|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of this research conducted by Blaske et al. was to conduct a controlled study of adolescent sexual offenders and violent offenders without the methodological shortcomings which have plagued previous studies. The authors evaluated the characteristics of adolescent sexual offenders and violent offenders with regard to individual adjustment, family relations, and peer relations.
METHODOLOGY:
This study was quasi-experimental and cross-sectional in design. The 60 subjects in this study were drawn primarily from a larger sample of 212 adjudicated boys used in a previous study conducted by the authors. To select the boys in the present study the researchers first located the 15 sex offenders from the larger sample of boys and then looked for an equal number of delinquent boys in two other categories, assaultive offenders and nonviolent offenders. These boys matched the sex offenders with respect to age (13 to 17), mothers age, race, social class, and having an absent father. A fourth group comprised of nondelinquent boys matched the other three groups in these demographic characteristics and was selected with the help of social services and a local school. In total, the sample consisted of 60 boys and their mothers, with 15 boys each in the categories of sex offenders, assaultive offenders, nonviolent offenders, and nondelinquent youth.
Researchers visited the boys and their mothers at their homes (87%) or at a local youth center (13%), whichever was more convenient for the family. The mother was asked to fill out a demographic questionnaire, the Revised Behavior Problem Checklist (RPBC), and the Missouri Peer Relations Inventory (MPRI). The RPBC is an 89-item checklist that measures several dimensions of child/adolescent psychopathology, including conduct disorder, socialized aggression, anxiety withdrawal, and attention problems. The MPRI is comprised of 39-items which rate the adolescent's behavior in areas such as physical aggression toward peers, popularity, and shyness on a 5-point Likert scale.
Next, the mother and son completed several self-report measures privately and without discussion. The instruments used were the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluating Scales II (FACES II), a 30 item measure of family relations, family cohesion and family adaptability; the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R), a 90-item inventory that assesses symptomatology on 9 scales, including obsessive-compulsiveness, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, and anxiety; and the Unrevealed Differences Questionnaire-Revised (URD-R) which consists of 9 items (each a situation or problem) with several alternative responses for each, such as, "A distant relative recently passed away and left our family $500. What should be done with the money?" (p 849).
After completing these instruments independently, the mother and son were asked to fill out the URD-R together. The two were videotaped completing this task, but the interviewer left the room. Finally, one of the boy's current teachers, selected at random, completed the MPRI.
Data were analyzed using multiple analyses of variance (MANOVAs) on the dependent variables of individual adjustment, family relations, and peer relations for each respondent. The authors then performed a one-way (offender type) univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the dependent measures for each of the significant MANOVAs. When significant ANOVAs were revealed, Duncan's Multiple Range Test was used to determine the nature of the between-groups differences (p<.05).
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
Several significant findings surfaced with regard to the independent variable individual adjustment. Sex offender boys reported more ruminative-paranoid symptoms (obsessive-compulsive, discomfort and uneasiness about interpersonal transactions, tendency to blame others) than did the assaultive offenders, and more anxiety than the three other groups. The mothers of the sex offenders reported more ruminative-internalizing symptoms (obsessive-compulsive, anxiety, nervousness, tension) than did the mothers of sons in other groups. The mothers of assaultive offenders reported more aggressive behavior from their sons than did mothers from other groups, and, along with the nonviolent offenders' mothers, reported more problem behavior.
Relations with ones family varied by offender type, as assaultive offender mothers reported lower family adaptability, and both assaultive offenders and their mothers reported lower family cohesion than the other groups. The researchers noted from their videotaped observations that nondelinquent mothers and sons had higher rates of positive communication than did the other pairs of mothers and sons.
Peer relations also varied by offender type. Assaultive offender mothers rated their sons as more aggressive with their friends than other mothers rated their sons, and nondelinquent mothers gave higher scores to their sons in terms of emotional bonding than did sexual offender mothers.
The authors concluded that assaultive offenders came from "rigid" families and had low bonding to the family and high bonding to deviant peers. Although their personal relationships seem dysfunctional, the authors pointed out that the assaultive offenders do not feel anxious when interacting with others while the sexual offenders do. Sexual offenders were found to be less emotionally bonded to their peers and more likely to feel interpersonal isolation than other boys.
AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
The authors recommended future research into the idea that assaultive offenders may have "poorly developed moral reasoning, empathy, and social perspective-taking skills" (p. 852).
(CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
Juvenile Male
Juvenile Offender
Juvenile Violence
Male Offender
Male Violence
Early Adolescence
Late Adolescence
Offender Characteristics
Family Characteristics
Family Relations
Peer Relations
Sexual Assault Offender
07-03 |