studies within criminal psychology Flashcards
what was the aim of Maletzky et al?
- to evaluate the offenders who had been assessed for appropriateness of MPA on or before their release, to compare the recidivism rates on those on the progamme, those who were advised to go on the programme but didn’t receive the drugs and those who weren’t advised to go on the drug.
procedure of Maletzky et al?
BACKGROUND INFO
-in Oregon some offenders need to get assessed for whether MPA would reduce their chances of reoffending
- the criteria used a range of past and current convictions for sexual offences and if they were within 6 months of release, if they were in prison for the second time, lacked mental capacity and had an excessive sex drive
- the men were then split into 1 of 3 groups:
1. recommended to go on the programme and they got MPA
2.recommended to go on the programme and they didn’t get MPA
3. men who were not thought to need MPA
METHOD
- the study used retrospective data and looked at the recidivism rate after their release. of the 134 recommended to have MPA only 55 got it due to the community not having the resources to offer the treatment, or the parole officer or treating therapist did not think it was needed.
- the 79 who got MPA got it through an injection once every 2 weeks. the dosage wasn’t known by the researchers but they expected between 200-400mg every other week.
- questionnaires were used to gather data about whether another offence had occurred after their release
- if there was an offence they were asked if it was a violation of any parole conditions, if the offender had been rearrested, and if they had, had the arrest been for sexual convictions
- the supervising officer also said if they were doing well or not
what were the results of Maletzky et al?
GIVEN MPA
-5.1% had a new offence, 0 were sexual in nature
-13.9% had a violation, 1.3% were sexual in nature
NOT GIVEN MPA
- 30.9% had a new offence, 58.8% of those were sexual in nature
- 34.5% had a violation, 63.2% were sexual in nature
NOT RECOMENDED MPA
- 26.9% had a new offence, 55.3% sexual in nature
- 41.8% had a violation, 37.3% sexual in nature
what were the conclusions of Maletzky et al?
- the main conclusion was that those who were recommended to receive MPA and actually did receive it was less likely to reoffend compared to those for whom it was recommended but did not receive it
- the not being given the MPA and was recommended and those who weren’t recommended it had similar outcome, suggesting the criteria used wasn’t valid, otherwise the group should have significantly less offences
- of those who did reoffend when on MPA non committed a sexual offence so MPA does reduce sexual drive meaning it also stops the sexual offences
what were the aims of Howells
- to see if anger management is more effective than no treatment in producing a change in offenders behaviour
- to see if offenders level of need and offender readiness could predict and improvement in offenders behaviour
the procedure of Howells
- 418 male ppts all from Australia, specifically in the south and west
- 86% had committed violent crimes. 285 completed the post intervention assessment, 78 the 2 month follow up and 21 the 6 month follow up. these numbers were logical and not because of drop out rates
- there was a control group who were waiting for anger management programs. this was so they had a base line comparison to see the difference in their behaviour. checking if there was a reduction of anger.
- ppts in the experimental group were tested for anger using self-reported measures four times. these were just before, just after, 2 months later and 6 months later
- the control group were tested for anger 2 times. first just before the program and second when it ended.
- the anger management sessions lasted for 10 sessions for 2 hours long. they both included the same content focussing on skills, such as identifying provocation, relaxation, cognitive screening restructuring, assertion, relapse prevention
- 2 self reported tests for anger were given to both groups, one measuring the ppts anger expression and control, and another measuring the ppts anger intensity and reactions to different provocations.
- ppts were also given questionnaires to measure knowledge of techniques to deal with anger was also given and a questionnaire and interview to measure readiness for treatment
results of Howells
- there was found to be a significant improvement in their knowledge during the treatment compared to the control group. on expressions of anger and being able to control anger the experimental group did improve slightly that the control group, however this improvement was small and not statistically significant.
- when looking at the longer effect they found that the improvements to anger control, anger cognitions, anger arousal and angry behaviour lasted for 2 months but not 6 months, but that improvements anger knowledge lasted for 6 months
- they also found that in the experimental group the greater the improvement after it.
