scholarly journals Variables influencing the case prioritisation of men convicted of internet child abuse material offences

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Garrington ◽  
Hannah Merdian ◽  
Douglas P. Boer
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Impression Management ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Community Safety ◽  
Psychological Variables ◽  
Key Variables ◽  
Reducing Recidivism ◽  
Child Abuse Material

The differentiation between men convicted of child abuse material offences, known as Internet Child Abuse Material (I/CAM), and Contact (CO) child sex offenders is an ongoing area of research. Current research indicates there are differences between men convicted of I/CAM and CO offences. This article highlights key variables that may indicate clinically and/or statistically significant differences between I/CAM and CO populations, as identified in current published research. Identified key variables may contribute to the case prioritisation of men under investigation for I/CAM offences to assist timely investigation. Post conviction, key variables may contribute to targeted treatment, reducing recidivism and protecting the global community. Articles containing variables differentiating I/CAM and CO populations were reviewed; articles that did not include any comparative analysis were excluded. The final sample of articles (n = 10) was reviewed using a literature review methodology to collate trend variables and directionality between the two populations. Demographic variables with critical differences between men convicted of I/CAM offences when compared to CO offences are younger age, White ethnic background, employed, lower use of alcohol and drugs, and less or no recorded criminal history but higher self-reported history of offending. Key psychological variables identified are lower impression management, lower demonstrations of antisociality, higher sexual deviancy and higher levels of victim empathy when compared to men convicted of CO offences. The findings will be considered in line with existing risk assessment and case prioritisation tools. This research can contribute to community safety through a specific focus on prioritising the investigation, case management, and treatment of men convicted of I/CAM offences and signals future pathways for targeted risk assessment.

A systematic review of risk variables for child abuse material offenders

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Garrington ◽  
Debra Rickwood ◽  
Peter Chamberlain ◽  
Douglas P. Boer
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Sexual Offenders ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Community Safety ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Specific Risk ◽  
Child Abuse Material

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to collate the available research into the characteristics of child abuse material (CAM) offenders to inform future assessment and treatment options. This systematic review collates the contribution and directionality of variables from existing research assessing an offenders’ use of CAM. Design/methodology/approach Background and definitions of terminology are reviewed, and a summary of sexual reoffending rates provided. Articles were then identified for inclusion through a systematic review using online searches, EBSCOHost and other databases. Articles were also identified from reference lists. After exclusions, the final sample (n=17) were reviewed for identified variables and their directional contribution to risk. Findings Internet only (IO) offenders present with a range of similarities and differences. The demographic, psychological and offence-specific risk variables identified suggest IO offenders differ from other types of sexual offenders. Using the collated variables, IO offender profiles are suggested. Research limitations/implications Limitations have been identified in the availability of research in this area, the variety of terminology and the definitions in common usage. Additionally, there are challenges in ascertaining the truthfulness of self-reported data. Practical implications Development of IO offender-specific risk assessment tools would contribute to advances in targeted supervision and treatment. In turn, this contributes to community safety by protecting children from online sexual victimisation. Originality/value Based on identified gaps, this review contributes to ongoing research by signalling future pathways for IO offender-specific risk assessment.

Evidence-Based Sentencing

Criminology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James C. Oleson
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Community Safety ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Criminogenic Needs ◽  
Actuarial Risk ◽  
Using Data

The evidence-based practice (EBP) movement can be traced to a 1992 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, although decision-making with empirical evidence (rather than tradition, anecdote, or intuition) is obviously much older. Neverthless, for the last twenty-five years, EBP has played a pivotal role in criminal justice, particularly within community corrections. While the prediction of recidivism in parole or probation decisions has attracted relatively little attention, the use of risk measures by sentencing judges is controversial. This might be because sentencing typically involves both backward-looking decisions, related to the blameworthiness of the crime, as well as forward-looking decisions, about the offender’s prospective risk of recidivism. Evidence-based sentencing quantifies the predictive aspects of decision-making by incorporating an assessment of risk factors (which increase recidivism risk), protective factors (which reduce recidivism risk), criminogenic needs (impairments that, if addressed, will reduce recidivism risk), the measurement of recidivism risk, and the identification of optimal recidivism-reducing sentencing interventions. Proponents for evidence-based sentencing claim that it can allow judges to “sentence smarter” by using data to distinguish high-risk offenders (who might be imprisoned to mitigate their recidivism risk) from low-risk offenders (who might be released into the community with relatively little danger). This, proponents suggest, can reduce unnecessary incarceration, decrease costs, and enhance community safety. Critics, however, note that risk assessment typically looks beyond criminal conduct, incorporating demographic and socioeconomic variables. Even if a risk factor is facially neutral (e.g., criminal history), it might operate as a proxy for a constitutionally protected category (e.g., race). The same objectionable variables are used widely in presentence reports, but their incorporation into an actuarial risk score has greater potential to obfuscate facts and reify underlying disparities. The evidence-based sentencing literature is dynamic and rapidly evolving, but this bibliography identifies sources that might prove useful. It first outlines the theoretical foundations of traditional (non-evidence-based) sentencing, identifying resources and overviews. It then identifies sources related to decision-making and prediction, risk assessment logic, criminogenic needs, and responsivity. The bibliography then describes and defends evidence-based sentencing, and identifies works on sentencing variables and risk assessment instruments. It then relates evidence-based sentencing to big data and identifies data issues. Several works on constitutional problems are listed, the proxies problem is described, and sources on philosophical issues are described. The bibliography concludes with a description of validation research, the politics of evidence-based sentencing, and the identification of several current initiatives.

Risk assessment of online child abuse material (CAM) offenders: a review of existing tools

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Garrington ◽  
Peter Chamberlain ◽  
Debra Rickwood ◽  
Douglas P. Boer
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Sexual Offenders ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Dynamic Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Online Searches ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Child Abuse Material

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to summarise the available risk and assessment tools for child abuse material (CAM) offenders. Noting the rise of internet-based offences surrounding CAM, it has been proposed that there may be substantial differences between internet only (IO) offenders, contact only and mixed profile sexual offenders. Design/methodology/approach Through online searches, risk assessment tools for sexual offenders were identified. Scoring manuals were consulted for applicability to IO offenders. Findings Nine risk assessment tools for sexual offenders were included. Risk assessment tools for sexual offenders use cautionary language regarding the application of sexual offence risk assessment tools to IO offenders. An additional five tools were identified specifically addressing IO offenders. Three of these tools address risk assessment and two assess cognitions and behaviours. Research limitations/implications Limitations include the identification of static and dynamic risk factors and the application of structured professional judgement. Practical implications By drawing together existing tools and recommendations for use with the IO offender population, a gap is identified for CAM specific risk assessment tools. Originality/value Appropriate risk assessment, case planning and treatment will contribute to the appropriate management and treatment of the IO offender population.

scholarly journals The Construct of Subjective Economic Inequality

2021 ◽  
pp. 194855062199686
Author(s):  
Anita Schmalor ◽  
Steven J. Heine
Keyword(s):  
Economic Inequality ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Objective Measures ◽  
Subjective Measure ◽  
Psychological Variables ◽  
American Sample ◽  
Key Variables ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Measures Of Inequality

Economic inequality has been associated with a host of social ills, but most research has focused on objective measures of inequality. We argue that economic inequality also has a subjective component, and understanding the effects of economic inequality will be deepened by considering the ways that people perceive inequality. In an American sample ( N = 1,014), we find that some of the key variables that past research has found to correlate with objective inequality also correlate with a subjective measure of inequality. Across six countries ( N = 683), we find that the relationship between subjective inequality and different psychological variables varies by country. Subjective inequality shows only modest correlations with objective inequality and varies by sociodemographic background.

Family Risk Assessment: Characteristics of Families With Child Abuse Notifications in Australia

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Lennings ◽  
Heidi I. Brummert Lennings ◽  
Kay Bussey ◽  
Alan J. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Family Risk

Comparing the Central Eight Risk Factors: Do They Differ Across Age Groups of Sex Offenders?

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (13) ◽  
pp. 4278-4294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Wilpert ◽  
Joan E. van Horn ◽  
Cyril Boonmann
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Recidivism Rates ◽  
Dynamic Risk Factors ◽  
Rnr Model ◽  
Risk Need Responsivity ◽  
Reducing Recidivism ◽  
General Recidivism

Following the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model, cognitive-behavioral therapy is considered most effective in reducing recidivism when based on dynamic risk factors. As studies have found differences of these factors across age, exploring this seems beneficial. The current study investigates the Central Eight (C8) risk factors across six age groups of outpatient sex offenders ( N = 650). Results showed that recidivism rates and age were inversely related from 19 years and up. Half of the C8 did not predict general recidivism at all, substance abuse, antisocial cognition, antisocial associates, and history of antisocial behavior in only one or several age groups. However, factors differed between age groups, with the youngest group demonstrating the most dysfunction in several areas and the oldest group the least. It is concluded that the C8 risk factors seem to lose significance in the older age groups. Results may benefit targeting treatment goals.

Child Abuse and Neglect Risk Assessment: Quality Improvement in a Primary Care Setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther K. Chung ◽  
Ruth S. Gubernick ◽  
Marianna LaNoue ◽  
Diane J. Abatemarco
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Child Abuse And Neglect ◽  
Abuse And Neglect

What Other Factors Indicate High or Low Recidivism Risk?

2019 ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Richard S. Frase ◽  
Julian V. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Prediction Accuracy ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Older Age ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Limited Extent ◽  
Criminal Thinking ◽  
Prior Record ◽  
Salient Factor

If prior record enhancements are justified as a way to manage offender risk, policymakers need to consider other, non-record risk factors that may improve risk-prediction accuracy. This chapter examines the limited extent to which guidelines systems have incorporated such factors—usually as a ground for departure or other adjustment after the recommended sentence has been determined based on current offense and prior record. The chapter summarizes the offense factors and non-criminal-history offender factors, such as the offender’s current age and criminal thinking patterns, that criminological research has found to be good predictors of the risk of re-offending, and that are often included in widely used risk assessment instruments such as the Salient Factor Score, CSRA, and LSI-R. Very few of these non-record risk factors have been given a formal role in guidelines sentencing. The chapter argues that judges should be allowed to consider some of these factors, especially older age.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document