For offenders with lengthy histories of substance abuse, therapeutic communities have been shown to be beneficial. These may be located in institutions or in the wider community and there are several different models on which they can be based (Lipton, Pearson, Cleland, & Yee, 2002bb). Other multi-modal, integrated programmes containing several ingredients have also demonstrated good effects for reducing substance misuse (Springer, McNeece, & Arnold, 2003).
While proposals concerning this can be no more than tentative at present, recent reviews have found evidence of positive results from treatment of offenders with mental disorders, including personality disorders (Martin, Dorken, Wamboldt, & Wootten, 2012; Morgan, Flora, Kroner, Mills, Varghese, & Steffan, 2012; for more detail see McGuire, 2015).
The evidence base concerning the usefulness of programmes of some of the above types is sufficiently impressive to have led to their adoption and implementation on a sizeable scale in prison and probation services in England and Wales (Hollin & Palmer, 2006). This became a component of a major government initiative and policy, the Crime Reduction Programme, which became operational in 2000. As part of it, an independent panel of experts, the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (CSAP),4 was created, as a means of ensuring quality control and monitoring the process of introduction and “rollout” of the programmes. In the period since then, a large number of separate programmes has been validated for use in custodial settings, alongside others for use in probation settings, and several approved for both settings. Maguire, Grubin, Lösel, and Raynor (2010) describe the history and work of the Accreditation Panel from an “insider” perspective.
Many of the above programmes, and the majority that are in most widespread used, are delivered in a group format, which has potential advantages in terms of including larger numbers of participants, achieving greater cost-efficiency in services, and also in generating additional “change factors” that can enhance the effects of some of the methods employed (Bieling, McCabe, & Antony, 2006). However, a large proportion of the work done with many people who have broken the law takes place on an individual basis. The two published case studies in Case Studies 17.1 and 17.2 illustrate applications of psychologically-based methods to the reduction of different types of offending behaviour.
CASE STUDY 17.1 DIANE
Aust (1987) described working alongside a psychologist in order to help Diane, a young woman given a suspended prison sentence and placed on probation after a series of shoplifting offences. Assessment indicated that she had committed numerous shop thefts and despite having been arrested and sentenced on several previous occasions, felt unable to control her urges to steal, which had been a feature of her life since the age of 16. She described a cycle of elation and compulsion when in shops but at other times suffered from depressed moods. Diane had two children and was now expecting a third, and was highly distressed by the imminent prospect, should she reoffend, of giving birth to her child in prison.
Diane, her probation officer and the psychologist worked out an intervention plan to help her overcome her compulsive stealing. This had two main components. One was covert sensitisation, a behaviour therapy procedure that in Diane’s case entailed recording an audiotape in which she told herself the story of being arrested, with all its dreaded consequences. The power of this was such that she simply had to look at it rather than listen to it in order for it to have its effects. The second was practice of several techniques of self-management, which included a range of actions such as: drawing the attention of staff whenever she went shopping, for example by asking them to show her where an item was; keeping receipts as a record of purchases; avoiding wearing clothes in which she could conceal items; and using a large, transparent carrier bag. While she implemented these changes, she also joined gym sessions, which helped raise her self-esteem and underlying moods, providing an alternative to the “buzz” of shoplifting. At her subsequent appearance in court, the judge deferred sentence for six months to allow her to work on this plan; at the end of this period, she had successfully avoided shop theft, and gained a new equilibrium in having reduced her impulses and replaced them with new patterns of behaviour. It is interesting to place this study in the context of research carried out by Carroll and Weaver (1986), who found remarkably different patterns of cognitions amongst a group of “expert” shoplifters as compared with a “novice” group.
CASE STUDY 17.2 BILL
Working with a very different type of offence, but also employing behavioural methods, Marshall (2006) has described a treatment programme carried out with Bill, a 38-year-old lorry driver who had convictions for sexual offences against children. Over a period of 20 years he had molested eight girls aged between 6 and 10 years old. He was given early release from prison on condition that he attend for treatment at a community-based clinic. Bill’s history showed a pattern of sexual fantasies concerning younger girls, and of failure in his relationships with females closer to his age, feeling he had been humiliated in these encounters. As an only child who had grown up in an isolated rural area, his development was characterised by very limited social contacts, and more extensive assessment showed negative attitudes towards women, some distortions in his views of children whom he saw as submissive but also as provocative, and an undervaluing of himself. Assessment by phallometry (penile plethysmograph or PPG) showed a pattern of strongest arousal to children but some evidence of arousal to adult women.
Intervention with Bill involved a multi-faceted programme that focused on a series of areas including reduction of his sexual interest in children. This was approached by means of a combination of olfactory aversion therapy, in which he learned to associate sexual arousal to children with a foul odour in a series of 40 conditioning trials over a four-week period; and directed masturbation associated with images of adult women. These interventions were accompanied by a separate series of sessions of cognitive restructuring, designed to address attitudes and beliefs he held that were supportive of offending. The treatment programme proved to be effective in altering both Bill’s sexual preferences and his habitual thoughts and feelings, and a follow-up over two years indicated that the changes were sustained. By that point in time, he had developed a stable relationship with an adult female partner.
17.6 PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO OFFENDER ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT
Forensic psychologists working in prisons, probation or youth justice settings have progressively extended their roles from their previous “niche” focused more or less exclusively on assessment and allocation, to a broader function in which they now contribute to risk assessment, delivery of interventions at the individual level, design and evaluation of programmes, report-writing, and research on all of these issues.
In recent years the risk-need-responsivity framework has been used to construct a number of more complex, in-depth assessment instruments for prediction of future involvement in crime. Several scales now exist for combined assessment of static and dynamic risk factors. The former refers to factors that are fixed at a given point in time (for example, an individual’s age on first appearance in court). The latter refers to influences that fluctuate over time and are also potentially susceptible to change through intervention (for example, antisocial attitudes or problem-solving skills). Probably the best-known example of an assessment combining this spectrum of variables is the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI; Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2004). However, there are numerous specialised methods of carrying out this work for general case-management purposes (for an overview of basic issues involved, see Hollin, 2002; for a recent review of predictive accuracy of some prominent tools, see Yang, Wong, & Coid, 2010; and Whittington et al., 2013). This type of approach, based on amalgamation of variables, is widely perceived as having more practical value than any single theoretical model. In addition to yielding predictions of the likelihood of reoffending, these approaches also generate information that can be applied in risk management, identifying target areas on which psycho
logists and other criminal justice staff can focus in their work with individual offenders.
There are also numerous specialised methods for undertaking risk assessment with reference to specific types of offence, such as violence, sexual offending, and domestic violence; and for assessment of mental disorders that have been shown to be associated with criminal conduct, most notably, psychopathy or antisocial personality disorder. Given the seriousness of crimes committed by some individuals who have enduring personality difficulties such as patterns of callousness or irresponsibility, the use of these types of assessments has attracted a great deal of attention, and also controversy with regard to the accuracy of the methods, and the ethical issues raised by their use (McGuire, in press).
Psychologically-based research and other approaches in criminology linked to it have made enormous strides over approximately the last two decades, with respect to developing an understanding of: the factors that contribute to criminal behaviour, the traditional and entrenched practices that have no impact on it, and methods that can genuinely help reduce the chances of its recurrence. None of this has achieved a state of perfection, of course: but the advances made have been significant nevertheless. Given this accumulated knowledge base, coupled with the level of public and governmental concern over crime, there remains a surprisingly large gap between this acquired information and everyday practice in many criminal justice agencies. The widespread perception that seeking to understand individual factors in crime implies that psychologists believe those are the only operative factors takes a very long time to dissipate. Apart from further research and knowledge accumulation, then, a sizeable challenge remains in translating available findings judiciously into practice, and convincing other concerned parties that psychology has something valuable to offer in this field.
17.7 SUMMARY
The chapter was concerned with penology, the study of legal punishment and of how it is administered. The principal objectives of sentencing in courts of law are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and restoration. The rationale was given for each of these in turn.
The chapter provided an overview of the main effects of penal sentences, with a more specific review of the evidence for sanctions and deterrence, which are not successful as means of altering rates of criminal recidivism.
An outline was given of the evidence concerning the impact of psychosocial interventions on criminal behaviour, including a summary of the findings of more than 100 meta-analytic reviews and of trends amongst the findings within them. This was followed by a brief survey of implications for practice in criminal justice and allied agencies.
Two illustrations were given of the types of interventions that have been shown to be effective in reducing offending behaviour.
The chapter concluded with a brief outline of some current psychological contributions to offender assessment and management.
ESSAY/DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Summarise the main arguments for the use of punishment as the principal component of society’s response to criminal offending. Explain whether, in your view, some approaches to this have a sounder basis than others.
Evaluate evidence concerning the extent to which those who have repeatedly broken the criminal law can be “rehabilitated” using psychosocial interventions. Give your views on whether this evidence might be of interest to policy makers in criminal justice.
Psychological research on offending and how to reduce it has tended to focus on serious crimes such as violence and sexual assault, or on the links between crime and mental disorder. Do you consider that this is the case? If so, what in your view are the reasons for it and are they justifiable?
Briefly survey current applications of psychological knowledge in the penal system and roles psychologists play within it. Propose possible extensions to these applications and roles, and provide appropriate justifications for them.
ANNOTATED READING LIST
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Andersen Publishing; Blackburn, R. (1993). The psychology of criminal conduct. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; McGuire, J. (2004). Understanding psychology and crime: Perspectives on theory and action. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill Education; and Hollin, C. R. (2012). Criminological psychology. In M. Maguire, R. Morgan, & R. Reiner (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of criminology (5th ed.) (pp. 81–112). Oxford: Oxford University Press. These sources provide recent and more extensive introductions to the relationships between psychology and crime in general.
Ashworth, A. (2010). Sentencing and criminal justice (5th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; and Easton, S., & Piper, C. (2012) Sentencing and punishment: The quest for justice (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Both of these books provide more detailed background on the law with particular reference to sentencing and punishment (though primarily focussed on England and Wales).
MacKenzie, D. L. (2006). What works in corrections: Reducing the criminal activities of offenders and delinquents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. A wide-ranging review of the research on the main categories of criminal justice interventions.
McGuire, J. (Ed.). (2002). Offender rehabilitation and treatment: Effective practice and policies to reduce re-offending. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; and Craig, L. A., Dixon, L., & Gannon, T. A. (Eds.), What works in offender rehabilitation: An evidence based approach to assessment and treatment. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Valuable descriptions of research concerning psychosocial interventions to reduce several kinds of offending behaviour.
Miethe, T. D., & Lu, H. (2005). Punishment: A comparative historical perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. An in-depth discussion of the history, and numerous other aspects of punishment
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton: Princeton University Press. An overview of research on the relationship between punishment and other factors mediating law-abiding behaviour.
REFERENCES
Andrews, D. A. (2001). Principles of effective correctional programs. In L. L. Motiuk & R. C. Serin (Eds.). Compendium 2000 on effective correctional programming. Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16, 39–55.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2004). Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7–27.
Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369–404.
Ashworth, A. (2010). Sentencing and criminal justice (5th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aust, A. (1987). Gaining control of compulsive shop theft. National Association of Probation Officers’ Journal, 145–146.
Babcock, J. C., Green, C. E., & Robie, C. (2004). Does batterers’ treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1023–1053.
Bernfeld, G. A. (2001). The struggle for treatment integrity in a “dis-integrated” service delivery system. In G. A. Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation in practice: Implementing and evaluating effective programs (pp. 184–204). Chichester: Wiley.
Bieling, P. J., McCabe, R. E., & Antony, M. M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral therapy in groups. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Bonta, J., & Andrews, D. A. (2017). The psychology of criminal conduct. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bush, J. (1995). Teaching self-risk-management to violent offenders. In J. McGuire (Ed.), What works: Reducing reoffending: Guidelines from research and practice (pp. 139–154). Chichester: Wiley.
Carroll, J., & Weaver, F. (1986). Shop
lifters’ perceptions of crime opportunities: A process-tracing study. In D. B. Cornish and R. V. Clarke (Eds.), The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending (pp. 19–38) . New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Clark, G. (1977). What happens when the police strike? In R. M. Ayres, & T. L. Wheelen (Eds.), Collective bargaining in the public sector: Selected readings in law enforcement (pp. 440–449). Alexandria, VA: International Association of Chiefs of Police.
Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (2009). Report 2008–2009. London: Ministry of Justice, Correctional Services Accreditation Panel Secretariat.
Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. P. (2000). Evaluating criminal justice interventions for domestic violence. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 252–270.
Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (1999). What works in young offender treatment: A meta-analysis. Forum on Corrections Research, 11, 21–24.
Dowden, C., Blanchette, K., & Serin, R. C. (1999). Anger management programming for federal male inmates: An effective intervention. Research Report R-82. Ottawa, ON: Correctional Service of Canada.
Forensic Psychology Page 80
