims.
Men with adult victims had higher recidivism rates across all treatment types (SOTP, Rockwood and no treatment).
(B) Treatment Outcomes:
violent and sexual recidivism with fixed 8 year follow up and unfixed follow up were conducted across all (3) treatment groups-
Medium & High risk Men in the Rockwood program showed the biggest reductions in recidivism.
There was no difference in men’s violent and sexual recidivism rates at low risk level across all (3) treatment groups (i.e., at low risk treatment is not really that effective-supports the RNR principles).
High risk men had significantly lower sexual recidivism rates at fixed 8 years in the SOTP condition compared to non-treatment groups.
Medium and High risk men had significantly lower rates of violent AND sexual recidivism at fixed 8 years in Rockwood relative to SOTP.
Significant reductions in violent recidivism in low risk males in Rockwood program relative to no-treatment.
(C) Survival Analysis
Rockwood treatment produced significantly lower recidivism (sexual and violent) than other groups.
2x increase in risk of sexual and violent recidivism for no treatment men relative to rockwood men.
SOTP had 2x increase of risk of recidivism (sexual and violent) relative to rockwood men and a three-fold increase relative to non-treatment.
Olver (2020) Prison-Based treatment:
Summary of Main Results:
prison sexual offending programs (strength-based in one prison and risk avoidance in multiple prisons) are effective to reduce risk of recidivism (sexual and violent).
when different levels of risk are controlled for, overall males in the Rockwood program showed the biggest reductions in sexual and violent reoffences than no-treatment group over the fixed 8-year follow up period but the biggest difference between rockwood treatment and no treatment were in the medium and high risk bands.
there were no significant differences between recidivism rates across low risk male sexual offender in both sexual and violent offences.
Rockwood program males who were medium risk also showed lower recidivism rates than SOTP groups, sexual and violent.
SOTP males showed lower recidivism rates than no-treatment in medium and high risk bands.
what is a specialised sexual offender treatment?
sexual offender programs with manuals, articulated treatment goals, delivered by trained licensed mental health professionals, in turn supervised by a psychologist or other licensed professionals.
SOTP only cotained treatment completers but Rockwood used an intention to treat model which coded all particpipants to success or fail.
SOTP group had more adult victims which is associated with higher risk of recidvism (so SOTP were originally more higher risk than Rockwood).
biggest strength of using a strength-based treatment is that it results in low refusal rates and high completion rates, maximises entry and commitment to treatment.
Explaining Paraphilias & Lust Murder: Towards an Integrated Model
(Arrigo & Purcell, 2001)
Abstract
Paraphillia’s
Claims that sexual homicide (i.e., erotophonophillia) is motivated by sexually deviant fantasies (i.e., paraphillia).
Integrates Hickey’s Trauma-Control Model and Burgress et al.’s Motivational Model.
Pariphilla acts as a system of behaviours that motivate sexually sadistic acts of lust murder.
there are 100’s of paraphilias that exist on a contimumn wtih lust murder or sexual sadism murders being at the extreme end of the scale.
in lust murder the act of killing is done to complete orgasim.
Paraphila is a key component of lust murder.
More common in males than females (same with Sexual offending).
Paraphillia of sadism is extreme end of pariphilia and is associated with inability to sexually function without violent fantasies or behaviour.
Paraphillia intrests are tied to childhood trauma expereinced or witnessed as a kid (i.e., sexual aor physical abuse tied to sexually deviant fantasies).
Failure to punish sexually deviant behaviours in childhood means they escalate over the life course.
what is erotophonophilia?
Sexual Murder/Homicide i.e., murder substitutes the act of sex.
Three key features of paraphilia?
Three key features of paraphilia compulsive masturbation, fantasy and facilitators (porn, alcohol and drugs).
Fantasy motivates sexually violent behaviour.
Masturbation reinforces behaviour and increases its frequency.
Facilitator linked to sexual homicide but the causal mechanism is unknown.
what are the (4) subgroup paraphilia’s in erotophonophilia?
- Flagellationism:
intense desire to beat, whip or club someone. - Anthrophagy:
intense desire to eat the felsh or body parts of other
people. - Picquerism:
intense desire to stab, wound, or cut the flesh of
others (especially genitals) - Necosadism:
intense desire to have sexual contact with a dead
body.
Two common elements of lust murderers?
1) sadism
(sexual arousal gained from psychologically or physically torturing others pre or post mortem) is a common sub paraphilia of lust murderers but not common in all sexual homicide killers!
2) lust or erotism
that the killing or violence is enacted to gain sexual gratification. Murder can replace the act of sex in some cases and therefore identifying sexual elements may not be explicit in the crime scene but can be deduced from the use of strangulation or mutilation.
FBI’s legal definition of serial sexual murderers?
3 or more victims with a cooling off period in between to indicate premeditation, fantasies and behaviour escalate in terms of violence after each kill.
(6) common themes in sexual violence fantasies?
- power
- domination
- molestation
- revenge
- degradation
- humiliation