The European Journal of Psychology Applied To Legal Context 2012

ISSN: 1889-1861
THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY APPLIED TO LEGAL CONTEXT
Volume 4, Number 2, July 2012
The official Journal of the

SOCIEDAD ESPAOLA DE PSICOLOGA JURDICA Y FORENSE Website: http://www.usc.es/sepjf
The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2) www.usc.es/sepjf
Editor Ramn Arce, University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain). Associate Editors Gualberto Buela-Casal, University of Granada (Spain). Francisca Faria, University of Vigo (Spain). Gnter Khnken, University of Kiel (Germany). Ronald Roesch, Simon Fraser University (Canada). Editorial Board Rui Abrunhosa, University of O Mio (Portugal). Ray Bull, University of Leicester (UK). Thomas Bliesener, University of Kiel (Germany). Fernando Chacn, Complutense University of Madrid (Spain). ngel Egido, University of Angers (France). Jorge Folino, National University of La Plata (Argentina). Antonio Godino, University of Lecce (Italy). Friedrich Lsel, University of Cambridge (UK). Mara ngeles Luengo, University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain). Eduardo Osuna, University of Murcia (Spain). Francisco Santolaya, President of the Spanish Psychological Association (Spain). Juan Carlos Sierra, University of Granada (Spain). Jorge Sobral, University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain). Max Steller, Free University of Berlin, (Germany). Francisco Tortosa, University of Valencia (Spain). Peter J. Van Koppen, Maastricht University (The Netherlands). David Wexler, University of Arizona (USA), Director of International Network on Therapeutic Jurisprudence. Indexation ANEP ACPN DIALNET DICE DIE ELEKTRONISCHE ZEITSCHRIFTENBIBLIOTHEK (EZB) DOAJ EBSCO GOOGLE SCHOLAR ISOC LATINDEX PASCAL PSICODOC REFDOC SCIRUS SCOPUS ULRICHS WEB Official Journal of the Sociedad Espaola de Psicologa Jurdica y Forense (www.usc.es/sepjf) Published By: SEPJF. Published in: Santiago de Compostela (Spain) Volume 4, Number 1. Order Form: see www.usc.es/sepjf Frequency: 2 issues per year (January, July). E-mail address: ejpalc@usc.es Postal address: The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, Facultad de Psicologa, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, E-15782 Santiago de Compostela (Spain). ISSN: 1889-1861. D.L.: C-4376-2008
ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context
The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2)

Eur. j. psychol. appl. legal context, 2012, 4(2), 99-196, ISSN: 1889-1861
www.usc.es/sepjf
CONTENTS Articles
Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making Raluca Enescu and Andr Kuhn 99
Family and socio-demographic risk factors for psychopathy among prison inmates Cirilo H. Garca, Jos Moral, Martha Fras, Juan A. Valdivia and Hctor L. Daz 119
In search of a fast screening method for detecting the malingering of cognitive impairment Guadalupe Snchez, Fernando Jimnez, Amada Ampudia and Vicente Merino 135
Therapeutic effects of a cognitive-behavioural treatment with juvenile offenders Santiago Redondo, Ana Martnez-Catena and Antonio Andrs-Pueyo 159
Is miss sympathy a credible defendant alleging intimate partner violence in a trial for murder? Antonio Herrera, Inmaculada Valor-Segura and Francisca Expsito 179
The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2): 99-118 www.usc.es/sepjf
SERIAL EFFECTS OF EVIDENCE ON LEGAL DECISION-MAKING

Raluca Enescu* and Andr Kuhn**
* University of Hamburg (Germany) ** University of Lausanne (Switzerland)
(Received 8 February 2011; revised 6 January 2012; accepted 2 February 2012) Abstract The order in which evidence is presented to a criminal court might influence the verdict. This study investigated the serial position effect in a judicial context. 1831 Swiss criminal judges received a filmed mock trial with a specific order stemming from the combination of 3 witnesses: a forensic expert, an eyewitness and an alibi witness. The evidence order was completely counterbalanced and each witness represented a different type of testimony chosen in accordance with the legal practice. If judges rendered their verdict on the basis of the first witness, a primacy effect would be observed. Conversely, if the last testimony would be preponderant, a recency effect would influence their judgment. Results showed a recency effect based on a defence eyewitness whose placement in the last position provoked significantly less condemnations. Furthermore, the probative value estimated by the judges for each piece of evidence was not associated with its serial impact. Results are discussed in relation to legal decision-making and the identification of a central witness mediating order effects. Keywords: decision making; evidence; order effects; criminal trial; verdict. Resumen El orden de presentacin de las pruebas ante un tribunal penal puede influir en el veredicto. En este estudio se investig el efecto del orden de presentacin. 1831 jueces suizos de la jurisdiccin penal recibieron la recreacin filmada de un juicio con un orden especfico derivado de la combinacin de 3 testimonios: testimonio de un forense, testimonio de un testigo presencial y un testigo de coartada. El orden de presentacin de las pruebas fue contrabalanceado, caracterizando cada testigo un tipo diferente de testimonio elegido de conformidad con la prctica jurdica. Si los jueces emitieran el veredicto sobre la base del primer testimonio se observara un efecto de primaca. Por el contrario, si el ltimo testimonio fuera el preponderante, un efecto mediara el juicio alcanzado. Los resultados mostraron un efecto de recencia para el testigo de la defensa, de modo que cuando este se coloc al final del juicio, la tasa de condenas fue significativamente menor. Por su parte, el valor probatorio estimado por los jueces para cada una de las pruebas no se asoci con su impacto en el orden de presentacin. Las implicaciones de los resultados se discuten en relacin con la toma de decisiones legales y la identificacin de un testimonio central que medie efectos en el orden de presentacin. Palabras clave: toma de decisiones; pruebas; efectos de orden; juicio penal; veredicto.
Correspondence: Raluca Enescu, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Law, Department of International and Comparative Criminal Law, Rothenbaumchaussee 33, 20148 Hamburg, Germany. E-mail: raluca.enescu@heuristix.eu ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context
100
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn Introduction As a perception or an opinion, a verdict is made up of various components. The
Gestalt theory (Koffka, 1933; Lewin, 1935; Wertheimer, 1959) has given rise to a psychology of wholes, summed up in the idea that an entity cannot be defined by the sum of its parts. The distinction between parts and whole means that each unit performs a precise function within an entity. The same part will change its role if it belongs to a different whole or if taken in isolation. Moreover the parts exercise a mutual influence until such time that they reach equilibrium within a stable entity (Guillaume, 1979). The reasoning behind an opinion stems from the way in which its contradictory pieces of information are organised by means of psychological mechanisms such as serial effects (Atkinson, 1977; Baddeley, 1999; Ebbinghaus, 1913), cognitive consistency (Festinger, 1957, 1964; Heider, 1946), anchoring effects (Wagenaar, 1988; Wagenaar, van Koppen, & Crombag, 1993) and heuristics (Gigerenzer, 2002; Kahneman, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982). Opinions about persons, also called social impressions, have similarities with the task of forming opinions about defendants and the acts they might have committed. In both cases, pieces of information will be presented and integrated into a judgment. The combination of personal characteristics within an impression is directly related to Gestalt theory, since it focuses on how a unified impression can be formed from discrete elements. When two experimental groups read the same terms in different orders of presentation, the resulting impressions differed greatly. They were based on the characteristics presented first and showed the influence of a primacy effect (Asch, 1946). If the first elements were positive, the importance of the negative terms presented thereafter was minimized; if they were negative, the value of the subsequent positive elements was reduced. This effect has been observed afterward in settings such as ability attribution (Jones, Rock, Shaver, Goethals, & Ward 1968), political and social issues (Edwards & Smith, 1996) and health policy (Jonas, Schulz-Hardt, Frey, & Thelen, 2001). Such results were explained by the construction of a reference frame, imposing unconsciously an interpretative direction on subsequent elements anchored to the first impression (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977). In 1938, Weld and Roff transcribed eleven witness statements of a real trial and read them out to the participants. The assessment of guilt was noted on a nine-point scale after each item was presented. It was observed that the very fact of being charged with a crime in itself constituted an incriminating factor. Thirty-three subjects out of
The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2): 99-118
Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making
101
fifty already judged the defendant guilty after hearing only the charge. This observation is in agreement with that of Schnemann (1983) who obtained more guilty verdicts when the indictment was read than when it was not read before the hearings. Concerning the four orders in which the witness statements were read, a recency effect was observed independently of whether the last witnesses spoke for the prosecution or the defence. Thus, it was the evidence presented at the end of the trial that most strongly influenced the choice of verdict. Although no complete counterbalancing of the witnesses was undertaken, this result shows that the primacy effect observed in a social context is not replicated in a judicial setting and that the same witness plays a different role according to the presentation order of the series. When the defence and prosecution arguments were presented orally by two persons playing the role of both parties involved in a trial, the later elements were the most convincing (Walker, Thibaut, & Andreoli, 1972). The judicial context differed again from the formation of an impression in which the first piece of evidence had the most weight. In the work of Asch (1946), the pieces of information referred to character traits, that is, stable characteristics also called dispositional elements. A trial lays greater emphasis on the reconstruction of a specific event in which a defendant might be involved, thus providing situational elements. If decision makers choose to attribute the cause of an action to situational rather than dispositional factors, the power of information about stable characteristics provoking a primacy effect would be reduced (Jones et al., 1968), thus increasing the probability of a recency effect. By changing the order of evidence in mock rape trials, Pennington (1982) observed a primacy effect, which contrasted with the previous results. When the strongest defence witnesses came first, followed immediately by the prosecution ones, the defendant was found innocent more frequently than in the opposite order. But if there was an overnight recess between both types of arguments, the verdict was based on a recency effect, finding the defendant guilty more often. In line with the social impression, primacy has been explained by the construction of a cognitive frame based on the first piece of evidence that jurors used to interpret following evidence in a coherent way (Kerstholt & Jackson, 1998). This frame provoked an overestimation of supportive evidence and an underestimation of discrepant information in order to provide a consistent judgment (Lagnado & Harvey, 2008). In the case of a time interval, Pennington (1982) stated that jurors did not remember the first arguments as well as the last ones. This interpretation has been extended by Costabile and Klein (2005) who
102
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn
showed that the verdict choice of jurors was based on the last piece of incriminating evidence even without time interval. Participants chose their verdict according to the evidence that they best remembered, but the authors provided also the explanation of Kerstholt and Jackson (1998) in cases where early evidence served the construction of a frame and provoked primacy effects. This happened when the researchers did not provide the jurors with background information and when they rated the guilty probability in an end-of-sequence mode. Interest in the effects of ordering in the legal domain has also given rise to a belief adjustment model following the receipt of new information (Hogarth & Einhorn 1992). In this model, individuals process each piece of evidence sequentially without carrying out a global evaluation of the evidence. Independently of the response mode (step-by-step or end-of-sequence) and of the length of the series, a recency effect was observed, the subjects modifying their opinion according to the value attributed to each new factor. These results supported those obtained in 1938 by Weld and Roff and are consistent with the Bayesian approach defended later by Champod and Taroni (1994) as the ideal way to compute evidence, in which each witness statement modifies the perceived likelihood of an event. In reality, it has been long shown that individuals do not calculate probabilities as per a Bayesian model (Schum & Martin, 1982), but weigh new information against the probability of an event, and then adjust the value in favour of this last factor. This approach corresponds to an intuitive calculation of the mean between two values (Lopes, 1985). Serial effects have recently been studied in the field of pleas and their influence on the length of the sentence (Englich, Mussweiler, & Strack, 2005). The results showed that anchoring took place in favour of the prosecution, which therefore had an advantage in speaking first, since the length of the sentence passed depended on what had first been recommended by the public prosecutor. According to the authors, this primacy effect could be explained by the fact that the defence based itself upon the details of the charge in order to overturn them, thus placing greater importance on those incriminating elements and on the case for the prosecution. These observations completed the anchoring of judicial decisions, especially towards guilty verdicts, found through an archive study gathering written material in 555 Spanish criminal cases (Faria, Arce, & Novo, 2002). The current research aims to draw a parallel between an opinion and a verdict from the perspective of the presentation order of its elements. In view of earlier work
103
and the emphasis placed on the order of evidence, the hypothesis of a recency effect on the verdict choice will be tested: the nearer to the end of the trial a witness is heard, the more influence he will have on the judgement. It is assumed that judges will carefully examine each piece of evidence, but would forgo the final judgement until they have received all evidence. Method Participants The material was sent to all Swiss criminal judges (N = 1831). The Germanspeaking judges represented 75% of the population, the French-speaking cantons 22%, and the Italian-speaking, 3% of the judges in the country. The judges sitting on the federal benches in Lausanne and Bellinzona were treated separately and the material was provided in all three national languages. Courts in bilingual regions were sent the research material in French and German. 208 judges returned the questionnaire, which represents a response rate of 11%. The linguistic distribution of the respondents is similar to the one of the population: 82% questionnaires in German, 17% in French and 1% in Italian. 72% of men and 27% of women took part in the study, 52% were professional and 48% lay judges (no legal studies and called by the president of a court to judge cases within their fields of competency). The mean age was the response category that listed 40 to 49 years old, their average employment rate in criminal justice was the category from 21% to 30% and the mean professional experience as a criminal judge was the category between 4 and 6 years. Material Following encouraging results obtained with a sample of 535 participants from the University of Lausanne (Enescu, 2008), it was decided to test the hypothesis of a recency effect on Swiss criminal judges. The written court case presented to the students was transformed into a 20 minutes film of a mock criminal case. The scenario had been revised by a group of judges who agreed to keep secret the aims of the study. The material was passed in a sealed envelope to each judge by way of the office of the court where they sat. The pack contained an introductory letter describing the general aims of the research. The instructions and a DVD with choice of language were enclosed. The
104
original version of the film was shot in French and additional versions were dubbed into Swiss German and Italian (330 copies of each order were made). The dubbing and the translations allowed a perfect synchronization with the original language. The names of the characters (judge, witnesses, victim, and defendant) and of the town where the accident took place were adapted to the linguistic region. The case described a road traffic accident and the defendant was accused of assault through negligence (Article 125 paragraph 1 of the Swiss Criminal Code) and of a second charge of violation of duties in case of accident (Article 92 paragraph 2 of the Swiss Road Traffic Act). Both offences are misdemeanours and the defendant had no prior criminal record. Three witnesses were presented in a real courtroom: - A prosecution witness: forensic expert who compared samples of paintings on the car of the defendant and on the motorcycle of the victim, he concluded that they were matching with high probability; - A defence witness 1: council employee, friend of the defendant, he provided him with an alibi by stating that they were having breakfast each day at the time of the accident; - A defence witness 2: teacher and eyewitness not acquainted with the defendant, he saw a car of a different colour than the one of the defendant.
No prosecutor was present during the hearing, which is in accordance with the Swiss practice in such a criminal case, and a court registrar was seated next to the judge to record the proceedings. At the beginning of the trial, the judge read a resume of the facts, the charges and the prosecutions demand to condemn the defendant and pass upon him a suspended sentence whose severity should be decided by the judge. The defendant chose to appear without a lawyer and explained why he could not have committed the offence because he was at a friends place at the time of the accident (no guilty plea exists in Switzerland). The victim was then asked by the judge to describe the accident and what injuries he suffered from. The role of the judge is active in the Swiss criminal procedure. He questions the defendant, the victim and each witness in order to clarify their statements. The judge was calling in the courtroom each witness one after the other and introduced him before he presented his testimony. After making sure that neither the victim nor the defendant had additional questions, he ordered the witness to leave the courtroom. The camera filmed each person when speaking (judge, defendant, victim, witnesses) and participants could see that the public gallery was
105
empty. At the end of the trial, the defendant was asked to speak last and he chose to repeat his presence at a friends place. The judge decided to retire with the registrar in order to decide the verdict and the sentence if appropriate. The film stops at this moment and the participants proceed with the questionnaire. The probative value of the incriminating forensic expert was designed to balance with both discriminating witnesses and not to provoke only condemnations. The defence witness who was acquainted with the defendant was meant to have a weaker evidential value than the eyewitness. The expert was supposed to have at least a moderately value, especially because he was incriminating and presenting forensic evidence identifying the defendants car (Ask, Rebelius, & Granhag, 2008). A pilot study with the same road traffic accident featuring a defence expert and two incriminating eyewitnesses provoked only acquittals. The permutations of the witnesses appearances led to six orders of presentation corresponding to six versions of the film: Order 1: prosecution expert defence witness 1 defence witness 2. Order 2: defence witness 1 prosecution expert defence witness 2. Order 3: defence witness 1 defence witness 2 prosecution expert. Order 4: prosecution expert defence witness 2 defence witness 1. Order 5: defence witness 2 prosecution expert defence witness 1. Order 6: defence witness 2 defence witness 1 prosecution expert.
The questionnaire related to the film of the case was drawn up in three languages and the following questions were asked: Verdict (guilty, not guilty) If relevant, the charge upheld Sentence imposed if guilty verdict Confidence in the verdict on a seven-point scale for each charge: (1) not at all confident, (2) hardly confident (3) not very confident, (4) fairly confident, (5) very confident, (6) extremely confident and (7) absolutely confident. Probative value of each witness statement1 on a seven-point scale adapted from Wagenaar et al. (1993): (1) highly incriminating, (2) moderately incriminating, (3) slightly incriminating, (4) neutral, (5)
1
The rating scales were presented with respect to the ordering of the witnesses in the film, aiming to minimize errors in the attribution of the probative values. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2): 99-118
106
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn slightly exculpating, (6) moderately exculpating and (7) highly exculpating. Six socio-demographic questions: age-range (10-year ranges); studies and profession in the case of lay judges2; employment rate as a criminal judge (9-year ranges); years of experience as a criminal judge (3-year ranges); sex; location of the court (canton).
Procedure Each judge received a DVD containing a mock criminal case presenting three witnesses in one of the six possible orders. In addition, it was of paramount importance not to reveal any other order of presentation of the witnesses. For that reason, the judges of the same court all received the same version of the film, namely with the witnesses in the same order. The first stage involved sending out the copies of the DVD to each court with a criminal division. Approximately 300 units per order of presentation were evenly distributed. An accent was put on correct cantonal and regional proportions for each version of the DVD, and on not sending multiple sets to a judge who was sitting in several courts. The material was sent in November 2006 and a letter of reminder was sent in January 2007. In order to secure a maximal ecological validity, instructions asked to watch individually the trial only once before answering the questionnaire. Of the 208 answers received, the distribution of the six orders of evidence was in a range of 24-42 judges: 2
Order 1: prosecution expert defence witness 1 defence witness 2 (42 judges, 20%) Order 2: defence witness 1 prosecution expert defence witness 2 (35 judges, 17%) Order 3: defence witness 1 defence witness 2 prosecution expert (24 judges, 12%) Order 4: prosecution expert defence witness 2 defence witness 1 (32 judges, 15%) Order 5: defence witness 2 prosecution expert defence witness 1 (41 judges, 20%)
The judicial organization is independent in each Swiss Cantons (States) and there is no common definition of a lay judge. Researchers agreed on the definition that lay judges are not legally trained and are chosen for specific trials because of their skills.
Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making Order 6: defence witness 2 defence witness 1 prosecution expert (34 judges, 16%).
107
The material was sent to all criminal judges in Switzerland (N = 1831). The response rate was relatively low (11%), while in a previous experiment 30% of the judges returned their answers (Kuhn & Jayet, 2005). The period during which the material was sent, November 2006, was probably not conducive to a high response rate. The end of the year is a busy period for the courts and the end of 2006 was particularly so, since the Swiss criminal law (especially relating to punishments) was amended on 1 January 2007 and raised concerns among the judges. The same amendment in the general part of the Swiss penal code made it necessary to send the material before the end of 2006. The punishments imposed after 1 January 2007 would have been difficult to compare with the sentencing decisions found in 2005 by Kuhn and Jayet (Kuhn, 2011). Results 17% judges (n = 36) condemned the defendant and 83% (n = 171) acquitted him . The confidence in the verdict was very high (M = 5, SD = 1.3, N = 191) and the probative value of the witness statements were in accordance with the researchers' expectations: the scientific expert was considered moderately incriminating (M = 2.6, SD = 1.2, N = 206), the council employee - eyewitness - moderately exculpating (M = 5.8, SD = 1.1, N = 206), and the teacher alibi witness slightly exculpating (M = 5.3, SD = 1.5, N = 206). The difference between the exculpating scores was significant, t(206) = 3.8, p < .001, and the effect size moderate (d = .04), therefore their effect on the verdict was separately tested. Disparities of the sentence between judges were observed, varying between 2 and 300 days for the same case. The average length of the sentence was 59 days with a mode of 60 days (n = 35). Two months of incarceration appeared to be the ordinary sentence in this criminal case. Of the 36 judges who condemned the defendant and specified their sentence, 28 passed a suspended sentence.
3
The number of judges will henceforth be 207, as one respondent returned an empty questionnaire except for the socio-demographic data. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2): 99-118
108
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn A recency effect was observed and confirms the hypothesis under investigation.
A 2 analysis of the six evidence orders and the verdict choice showed a recency effect (see Table 1) based on a defence witness, 2(5, N = 207) = 11.15, p < .05, ' = .23.
Table 1. Counterbalanced Order of Evidence and Type of Verdict Rendered. Order 1 Descriptiona pro-def1-def2 Type of value observed value theoretical value 2 def1-pro-def2 observed value theoretical value 3 def1-def2-pro observed value theoretical value 4 pro-def2-def1 observed value theoretical value 5 def2-pro-def1 observed value theoretical value 6 def2-def1-pro observed value theoretical value Total Guilty 7 7 0 6 6 4 8 6 10 7 5 6 36 Not guilty 35 35 35 29 18 20 24 26 31 34 28 27 171 Total 42 42 35 35 24 24 32 32 41 41 33 33 207
Note. a pro = expert prosecution witness; def1 = council worker, defence witness 1 and def2 = teacher, defence witness 2. When the observed values were compared with those expected independently of the two variables, the second order which presented the council employee for the defence first, followed by the expert for the prosecution and finally the teacher for the defence was the only relevant order for interpreting this result. Due to the low number of verdicts in each category using the six evidence orders, it was decided to merge the orders according to the placement of one specific witness. No attention was paid to the permutations of the two other pieces of evidence,
109
since the previous results did not show any influence of this factor. The place held by the scientific expert grouped together Orders 1 and 4 (expert in first position, n = 76), Orders 2 and 5 (expert in second position, n = 76), and Orders 3 and 6 (expert in third position, n = 57). The 2 analysis of these three orders of presentation and the type of verdict was not significant, 2(2, N = 207) = 1.52, p < .47, ' = .09, which means that the proportions of convictions and acquittals observed did not depend on the order of the witnesses as grouped according to the position occupied by the prosecution expert. If the six original orders were merged according to the position held by the first defence witness, the council employee who provided an alibi, he appeared first (Orders 2 and 3, n = 59), second (Orders 1 and 6, n = 75) or last (Orders 4 and 5, N = 73). His position did not influence the choice of verdict, 2(2, N = 207) = 4.93, p < .09, ' = .15. Finally, when the six original orders were regrouped according to the position of the second defence witness, namely the eyewitness, his testimony came first in Orders 5 and 6 (n = 74), second in Orders 3 and 4 (n = 56) and last in Orders 1 and 2 (n = 77). The result of the 2 showed a significant recency effect of the witnesses order on the choice of verdict, 2(2, N = 207) = 6.38, p < .05, ' = .18.
Table 2. Serial Position of a Defence Witness and Type of Verdict Rendered. Order 1 Type of value Observed value Theoretical value 2 Observed value Theoretical value 3 Observed value Theoretical value Total Guilty 15 13 14 10 7 13 36 Not guilty 59 61 42 46 70 64 171 Total 74 74 56 56 77 77 207
When the defence witness appeared last, 9% guilty verdicts were observed, which is significantly lower than in the first (20%) or middle position (25%). When heard in the first or second place, his influence on the verdict was equally weak. For the
110
same case and with identical witnesses, the same defendant was convicted in a range of 9-25% due to the change of position of one defence eyewitness. As verdict is a dichotomous variable, its prediction may be estimated with a binary logistic regression analysis. The previous orders of each testimony were the categorical independent variables. The first position of each witness was chosen as the reference category by simple contrast. If the overall ordering of a witness was significant, his middle and last positions were compared to the first one. The verdict was best predicted by the position of the eyewitness, whose last position significantly increased the odds to acquit the defendant by 2.5 in comparison to the first position. His second place in the series didnt play a significant role in the prediction of the verdict. The orders of the expert and of the alibi witness did not influence the verdict choice. Results showed that a recency effect stemming from the defence eyewitness correctly predicted 83% of the verdicts, 2(2, N = 207) = 6.8, p < .05.
Table 3. Binary Logistic Regression Analysis Predicting the Type of Verdict Rendered. Variable Eyewitness Eyewitness 2nd position Eyewitness 3rd position Expert Alibi witness -.27 .93 .42 .49 B SE Wald 5.98 .41 3.62 2.46 2.46 p .05 .52 .05 .29 .29 df 2 1 1 2 2 .76 2.54 .33 - 1.74 .97 - 6.65 Exp(B) 95% CI
Additional 2 analyses provided interesting results, although not connected with serial effects. The influence of the judges training on the choice of verdict indicated that trained lawyers rendered guilty verdicts less often than expected, while lay judges gave guilty verdicts more often than expected, 2(1, N = 203) = 6.64, p < .01, = .18. Other analyses comparing professional to lay judges were not significant, as was the interaction between the type of verdict and its confidence. Variables of sex, linguistic region, years of experience, and full or part-time activity in a criminal court showed no significant results.
Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making Discussion
111
From a criminal system with sentences of imprisonment (immediate or suspended) and fine, Switzerland moved to a system with monetary, community service and imprisonment sentences (suspended or not) on the 1st January 2007, limiting custodial sentences of less than six months to exceptional cases (Kuhn, Moreillon, Viredaz, & Willi-Jayet, 2004). The letter of reminder sent in January 2007 had almost no effect on the response rate, only three additional questionnaires being received. The transition to the new criminal law took place at the same time as the sending of the material and might have prevented a greater number of judges from taking part in the study. A second hypothesis for the 11% response rate could be the high participation of Swiss judges in a previous research by Kuhn and Jayet (2005). The results communicated at that time might have been badly received, hindering some people from participating in a new study about criminal trials. The results showed the presence of a recency effect on the choice of verdict: the proportions of condemnations and acquittals followed the presentation of the last witness (council worker for the defence expert for the prosecution teacher for the defence) when all six orders of witnesses were analysed, just as when the six orders were regrouped according to the placement of the teacher. The fact that two witnesses did not provoke any serial effect does not support the belief adjustment model of Hogarth and Einhorn (1992), where the last piece of evidence was always overweighted. The evidential value of the eyewitness for the defence was significantly lower than the one of the second defence witness, contradicting the researchers' expectations. Nevertheless, it is the former witness that influenced the verdict according to his serial position and not the most exculpatory one. It was also expected that the position of the expert would have an effect on the verdict choice, but he didnt show such an influence. The probative value seemed not to be connected to the order effect of one piece of evidence. The forensic evidence was interpreted in the context of the case and did not lead to a verdict that followed its conclusions. This result differs from the findings of Ask, Rebelius and Granhag (2008) who observed that forensic evidence had more value if it produced incriminating information. A pilot study showed also that a discriminating forensic expert had a drastic effect on the verdicts, which were all acquitting the defendant.
112
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn The influence of an expert depends on the credibility, which is based on
trustworthiness, knowledge, confidence and likeability (Brodsky, Griffin & Cramer, 2010). The present expert used partly technical jargon and therefore could have been perceived as not likeable, reducing his credibility (Brodsky, Neal, Cramer, & Ziemke, 2009). A limitation of the current study was the lack of information about the credibility of the witnesses. In future research, this characteristic should be measured and a condition in which the expert is a woman added, since gender can influence the impact of such testimony due to role stereotypes and the type of offence to be judged (Schuller & Cripps, 1998). An explanation of the recency effect of the second defence witness could be that he was considered as the key witness in this criminal case. As the terms used by Asch (1946) in the context of impression formation, a judicial decision making could also rely on the choice of a central piece of evidence or of a key witness who would be the basis of the most convincing story for the events that occurred (Pennington & Hastie, 1986). The order effects might be mediated by the distinction between central or peripheral pieces of evidence, only the former ones producing a recency effect. Since the presentation of prosecution and defence witnesses is usually mixed in the Swiss procedure, the role and the position of one witness and not of a group of prosecution or defence witnesses - can be determinant in creating the narrative that will be used to choose the verdict (Pennington & Hastie, 1988). To ensure ecological validity, future research could address both the central or peripheral role of a witness appearing in the middle of contradicting ones and the position in the evidence series in order to study the occurrence of a serial effect and its influence on the verdict. If each piece of evidence produced a preliminary judgment and if the final verdict was made up of the sum of the previous judgments, the result would not depend upon the presentation order of the evidence. The significative effect of the witnesses order on the verdict shows that forming a verdict does not follow an additive process since the proportions of convictions and acquittals vary according to the placement of a witness speaking for the defence. When the same terms were presented in different orders, Asch (1946) observed that the resulting impressions differed greatly, following a primacy effect: if the first elements were positive, the importance of the negative terms was minimized, leading to a favourable impression. If the first elements were negative, the value of the positive ones that followed was lessened, and the final impression was unfavourable. This serial
113
primacy effect was not borne out by this research. It is the final element that possessed the greatest influence on the final judgment and not the first one as observed by Asch in the context of impression formation or by Pennington (1982) in a judicial decision making. The fact that identical elements placed in different positions caused different impressions resulted from the construction of a reference frame following the first pieces of information, which provided an interpretative direction for the later elements (Pennington, 1982; Kerstholt & Jackson, 1998). This explanation, although based on similar results (a different verdict was obtained by changing the order of the witnesses), did not apply in the present case: it is the final witness who shifted the ratio of convictions to acquittals in his direction. The current observations, therefore, were not stemming from a frame of reference based on the first witness, but from the influence of the last witness statement on the choice of verdict. This result could be mediated by the best memory of this piece of evidence or by its centrality. A limitation of the study lays in the impossibility to examine the process underlying the order effects. Future research could investigate this important point by asking the respondents to describe the pieces of evidence and to argument their verdict. An oral presentation by two people presenting the arguments of the defence and of the prosecution led to a recency effect (Walker et al., 1972) and Insko (1964) also highlighted the influence of a personal testimony on the type of serial effect: the situations in which the witnesses were seen produced a recency effect, while those in which the information was read provoked a primacy effect. A trial belongs to the first category of situation, as did the material used for the present study, which allowed judges to see the witnesses. This aspect might have made the recency effect on the verdict more likely. However, the results of Weld and Roff (1938) also revealed a recency effect using material read out to the participants. Moreover, undergraduates responses after reading the summary of a mock criminal trial showed a recency effect (Costabile & Klein, 2005; Enescu, 2009). This study emphasized the effect of the recency on the choice of verdict, which was significantly influenced by the last piece of evidence. The influence of situational factors, which referred to the circumstances in which the offence took place, and the lack of dispositional ones, might have played a role in the results. This assumption would be in agreement with the statements of Jones and Nisbett (1971) for whom only stable dispositional factors give rise to a primacy effect.
114
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn The recency effect implies that the choice of the evidence order does lead to a
different judgement. An end-of-sequence response mode that is ecologically valid was used and found a defence witness whose position influenced the proportions of condemnations. Is it right to take this knowledge into consideration in the conduct of trials? Pleas are made in a specific order: the public prosecutor speaks first, followed by the prosecution, and then the defence, before the defendant (presumed to be innocent as no plea of guilt exists in Switzerland) has the right to speak last of all. This order stems from a presumption of a recency effect (contrary to the results of Englich et al., 2005), given that the rights of the defence take precedence over those of the prosecution. Since the results of the studies carried out on the order of witnesses lead towards the existence of a recency effect (except the results of Pennington, 1982), should a similar order in favour of the defendant equally be respected in the choice of the evidence order (the evidence for the prosecution presented before the evidence for the defence)? In Switzerland, the president of the court chooses the evidence order according to the availability of the witnesses and experts. An improvement of the courtroom procedure could state that the choice of the evidential order will, in general4, be left to the defence in order to control the consequences of serial effects. The application of such findings in the courtroom is of major importance for the rights of the defendant and needs to be addressed conjointly by researchers and legal scholars. Acknowledgements Research supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Chuard-Schmid Foundation and the Vaud Academic Society (Nr. 100011-109796). References Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258-290. doi: 10.1037/h0055756 Ask, K., Rebelius, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2008). The elasticity of evidence: A moderator of investigator bias. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1245-1259. doi: 10.1002/acp.1432 Atkinson, R. C. (1977). Human memory: Basic processes. London: Academic Press. Baddeley, A. D. (1999). Essentials of human memory. Hove: Psychology Press.
4
Certain pieces of evidence are meaningless unless they are given after previous ones, therefore the court should keep control over the order in which the evidence is given.
115
Brodksy, S. L., Griffin, M. P., & Cramer, R. J. (2010). The Witness Credibility Scale: An outcome measure for expert witness research. Behovioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 892-907. doi: 10.1002/bsl.917 Brodsky, S. L., Neal, T. M. S., Cramer, R. J., & Ziemke, M. H. (2009). Credibility in the courtroom: How likeable should an expert witness be? Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 37, 525-532. Champod, C., & Taroni, F. (1994). Probabilits au procs pnal [Probabilities in a criminal trial]. Revue Pnale Suisse, 112, 94-219. Costabile, K. A., & Klein, S. B. (2005). Finishing strong: Recency effects in juror judgments. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27, 47-58. doi:
10.1207/s15324834basp2701_5 Ebbinghaus, H. (1913). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. New York, NY: Teacher's College Columbia University. doi: 10.1037/10011-000 Edwards, K., & Smith, E. E. (1996). A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 5-24. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.5 Enescu, R. (2008). Influence de ladministration des preuves sur lactivit mentale menant la formation du verdict au cours dun procs pnal [Influence of the taking of evidence on the verdict formation in a criminal trial]. Lausanne, Switzerland: Chabloz. Enescu, R. (2009). Effets sriels et conflit cognitif dans ladministration des moyens de preuves et le choix dun verdict pnal [Order effects and cognitive conflict in the taking of evidence and the verdict choice in a criminal trial]. Revue Suisse de Criminologie, 127, 18-28. Englich, B., Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2005). The last word in court: A hidden disadvantage for the defense. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 705-722. doi: 10.1007/s10979-005-8380-7 Faria, F., Arce, R., & Novo, M. (2002). Heurstico de anclaje en las decisiones judiciales [Anchoring in judicial decision-making]. Psicothema, 14, 39-46. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision and dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
116
Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. New York: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195153729.001.0001 Guillaume, P. (1979). La psychologie de la forme [The psychology of the form]. Paris: Flammarion. Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organisation. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107112. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1946.9917275 Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The beliefadjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1-55. doi: 10.1016/00100285(92)90002-J Insko, C. A. (1964). Primacy versus recency in persuasion as a function of the timing of arguments and measures. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 381391. doi: 10.1037/h0042765 Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001). Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 557571. doi: 10.1037/0022-
3514.80.4.557 Jones, E. E., Rock, L., Shaver, K. G., Goethals, G. R., & Ward, L. M. (1968). Pattern of performance and ability attribution: An unexpected primacy effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 317-340. doi: 10.1037/h0026818 Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. New York, NY: General Learning Press. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kerstholt, J. H., & Jackson, J. L. (1998). Judicial decision making: Order of evidence presentation and availability of background information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 445-454. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199810)12:5<445::AIDACP518>3.0.CO;2-8 Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt psychology. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan. Kuhn, A. (2011). La punitivit du public augmente-t-elle et correspond-elle celle des juges? [Does the punitiveness of the public increase and does it fit the one of the judges?] Revue Pnale Suisse, 2, 180-193.
117
Kuhn, A., & Jayet, A. (2005). Doing time and marking time, 25 years later: A Swiss confirmation of a British hypothesis. The Howard Journal, 44, 167-171. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2311.2005.00364.x Kuhn, A., Moreillon, L., Viredaz, B., & Willi-Jayet, A. (2004). Droit des sanctions: De lancien au nouveau droit [Law of sanctions: From the old to the new law]. Berne: Stmpfli. Lagnado, D. A., & Harvey, N. (2008). The impact of discredited evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1166-1173. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.6.1166 Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers. London: McGrawHill. Lopes, L. L. (1985). Averaging rules and adjustment processes in Bayesian inference. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 23, 509-512. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 250256. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.35.4.250 Pennington, D. C. (1982). Witnesses and their testimony: Effects of ordering on juror verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12, 318333. doi: 10.1111/j.15591816.1982.tb00868.x Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242-258. doi: 10.1037//00223514.51.2.242 Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521-533. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.14.3.521 Schuller, R. A., & Cripps, J. (1998). Expert evidence pertaining to battered women: The impact of gender of expert and timing of testimony. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 17-31. doi: 10.1023/A:1025772604721 Schum, D. A., & Martin, A. W. (1982). Formal and empirical research on cascaded inference in jurisprudence. Law & Society Review, 17, 105-151. doi: 10.2307/3053534 Schnemann, B. (1983). Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Reform der
Hauptverhandlung in Strafsachen [Experimental studies of the reform in the trial of criminal cases]. In H. J. Kerner, H. Kury, & K. L. Sessar (Eds.), Deutsche
118
R. Enescu and A. Kuhn Forschungen zur Kriminalitts-entstehung und Kriminalittskontrolle (pp. 11091152). Cologne: Heymanns.
Wagenaar, W. A. (1988). The proper seat: A bayesian discussion of the position of expert witness. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 499-510. doi:
10.1007/BF01044630 Wagenaar, W. A., van Koppen, P. J., & Crombag, H. F. M. (1993). Anchored narratives: The psychology of criminal evidence. New York: St. Martins Press. Walker, L., Thibaut, J., & Andreoli, V. (1972). Order of presentation at trial. The Yale Law Journal, 82, 216-226. doi: 10.2307/795112 Weld, H. P., & Roff, M. (1938). A study in the formation of opinion based upon legal evidence. The American Journal of Psychology, 51, 609-629. doi:
10.2307/1415696 Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking. New York, NY: Harper.
FAMILY AND SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC RISK FACTORS FOR PSYCHOPATHY AMONG PRISON INMATES
Cirilo H. Garca*, Jos Moral*, Martha Fras**, Juan A. Valdivia***, and Hctor L. Daz****
*Autonomous University of Nuevo Len (Mxico) **University of Sonora (Mxico) ***Washington State University (USA) ****The University of Texas Pan American (USA)
(Received 16 June 2011; revised 22 February 2012; accepted 24 February 2012) Abstract A field study was conducted with prison inmates to explore to what extent family and socio-demographic characteristics represent risk factors for psychopathy and delinquent behavior. A psychopathy scale derived from Hares Revised Psychopathy Checklist and an instrument containing questions related to family and socio-demographic characteristics were administered to 178 prison inmates. The psychopathy scales reliability ( = .92) and construct validity were established. A confirmatory factor analysis provided support for a model showing a negative association between psychopathy and age at which the person stopped living with his family of origin, age of first incarceration, severity of delinquent acts, length of prison sentence, and length of time spent in prison. (2/df = 1.40, FD = 1.34, PNI = 0.38, RMSEA =.04, IFI = .94, CFI = .94 and TLI = .93). Furthermore, the model sustained a positive association of psychopathy with income and frequency of incarceration. Level of education and age were eliminated from the model given that no significant associations were found among these variables and psychopathy. The validation of this model enables to interpret research findings in relation with attachment theory. Keywords: psychopathy; sentenced; delinquency; family. attachment; Resumen Se realiz un estudio de campo con un grupo de prisioneros para investigar en qu medida las caractersticas familiares, sociales y demogrficas de stos representan factores de riesgo para la psicopata y la delincuencia. Se administr a 178 internos en prisin una escala para medir la psicopata derivada de la PCL-R de Hare junto con un instrumento creado ad hoc con preguntas relacionadas con sus caractersticas familiares, sociales y demogrficas. Esta escala de psicopata se mostr fiable ( = .92) y vlida, validez de constructo. Un anlisis factorial confirmatorio prest a poyo a un modelo que sustenta una asociacin negativa entre la psicopata y la edad de abandon del hogar de su familia de origen, la edad del primer internamiento en prisin, la gravedad del delito, la longitud de la sentencia y la cantidad de tiempo que estuvo internado en prisin (2/gl = 1.40, FD = 1.34, PNCP = 0.38, RMSEA =.04, IFI = .94, CFI = .94 y TLI = .93). Por su parte, el modelo evidenci una asociacin positiva entre la psicopata, los ingresos econmicos y la frecuencia de encarcelacin. El nivel educativo y la edad fueron eliminados del modelo dado que no se encontraron asociaciones significativas entre estas variables. La validacin de este modelo permite interpretar los hallazgos en relacin con la teora del apego. Palabras clave: psicopata; apego; sentenciado; delincuencia; familia.
Correspondence: Cirilo Humberto Garca. Facultad de Psicologa de la Universidad Autnoma de Nuevo Len, Dr. Carlos Canseco 110, Colonia Mitras Centro, Monterrey, N. L., Mxico. E-mail: cirilo.garciacd@uanl.edu.mx ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context
120
C. H. Garca et al. Introduction Many research studies related to psychopathy have been conducted during the
last 20 years in English-speaking countries while very have been conducted in Spanishspeaking countries (Moral, 2010; Muoz, Khan, & Cordwell, 2011; Rodrguez et al., 2011; Rufino, Boccaccini, & Guy, 2011). Researchers were initially concerned with establishing the constructs validity and reliability so it could be clearly differentiated from other psychiatric conditions or disorders. Hare (1991, 2003) for instance, concentrated his efforts in the validation of his Revised Psychopathy Checklist to predict recidivism and reoccurring delinquent behavior. More recent studies have explored neuropsychological perspectives that establish relations between the brains anatomy and the psychopaths cognitive and affective functioning. A significant finding for instance is that the deficient functioning of the tonsils is associated with psychopathy (Marsh et al., 2011). Researchers should be very careful however to assume causal relationships between a deficient neurobiological structure and psychopathy. This could lead to theoretical reductionism, which has been highly criticized in psychology. It is made theoretical reductionism whenever it is proposed a cause stemming from a dimension different from that of the effect under consideration. Studies related to conditioning for psychopathy, for instance, seek to find causes for this disorder in the same psychological realm in which it takes place. Attachment theory, in turn (Van der Horst, 2011) proposes that the psychopath personality develops when family members and caretakers fail to provide children with a sound support system that enables them to feel understood and accepted. Such proposition implies that said childhood experiences as well as the psychopathy take place in the psychological realm. The findings of recent research studies strongly suggest significant associations between early abusive experiences, neglect, parental conflicts, authoritarianism in the family, and subsequent problems of social adaptation and onset of psychiatric disorders (Dunst & Kassow, 2008; Gao, Raine, Chan, Venables, & Mednick, 2010; Mack, Hackney, & Pyle, 2011). There are genetic, environmental and/or demographic risk factors that may contribute to psychopathy (Gunther, Vaughn, & Philibert, 2010) such as male gender (Guillet & Tamatea, 2012; Seara-Cardoso, Neumann, Roiser, McCrory, & Viding 2012), being one of the youngest siblings among a large number of brothers and sisters (Khan & Cooke, 2008; Lalumire, Harris, Quinsey, & Rice, 1998), academic failure
Psychopathy among prison inmates
121
(Jurez, Villatoro, Gutirrez, Fleiz, & Medina, 2005), family disintegration (McDonald, Dodson, Rosenfield, & Jouriles, 2011), alcoholism or antisocial behavior of the father (Moffitt, 2005; Rodrguez et al., 2011), low socio-economic status (Silva, 2003), presence of gangs in the neighborhood (Mobilli & Rojas, 2006), minority status (Ullrich, Farrington, & Coid, 2008), and school violence (Merrell, Buchanan, & Tran, 2006). An early onset of the problem is often manifested through antisocial behavior, academic failure, cruelty, recidivism of delinquent behavior, and failure of rehabilitation programs provided by the prisons. The previously-mentioned factors are also significant indicators of psychopathy among adult prisoners (e.g., Verona, Patrick, Curtin, Bradley, & Lang, 2004). This study was conducted on a group of prison inmates and sought to explore the associations between family dynamics, age at which the inmates stopped living with their parents, age at initial imprisonment, current age, number of years of formal education, income, and psychopathy. At the same time, the study seeks to discover the effect of psychopathy on delinquent or illegal behaviors that lead to the subjects imprisonment, length of the prison sentence, the actual length of time spent in prison, and the frequency or number of the subjects imprisonment. Ultimately, the study aims at proposing a model to help to predict the onset of psychopathy. Such model will include familial, social and demographic characteristics including age of initial imprisonment. The model will hopefully also enable to determine how psychopathy can lead to eventual involvement with the judicial and law enforcement systems. Method Participants This study relied on a cross-sectional survey administered to a convenience sample of 178 prison inmates in the city of Apodaca, Nuevo Len, Mxico. Study participants were male inmates currently serving sentences in a medium security prison. The mean age of participants is 34.6 years, (SEM = 0.57), with a range going from 22 to 58 years of age. The mean level of education is 7.52 years (SEM = 0.17), which is equivalent to one and a half years of education beyond elementary school. The level of education on study participants ranged from 1 to 11 years.
122 Procedure
C. H. Garca et al.
In most instances, a questionnaire that included questions related to family background, history of delinquent or criminal behavior, and a psychopathy scale was administered to prison inmates in the institutions common dining area. In very few occasions the instrument was administered to inmates in their respective cells. Four university students from the Autonomous University of Nuevo Len (Mxico) served as interviewers and were responsible for data collection under the supervision of the first author. These included two undergraduate students from the criminology and psychology departments as well as two graduate students. Data collection was conducted during a two day period after obtaining the necessary authorization from the department of prisons and corrections of the State of Nuevo Len (Subsecretara de Administracin Penitenciaria del Gobierno del Estado de Nuevo Len) and after obtaining informed consent forms from all subjects or participants. Prison guards and administrators facilitated access to all prison inmates willing to participate in this study who were not busy working or subjected to some type of institutional punishment. Inmates were transferred to the institutions common dining area by the prison guards to be interviewed during the times of the day that the study interviewers had authorization to visit. Instruments A socio-demographic questionnaire was used to collect data and information related to criminal behaviors, family background, age, level of formal education, marital status, occupation, income earned prior to imprisonment (see Appendix A). A 36 item Likert type scale to measure psychopathy was developed and validated using question items from the Hare Revised Psychopathy Checklist (see Appendix B). Participants were asked to answer all questions in a four point scale: 1 (Definitively, no), 2 (I do not think so), 3 (I think so) and 4 (Yes, of course). The two negative items were scored using a reverse scoring method. The items in this scale cover the affective and interpersonal dimensions of Hares Revised Psychopathy Checklist, which possesses a very high Alpha Coefficient ( = .84) (Hare, 2003). This Checklist is lowly correlated (r <.30) with intelligence, anxiety and depression tests. This is indicative of the instruments validity and reliability (Campbell & Russo, 2001; Garca-Cadena, 2009).
123
A team of four masters level psychology students from the Autonomous University of Nuevo Len, a psychiatrist and this studys principal investigator worked on the development of items for the psychopathy scale. Three additional independent experts were asked to rank order the severity of criminal offenses committed by the inmates in the study. The resulting items were included in the studys survey questionnaire. One of these three experts is a social psychologist with more than 25 years of experience in public safety issues. The second one is a young criminologist and the third is a researcher in the legal and forensic psychology. None of them were informed about the objectives of the research study or the studys theoretical model. Researchers averaged the severity rankings of the criminal offenses provided by these three experts and proceeded to include those mean ranking scores in subsequent analyses. Data Analysis The severity of the criminal offenses committed by the prison inmates was evaluated using a 1 to 30 scale utilizing a Thurstone approach. The resulting evaluations are considered reliable given that all scores are found within one quartile of the scale. The construct validity of the psychopathy instrument was determined through an exploratory factor analysis by principal components. This method seemed appropriate given the 5:1 subjects/variable ratio, which is a conventional standard in research (Henson & Roberts, 2006). Moreover, the instruments reliability was determined through the calculation of Cronbach Alphas. Structural equation modeling was used to measure the effect of the independent variables (age at which they left the parents home, current age, income, level of education, age of first imprisonment related to the psychopathy) on the dependent variables (total number of imprisonments, severity of criminal offenses, length of sentences, and actual amount of time spent in prison). Structural equation modeling was appropriate given that the number of elements in the matrix is greater than the number of parameters to be calculated (Kline, 2010). Data were analyzed with the assistance of SPSS 15 and AMOS 16.
124
C. H. Garca et al. Results Table 1 identifies the criminal offenses that lead to the sentencing of subjects in
this study, the score assigned to the severity of each offense by each of the three experts, and the mean scores assigned to each offense. Table 1. Experts Evaluation of the Severity of Criminal Offenses. Criminal Offense Homicide Homicide and offenses against someones health Homicide and rape Theft and homicide Kidnapping and possession of weapons Homicide and carrying firearms Theft with violence and depriving others of their freedom Comparable rape Complicity in a homicide Theft and rape Theft with violence and homicide attempt Domestic violence and rape Theft with violence and shooting a firearm Theft with violence Attacks against someones modesty or shame, theft, injuries and offenses against ones health Offenses against ones health Marihuanas trafficking, possession and sale Theft and offenses against ones health Theft and injuries Theft and carrying firearms Fraud Carrying firearms Injuries Attacks against someones modesty or shame Simple theft Damages to someone elses property Traffic accidents Damages M 28.33 28.33 28 27.33 27 26.67 23.67 22 21.67 21.67 21.33 21 19.67 18.67 18 17.67 17.33 16.67 16 14 12.67 12.33 12.33 11.67 9.67 9 9 8.67
Note. M = Mean evaluation score of the severity of criminal offenses provided by three experts using the Thurstone approach. The range of scores was in all the crimes assessed within one quartile of the measurement scale (7.5).
125
The psychopathy scale has 36 items and was validated through an exploratory factor analysis of principal components resulting in a single 13 item dimension (see table 2). We selected the items with the highest factor loadings (>.50) in order to get the best construct indicators and to facilitate the necessary adjustments to the structural model we seek to develop. The internal consistency of the 13 items is ( = .92). The mean score of all subjects on this scale is 2.28 with a standard deviation of 0.83, an asymmetry of -0.08, and a kurtosis of -1.56. Table 2 shows the factor loadings and the final communalities estimates (portion of the variance of the item explained by the factor or shared variance) of the 13 items. This factor explains 52.54% of the total variance. The correlations matrix for the 13 items enabled to extract the main factors: Its KMO index value was very high (.94), the Bartlett test enabled to reject its equivalency to an identity matrix, 2(70) = 995.12, p < .01 and its determinant was close to zero (< .01) while reaching 91% (71 out of 78) of medium strength correlations (from .30 to .69) with a variation from .13 to .70 and a mean of .47.
Table 2. Final Communalities Estimates and Factor Loadings of Items Extracted from a Single Dimension of Psychopathy. Items 12. It is justified to lie to protect yourself 24. I enjoy deceiving others 17. If I do harm to others is because they deserve it 10. I enjoy lying 28. I manipulate other people to get what I want 15. Lying is justified in order to get what you want 27. It is correct to make others suffer if they deserve it 19. I feel the pain of others in my own flesh 8. The best thing I can do is to tell the truth 30. I am surrounded by lots of dumb and stupid people 34. Only dumb people get robbed 29. I reach my goals taking other people into account 36. Dumb people deserve to be deceived Note. Extraction Method: Principal Components. Final Communalities .71 .71 .69 .67 .67 .63 .62 .45 .43 .36 .31 .30 .26 Factor Loadings .84 .84 .83 .82 .82 .80 .79 .67 .66 .60 .56 .55 .51
126
C. H. Garca et al. In the initial structural model two variables assumed to be predictors of
psychopathy were found not to be significant and were consequently excluded. These included: level of education ( = -.02, p = .81) and age ( = -.07, p = .42). The degrees of freedom of the final model finally reached values from good (2/df = 1.40 <2, df = 1.34 < 2, PNI = 0.38 < 1, and RMSEA = .04 <.05) to adequate (IFI = .94 >.90, CFI = .94 >.90, and TLI =.93 >.90) (Moral, 2006). In this model, age of initial imprisonment ( = -.35, p < .01) and age until which inmates lived with their parents ( = -.25, p < .01) showed significant negative correlations with psychopathy. Further analyses, revealed a significant positive association between income and psychopathy ( = .17, p < .05). Significant negative associations were also found between psychopathy and severity of criminal offenses ( = -.25, p < .05), length of sentence ( = -.55, p < .01) and actual length of imprisonment ( = .36, p < .01). A significant positive association was found between psychopathy and frequency of imprisonment ( = .22, p < .01). Psychopathy accounted for 21% of the variance in this model while it also explained 31% of the variance of the length of the sentence, 13% of the variance of the actual length of time spent in prison, 6% of the variance of the severity of the criminal offense, and 5% of the variance of frequency of imprisonment (see Figure 1).
e1 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8 e9 e10 e11 e13 2 33% 53% 70% 50% 66% 43% 68% 62% 61% 24% 20% 23% 21 8 10 12 15 17 19 24 27 28 29 30 34 36 %
.57 .73 .84 .70 .81
.82 .65
.78 21%
.78 .49 .45 .48 .46
e15
5%
Age of first Imprisonment
-.35
.22 Psychopathy -.55
Number of times in prison 31% Length of sentence 6% e16
-.25 .17
e14 -.36
-.25
Age of emancipation
Severity of offense Income Time spent in prison 13% e18
e17
Figure 1. Standardized Model Estimated by the Maximum Likelihood Method.

Psychopathy among prison inmates Discussion
127
Most explanations of personality disorders focus on early stages of development and assume problems in child rearing and family structure that resulted from the loss of one of the parents through divorce or death (Rutter, 2005). According to attachment theory, children lacking the attachment to a significant adult figure are unable to empathize and care about others (Van der Horst, 2011). It is difficult to objectively track down early experiences and even more difficult to measure the effects of those experiences on peoples current thoughts and feelings. This study found a significant association between the age at which prison inmates left their parents homes and psychopathy among a group of prison inmates in a medium security prison in Apodaca, Nuevo Len, Mxico. Findings suggest that the lesser the time subjects spent in their homes of origin, the higher their level of psychopathy will be. The subgroup of subjects diagnosed as psychopaths lived at their homes of origin an average of 13 years while inmates not diagnosed as psychopaths lived at their homes of origin an average of 18 years. This finding suggests the possibility that the previously mentioned 5 year difference enabled inmates without psychopathy to develop the capacity to empathize and care about others, even though our study design does not enable us to clearly establish cause and effect relationships. It is possible that separating too early from the protection of ones family of origin may be a risk factor for psychopathology and more specifically for psychopathy. Available psychological literature proposes that definite detachment could develop after prolonged separation from an attachment figure during the first three years of life (Dunst & Kassow, 2008). This study however did not attempt to test this proposition, which in our opinion deserves more rigorous research. It would be worth discovering to what extent the prolonged lack of access of children to attachment figures may contribute to psychopathy and to what extent psychopathy may lead to criminal behavior. By attachment figures we mean persons to which normally children become attached and who children prefer over other individuals. The findings about the negative associations between psychopathy and the severity of criminal offenses, the length of the sentence, and the actual length of time spent in prison are consistent with those reported by Verona et al. (2004) and support their conclusions that there is no cause and effect relationship between psychopathy and
128
C. H. Garca et al.
violence, and that the delinquent acts of psychopaths tend to be instrumental in nature and they do not necessarily cause harm to their victims. The findings of this study also support studies conducted in English speaking countries showing a negative association between age of initial imprisonment and the degree of psychopathy, and a positive association between psychopathy and the number of imprisonments and the recidivism of juvenile delinquency (Hart & Hare, 1997, Hemphill, Hare, & Wong, 1998). All the previous findings are related to factor 1 of the psychopathy scale covering the socio-affective dimension. Finally, we recommend the use of our psychopathy scale in penal institutions in order to separate or differentiate between psychopath and non-psychopath inmates. This would enable such institutions to provide inmates with appropriate and necessary education and treatment. Different living spaces could be designated for members of these two groups. Services could also be provided to psychopath inmates to help them with their social and affective functioning and development. Therapy sessions could focus on the role of the therapist as an attachment figure who provides unconditional acceptance. The therapeutic relationship would help create a solid emotional and interpersonal foundation, which psychopath inmates very much need (Ansbro, 2008). Obviously, it would be best to simultaneously research the potential positive effects of the previous recommendations in a long term study in at least a medium security prison. References Ansbro, M. (2008). Using attachment theory with offenders. Probation Journal. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 55, 231-244. doi:
10.1177/0264550508092812 Campbell, D. T., & Russo, M. J. (2001). Social measurement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Dunst, C. J., & Kassow, D. Z. (2008). Caregiver sensitivity, contingent social responsiveness, and secure infant attachment. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavioral Intervention, 5(1), 40-56. Gao, Y., Raine, A., Chan, F., Venables, P. H., & Mednick, S. A. (2010). Early maternal and paternal bonding, childhood physical abuse and adult psychopathic personality. Psychology Medicine, 40, 1007-1016. doi:
10.1017/S0033291709991279
129
Garca-Cadena, C. H. (2009). Como investigar en psicologa [How to research in psychology] Mxico: Trillas. Gillett, G., & Tamatea, A. J. (2012). The warrior gene: Epigenetic considerations. New Genetics and Society, 31, 41-53. doi: 10.1080/14636778.2011.597982 Gunter, T. D., Vaughn, M. G., & Philibert, R. A. (2010). Behavioral genetics in antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy: A review of the recent literature. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 148-173. doi: 10.1002/bsl.923 Hare, R. D. (1991). The Psychopathy ChecklistRevised manual. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Hare, R. D. (2003). The Psychopathy ChecklistRevised technical manual (2nd ed.).Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Hart, S. D., & Hare, R. D. (1997). Psychopathy: Assessment and association with criminal conduct. In D. M. Stoff, J. Brelling, & Maser, J. D. (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 22-35). New York, NY: Wiley. Hemphill, J. F., Hare, R. D., & Wong, S. (1998). Psychopathy and recidivism: A review. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3, 139-170. doi: 10.1111/j.20448333.1998.tb00355.x Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 393-416. doi: 10.1177/0013164405282485 Jurez, F., Villatoro, J. A., Gutirrez, M. L., Fleiz, C., & Medina, M. E. (2005). Tendencias de la conducta antisocial en estudiantes del Distrito Federal: Mediciones 1997-2003 [Tendencies of antisocial behavior in student of the Federal District: 1997-2003 measures]. Revista de Salud Mental, 28(3), 60-68. Khan, R., & Cooke, D. J. (2008). Risk factors for severe inter-sibling violence: A preliminary study of a youth forensic sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 1513-1530. doi: 10.1177/0886260508314312 Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press Lalumire, L. M., Harris, G. T., Quinsey, V. L., & Rice, M. E. (1998). Sexual deviance and number of older brothers among sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 10, 5-15. doi: 10.1177/107906329801000102 Mack, T. D., Hackney, A. A., & Pyle, M. (2011). The relationship between psychopathic traits and attachment behavior in a non-clinical population.
130 Personality and
C. H. Garca et al. Individual Differences, 51, 584-588. doi:
10.1016/j.paid.2011.05.019 Marsh, A. A., Finger, E. C., Fowler, K. A., Jurkowitz, I. T. N., Schechter, J. C., Yu, H. H., Pine, D. S., & Blair, R. J. R. (2011). Reduced amygdala-orbitofrontal connectivity during moral judgments in youths with disruptive behavior disorders and psychopathic traits. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 194, 279-286. doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2011.07.008 McDonald, R., Dodson, M. C., Rosenfield, D., & Jouriles, E. N. (2011). Effects of a parenting intervention on features of psychopathy in children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39, 1013-1023. doi: 10.1007/s10802-011-9512-8 Merrell, W. K., Buchanan, R., & Tran, O. K. (2006). Relational aggression in children and adolescents: A review with implications for school settings. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 345-360. doi: 10.1002/pits.20145 Mobilli, A., & Rojas, C. (2006). Aproximaciones al adolescente con trastorno de conducta disocial (Approaches to adolescent with disocial behavior disturbance). Investigacin en Salud, 8, 121-128. Moffitt, E. T. (2005). The new look of behavioral genetics in developmental psychopathology: Gene-environment interplay in antisocial behaviors.
Psychological Bulletin, 131, 533-554. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.4.533 Moral, J. (2006). Anlisis factorial confirmatorio [Confirmatory factor analysis]. In R. Landero & M. T. Gonzlez (Eds.), Estadstica con SPSS y metodologa de la investigacin (pp. 445-528). Mxico: Trillas. Moral, J. (2010). A study of personality traits in undergraduates: Alexythymial and its relationship to the psychological deviate. In M. Fras & V. Corral-Verdugo (Eds.), Bio-psycho-social perspectives on interpersonal violence (pp. 51-77). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Muoz, L. C., Khan, R., & Cordwell, L. (2011). Sexually coercive tactics used by university students: A clear role for primary psychopathy. Journal of Personality Disorders, 25, 28-40. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2011.25.1.28 Rodrguez, F. J., Bringas, C., Rodrguez, L., Lpez-Cepero, F., Prez, B., & Estrada, C. (2011). Drug abuse and criminal family records in the criminal history of prisoners. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 3, 89105.
131
Rufino, K. A., Boccaccini, M. T., & Guy, L. S. (2011). Scoring subjectivity and item performance on measures used to assess violence risk: The PCL-R and HCR-20 as exemplars. Assessment, 18, 453-463. doi: 10.1177/1073191110378482 Rutter, M. (2005). Commentary: What is the meaning and utility of the psychopathy concept? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 499-503. doi:
10.1007/s10802-005-5730-2 Seara-Cardoso, A., Neumann, C., Roiser, J., McCrory, E., & Viding, E. (2012). Investigating associations between empathy, morality and psychopathic personality traits in the general population. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 67-71. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.08.029 Silva, A. (2003). Conducta antisocial: Un enfoque psicolgico [Antisocial behavior: A psychological approach]. Mxico: Pax. Ullrich, S., Farrington, D. P., & Coid, J. W. (2008). Psychopathic personality traits and life-success. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1162-1171. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.11.008 Van der Horst, F. C. P. (2011). John Bowlby - From psychoanalysis to ethology: Unraveling the roots of attachment theory. Chichester, England: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/9781119993100.fmatter Verona, E., Patrick, C. J, Curtin, J. J. Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (2004). Psychopathy and physiological response to emotionally evocative sounds. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113, 99-108. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.113.1.99
132
C. H. Garca et al. Appendix A
Potential predictors and indicators of psychopathy 1. What was your estimated weekly gross income prior to imprisonment? ______ 2. Until what age did you live with your parents? __ 3. How many times have you been in prison? ___ 4. At what age were you imprisoned for the first time? ___ 5. How many consecutive years and months have you spent in prison? ____ 6. What criminal offense were you accused of? ____ 7. If you have already been sentenced, how many years have you been sentenced to? ____
Psychopathy among prison inmates Appendix B Psychopathy Scale 1. The worst is to deceive others. 2. I m not at fault when I destroy the belongings of others, if they deserve it. 3. I always get what I want even if doing so damages other people.
133
4. People who do not take care of their belongings at responsible for having them stolen. 5. Almost nobody loves other people. 6. I have sometimes loved another person. 7. Do unto others as you would like for them to do unto you. 8. The best thing I can do is to tell the truth. 9. I worry about the feelings of others. 10. I enjoy lying. 11. I have to be careful about what I say because I could offend others. 12. Lying is justified if you do it to protect yourself. 13. I do not experience remorse when I harm other people 14. I do not worry about what happens to other people. 15. Lying is justified in order to get what you want. 16. It is just for others to make me suffer if I made them suffer first. 17. If I do harm to others is because they deserve it. 18. People who lye are intelligent. 19. I feel the pain of others in my own flesh. 20. Almost nobody hates other people. 21. Almost nobody experiences fear. 22. When somebody neglects his/her belongings, he/she is responsible for their theft. 23. It is immoral to deceive others. 24. I enjoy deceiving others. 25. I will do anything in order to get what I want. 26. The greatest thing is to lye without getting caught. 27. It is correct to make others suffer if they deserve it. 28. I manipulate other people to get what I want. 29. I reach my goals taking other people into account.
134
C. H. Garca et al. 30. I am surrounded by lots of dumb and stupid people. 31. I have sometimes hated other people. 32. It is not my problem if others suffer because of what I do. 33. I have sometimes been afraid of something or someone. 34. Only dumb people get robbed. 35. It is peoples fault if others take advantage of them because they are stupid.
Dumb people deserve to be deceived
IN SEARCH OF A FAST SCREENING METHOD FOR DETECTING THE MALINGERING OF COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
Guadalupe Snchez*, Fernando Jimnez*, Amada Ampudia**, Vicente Merino*
*Universidad de Salamanca (Espaa) **Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico, UNAM (Mxico) (Received 8 January 2012; revised 14 March 2012; accepted 16 March 2012) Abstract Forensic settings demand expedient and conclusive forensic psychological assessment. The aim of this study was to design a simple and fast, but reliable psychometric instrument for detecting the malingering of cognitive impairment. In a quasi-experimental design, 156 individuals were divided into three groups: a normal group with no cognitive impairment; a Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) group; and a group of informed malingerers with no MCI who feigned cognitive impairment. Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analysis of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), and of several subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMSIII) revealed that the WMS-III was as reliable and accurate as the TOMM in discriminating malingerers from the honest. The results revealed that the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the WMS-III Auditory Recognition Delayed of Verbal Paired Associates subtest was similar to the TOMM in discriminating malingering from genuine memory impairment. In conclusion, the WMSIII Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates subtest and the TOMM provide a fast, valid and reliable screening method for detecting the malingering of cognitive impairment. Keywords: malingering; cognitive impairment; recognition of verbal paired associates; TOMM; WMS-III Resumen En el contexto forense se le demanda al perito psiclogo una evaluacin expeditiva y concluyente. Por ello, se planific un estudio con el objetivo de disear una herramienta psicomtrica simple, rpida y fiable para la deteccin de la simulacin de deterioro cognitivo. Mediante un diseo cuasiexperimental, 156 individuos fueron divididos en tres grupos: un grupo normal de sujetos sin deterioro cognitivo; un grupo con Deterioro Cognitivo Leve (DCL); y un grupo de sujetos sanos simuladores de deterioro cognitivo. Anlisis de la curva ROC del Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) y de varios subtests de la Wechsler Memory Scale-III (WMS-III) mostr que la WMS-III era tan fiable y exacta en la discriminacin entre respuestas simuladas y honestas como el TOMM. Adems, los resultados tambin revelaron que la exactitud diagnstica, la sensibilidad y especificidad del subtest del WMS-III Reconocimiento de Parejas de Palabras eran similares al TOOM en la discriminacin entre simuladores y casos verdaderos de deterioro cognitivo. En conclusin, el subtest del WMS-III de Reconocimiento de Parejas de Palabras y el TOMM conforman un mtodo rpido, vlido y fable para la deteccin de la simulacin de deterioro cognitivo. Palabras clave: simulacin; deterioro cognitivo; reconocimiento de parejas de palabras; TOMM; WMS-III.
Correspondence: Fernando Jimnez. Facultad de Psicologa. Dpto. de Personalidad, Evaluacin y Tratamiento Psicolgicos. Universidad de Salamanca. Avda. de la Merced, 109. 37005 Salamanca (Spain). E-mail: fjimenez@usal.es ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context
136
G. Snchez et al. Introduction In nature, some animals that encounter a life threatening situation have the
ability to change their behaviour in order to elude the peril. Well-known strategies are remaining motionless, pretending to be dead, camouflage to blend in with the surrounding environment, etc. It is hardly surprisingly, therefore, that humans under similar circumstances should develop behavioural strategies to escape danger or punishment or for profit (e.g., reduction in prison sentence, financial compensation and insurance claims and benefits, child custody, to avoid losing or to obtain personal wealth). Moreover, neuroimaging techniques are not sufficiently sensitive to detect early changes in the brain associated to cognitive impairments (Muoz-Cspedes & Pal-Lapedriza, 2001). In recent years, the prevalence of cognitive malingering in the courts has been on the rise, the most common form being the feigning of memory loss caused by brain injury. However, recent neuropsychology studies suggest that only 40% of cases are legitimate claims of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) (Larrabee, 2003; Mittenberg, Patton, Canyock, & Condit, 2002). Defendants often allege memory crime-related amnesia to elude punishment (Oorsouw & Cima, 2007) in the commonly held belief that, during the lapse in time between committing the offence and the trial, offenders will have forgotten the events making it easier for them to feign cognitive impairment since they only have to stifle their normal cognitive functioning such as recalling or speaking rather than having to malinger positive symptoms such as hallucinations, ravings or paranoia (Garca, Negredo, & Fernndez, 2004). On the whole, as malingerers lack any specific coherent syndrome disorder, they tend to exaggerate symptoms rather than fabricate them. Hence the most frequent malingering disorders are exaggerated cognitive, behavioural, sensorial, and personality disorders. The main features of malingering on both the DSM-III and DSM-IV-TR include (1) the intentional production of false or grossly exaggerated physical or psychological symptoms, (2) motivated by external incentives such as obtaining financial compensation, evading criminal prosecution, avoiding military duty, avoiding work, or obtaining illicit drugs American Psychiatric Association 2000, pp. 739740). Slick, Sherman, and Iverson (1999) have defined the malingering of cognitive impairment as the volition to exaggerate cognitive impairment to gain material wealth or to elude responsibility and punishment (p. 552). Consequently, the diagnosis and assessment of
Memory malingering assessment
137
mild or moderate cognitive impairment (such as memory loss) due to traumatic brain injury (TBI) or dementia is crucial for forensic contexts. In severe cases there is often no discrepancy between neuropsychological findings and neuroimaging techniques; however, in mild to moderate cases, the assessment of injuries and their impact on a persons daily life is highly challenging and problematic. This has prompted business, lawyers, insurance companies and researchers to design and develop psychometric methods and instruments for detecting malingering. As memory loss is the most commonly feigned brain injury, most tests have focused on the evaluation of this cognitive process, and the detection of abnormal memory performance (Bender, 2008; Martins & Martins, 2010). In order to assess the reliability of empirical data, some researchers have worked with groups of malingers in various contexts using different scales and instruments (Arce, Faria, Carballal, & Novo, 2006; Jimnez & Snchez, 2002, 2003, Kirk et al., 2011, Luna & Martn-Luengo, 2010; Rogers, 2008; Rosenfeld, Edens, & Lowmaster, 2011). Other authors, have analyzed diagnostic accuracy (e.g., Berry & Schipper, 2008), in terms of sensitivity and specificity of malingering using the ROC curve (Irwin, 2009; Jimnez, Snchez, & Tobon, 2009; Pintea & Moldovan, 2009; Santosa, Hautus, & O'Mahony, 2011; Streiner & Cairney, 2007) in order to compare the data. The decade of the 1990s witnessed a surge in journal publications on neuropsychological research (e.g., Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, The Clinical Neuropsychologist) focusing on deceit and malingering. Of 139 forensic articles, 120 (86%) addressed deceit or malingering (Sweet, Ecklund-Johnson, & Malina, 2008; Sweet, King, Malina, Bergman, & Simmonds, 2002). Similarly, the prevalence of malingering and deception was higher in criminal than in civil contexts (Ardolf, Denney, and Houston, 2007). An estimated 25 to 45% (Kopelman, 1987) and up to 65% (Bradford & Smith, 1979) of defendants standing trial for murder allege crime related amnesia to elude responsibility and punishment with a plea of insanity (Jelicic & Merckelbach , 2007; Merckelbach & Christianson, 2007; Oorsouw & Merckelbach, 2010). As for the methodology regarding the participants, Garca et al. (2004) propose two alternative methods for assessing the feigning of cognitive impairment: a) a laboratory experimental design where subjects are assigned to an experimental group of malingerers who receive specific malingering instructions for feigning a particular situation or event, and b) an assessment of real malingers e.g., parties involved in
138
G. Snchez et al.
litigation who stand to gain from deception. Though the latter would be the optimum choice for research purposes, it is undoubtedly the most difficult to assess empirically due to the difficulty in locating and evaluating real malingerers (Iverson & Franzen, 1996). As for the psychometric instruments employed for detecting malingering, some techniques are based on the ceiling-floor-effect and others on the forced-choice formats. Though most of the tests are simple, they appear to be complex, and induce malingers to overate the difficulty of a task and score higher (ceiling) or lower (floor) than individuals with severe brain dysfunction (Flowers, Bolton, & Brindle, 2008; Zilkowska, 2007). The forced-choice format, where subjects have to choose between two or more alternatives, either visual or auditory, is currently the most widely used format (Garca et al., 2004; Muoz-Cspedes & Pal-Lapedriza, 2001). These tests calculate the percentage of random answers, subjects answering significantly below chance performance is indicative of malingering or exaggerating. Though these simple tests are sensitive to wild exaggeration, they succumb to subtle deceit (Garca et al., 2004). Sharland and Gfellers (2007) review of the neuropsychology techniques used for detecting the malingering of memory impairment revealed that 75% of professionals used the TOMM, 41% the Word Memory Test (WMT), and 18% the Victoria Symptom Valid Test (VSVT). In this study two instruments were employed to detect the malingering of memory impairment i.e., the specificity and sensitivity of the Wechsler-III Memory Scale, and the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). The Wechsler Memory Scale-III (WMS-III, Wechsler, 2004) for the detection of malingering has revealed that the General Memory Index was usually below the Attention-Concentration Index in patients with well documented brain damage (Ord, Greve, & Bianchini, 2008; West, Curtis, Greve, & Bianchini, 2011) whereas in the malingerers group the opposite tendency was observed (Mittenberg, Arzin, Millsaps, & Heilbronner, 1993). This technique was employed in this study as it enables the assessment of immediate memory, working memory and delayed memory. Each of these types of memory can be evaluated in terms of two modalities: auditory and visual, and two types of tasks: recall and recognition. Wechsler Memory Scale consists of a total of 11 tests (6 primary and 5 optional subtests), that have been adapted to the Spanish population (Wechsler, 2004). As the Wechsler Memory Scale is extensive, and
139
the aim of this study was to develop a fast screening method for the detection of malingerers, only 5 of the 11subtests were assessed in this study. The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), designed to detect the malingering of memory impairment (Tombaugh, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2011), provides good sensitivity for forensic settings (Delain, Stafford, & Ben-Porath, 2003; Gast & Hart, 2010; Sweet, Condit, & Nelson, 2008). As forensic evaluations are often performed under the pressure of tight deadlines set by the courts for the submission of forensic reports, the present study aims to design a fast screening psychometric instrument with good diagnostic accuracy and discriminating power indexes for the detection of malingered memory loss. The participants, assigned to one of three groups (Normal, MCI or informed malingers), were administered 6 different types of memory evaluation tests (Digit Span, Faces I and II, Verbal Paired Associates I and II, Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates and Family Pictures I and II). In addition to correlations and ANOVAs, Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analysis was undertaken. A ROC curve is a graphical representation of the success rate or sensitivity (probability of correctly detecting a presented signal) against a false alarm rate or specificity (probability of detecting a signal when it is actually not presented) for detection tasks with binary classifier system of responses (yes/no, present/absent), the number of true positive, true negatives, false positives and false negatives will determined by the position of the cut-off point for detecting malingering. In both medicine and psychology, test sensitivity and specificity are used to validate diagnostic decision-making. These concepts, combined with the area under the curve (AUC), are widely used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and discriminating power of a psychological test (e.g., for illness classification), and circumvent the need for expensive, time consuming diagnostic tests. Method Participants A total of 156 participants who freely volunteered were assigned to one of three groups. The first group, termed normal, consisted of 57 individuals, average age of 31.48 years (SD = 2.13), with no memory impairment were given specific instructions to answer truthfully and honestly to each of the tests. The second group, termed MCI was composed of 41 individuals, average age of 64.00 years (SD = 2.60), who had been
140
G. Snchez et al.
previously evaluated on the Mini-Mental State Examination memory tests (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975) and had been diagnosed for MCI (score range 24-29; Spanish adaptation of Lobo, Ezquerra, Gmez, Sala, & Seva, 1979), were given specific instructions to answer truthfully and honestly to each of the tests. The third group comprised 58 informed malingers, average age of 21.12 years (SD = .22) with no memory impairment, who were instructed to feign they suffered memory impairment. Measuring instruments The Spanish version (Wechsler, 2004) of the Wechsler Memory Scale-III (WMS-III) was used since, at the time of data gathering, the adapted IV version of the WMS that assesses immediate, delayed, and working memory was unavailable in Spain. Each of these types of memory can be evaluated by two modalities: visual and auditory with two task types: recall and recognition. The WMS-III consists of a total of 11 tests (6 primary and 5 optional subtests). Bearing in mind the main objective of this study was to design a fast screening psychometric instrument for detecting the malingering of memory impairment, the full WAIS-III scale was not applied and the most representative subscales of the subject's ability to remember and manipulate the information presented both auditory and visually in working memory were selected. Thus, participants underwent the following tests: Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). This instrument developed by Tombaugh (1996, 1997, 2002, 2011) for detecting the malingering of mnemonic disorders comprises 50 items (drawn objects), and has been found to be unaffected by demographic variables such as age or educational status. Comparative studies (Tombaugh, 1997) have shown that the implementation of TOMM that partially measures learning and memory, detects cognitive impairment in patients. It is a visual test for assessing the ability to memorize, either immediate or delayed, a series of drawn objects that have been previously presented. Mini-Cognitive Test. The Mini-Examen Cognoscitivo is Lobos et al. (1979) Spanish adaptation of the Mini-Mental State Examination (Folstein et al., 1975). This test was only administered to the MCI group. It is a fast screening test to discriminate (5-10 minutes) between cognitive normality and abnormality specifically, but not only, in elderly populations. There are two versions of 30 and 35 items, the latter being the most currently in use, and was employed in this study.
141
This tool explores five cognitive areas: Orientation, Fixation, Concentration and Calculation, Memory, and Language. And the WAIS-III subscales (Wechsler, 2004): 1) Digit Span. It is an original WAIS-III subtest that assesses a persons ability to remember information immediately after oral presentation (immediate auditory memory), and is widely used as a tool to detect malingering, and as an index of deception (Berry & Schipper, 2008; Jasinski, Berry, Shandera, & Clark, 2011). 2) Faces I and II. Designed to obtain information on the ability to recall visual information immediate (phase-I) and delayed (phase-II). The average reliability coefficient for the age groups (16 to 89 years) was .74 in both the first and second phase (Wechsler, 2004). 3) Verbal Paired Associates I and II. The objective of these subtests is to assess a person's ability to recall items presented verbally immediate (phase I) or delayed (phase II). The reliability coefficients (Cronbach's ) were .93 (phase I) and .83 (phase II) when the average coefficients were determined at different ages (Wechsler, 2004). 4) Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates. This subtest seeks to assess the ability to recall the information presented after a 25 to 35-minute time interval. It is an extension of the previous test of Verbal Paired Associates. Using the same stimuli of 24 paired words, the subject has to re-read a list and recall using a (yes/no) format the items on the first list. 5) Family Pictures I and II. This test aims to assess the ability to remember, immediate (Phase I) or delayed (phase II), visual-spatial memory. The reliability (Cronbach's ) for this test was .81, for immediate, and .84 for the delayed memory (Wechsler, 2004). Procedure and design A quasi-experimental design was used in this study, it is quasi-experimental in that participants had not been randomly selected and assigned to groups i.e., participants had been previously selected and assigned to groups, and "descriptive" in that it compares the specificity and diagnostic accuracy of each test in detecting malingering.
142
G. Snchez et al. All participants responded voluntarily. The normal and MCI groups were
instructed to reply to the test following the guidelines (standard rules), on sincerity and honesty established in the manuals. The fact that informed malingers were given specific malingering instructions to avoid random responses as they are strong evidence of malingering since feigners of disability often act on the false belief that they must obtain fewer than 50% correct answers in order to prove their disability (Garca et al., 2004). Patients with memory loss are expected to achieve a 50% success rate, but with each test the malinger is repeatedly faced with the same dilemma i.e., if they try to feign a disability, they run the risk of failing too many responses since patients who feign erroneously believe that the correct score should fall below chance performance. Subjects answering significantly below chance performance are considered to be malingering or exaggerating. The informed malingers were given malingering instructions, shown examples of the most common forms of deceit, and asked to further develop their own particular strategy of deception. The following are the specific instructions: "Imagine you could claim a large sum of money, or obtain substantial benefits if you could convince us that you have memory loss, and that it affects your work or daily life. Most people use the strategy of random answers, others try to answer correctly to everything, and others recall only the first words, pictures or given phrases. You must choose your own strategy to really convince us that your memory fails, okay? Bellow I will show you a series of drawings or figures ..." (continue with the general instructions of the test). The implications and personal consequences that may arise from the interpretation of psychological tests in forensic settings underscore the need to assess test accuracy and diagnostic discriminating power: a) for the diagnostic accuracy of each test the AUC analysis must exceed the minimum value of .90 (excellent accuracy); b) the minimum value of the diagnostic discrimination test must exceed 90% sensitivity and specificity. However, other authors (Burgueo, Garca-Bastos, & GonzlezBuitrago, 1995) have proposed 80%. Results One-way ANOVAs performed for the group factor (normal, malingerers, and MCIs) on the memory impairment measures revealed significant differences in all measures (see Table 1). Post hoc analyses with Bonferroni correction (see Table 2) showed that: a) all of the tests analysed in this study were able to statistically
143
discriminate between malingers and normal individuals with no memory impairment. Remarkably, the Family Pictures test and TOMM obtained a high score; b) TOMM and the Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates test failed to statistically discriminate between normal subjects with no memory impairment and the MCI group; c) only TOMM, the Digit Span, and Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates significantly discriminated between malingers and the MCI group; and d) only the Digit Span test statistically discriminated the three groups, with a medium effect size, d = .64 and d = .62, comparing the scores for the MCI group with normal subjects and malingers, and a large effect size, d = 1.18, between normal subjects and malingers. Table 1. ANOVAs for Factor Group (normal, malingerers, and MCIs). Variables TOMM-R Digit Span Faces-II VPA-II VPA.Rec F.Pictures-II F 125.76 88.96 68.88 100.77 100.20 89.19 p .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 MN 49.89 15.96 39.56 7.07 23.93 9.56 MM 30.88 6.14 28.19 2.31 16.79 3.45 MMCI 46.78 10.95 30.51 2.68 22.59 6.05
Note. df(2, 153); MN = mean of the normal group; MM = mean of the malingerer group; MMCI= mean of the Mild Cognitive Impairment group; Digit Span = Digit Span, WMSIII Subtest; Faces-II = WMS-III Subtest; VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, WMSIII Subtest; VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, WMS-III Subtest; F. Pictures-II = Family Pictures II, WMS-III Subtest.
Table 2. Mean Difference (I-J) and Effect Size (d).
TOMM-R MD Malingerers/Normal Normal/MCI Malingerers/MCI -19.01* 3.11 -15.90* d 1.33 .41 .92 Digit Span MD -9.83* 5.01* -4.81* d 1.18 .64 .62 Faces-II MD -11.37* 9.05* -2.32 d 1.00 .89 .21 VPA-II MD -4.76* 4.39* -.37 d 1.28 1.15 .08 VPA.Rec. MD -7.14* 1.34 -5.79* d 1.16 .48 .80 F. Pictures-II MD -22.36* 28,51* -6.16 d 1.04 1.19 .31
Groups
Note. * Bonferroni Significant Difference (BSD); MD = Mean difference (I-J); MCI = Mild Cognitive Impairment; Digit Span = Digit Span, WMS-III Subtest; Faces-II = WMS-III Subtest; VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, WMS-III Subtest; VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, WMS-III Subtest; F. Pictures-II = Family Pictures II, WMS-III Subtest. On the whole, the analysis of the correlations (see Table 3) between tests revealed all of the correlations were significant, ps < .001, and positive, ranging from
144
G. Snchez et al.
.83 (TOMM-Retention and Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates) to .46 (Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates and Family Pictures-II); that is, the explained variance ranging from 21.16 to 68.72% (a large effect size). Table 3. Correlation Matrix. Test TOMM-R Digit Span Faces-II VPA-II VPA. Rec TOMM-R 1 .683* .634* .581* .829* Digit Span .683* 1 .679* .664* .667* .617* Faces-II VPA-II .634* .679* 1 .678* .683* .752* .581* .664* .678* 1 .637* .766* VPA. Rec. F. Pictures-II .829* .667* .683* .637* 1 .460* .430* .617* .752* .766* .460* 1
F. Pictures-II .430*
Note. * p < .001 (two tailed); TOMM-R = TOMM Retention subtest; Digit Span = Digit Span, WMS-III subtest; Faces-II = Faces, WMS-III subtest; VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, WMS-III subtest; VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, WMS-III subtest; F. Pictures-II = Family Pictures II, WMS-III subtest. Sensitivity and specificity The key property of a clinical diagnostic test is accuracy, defined as the ability to properly classify individuals into clinically relevant subgroups. In its simplest form, it is the ability to distinguish between two states of health (healthy and sick). The accuracy of a diagnostic test is measured in terms of sensitivity and specificity as determined by the cut-off values above or below which the test is positive. As cut-offs vary according to healthy and sick populations, a more comprehensive method for evaluating the full range of test cut-off scores is by using of a ROC curve, which is a fundamental and standardized tool for the evaluation of diagnostic tests. The ROC curve is a graph showing the sensitivity/specificity pairs resulting from the continuous variation in the cut-off points for the entire range of observed results. The vertical axis represents the sensitivity or true positive fraction, and the X axis represents the specificity or false positive fraction. The results of the ROC curve analyses were compared to ascertain which memory tests discriminated malingers from non-malingers with the greatest diagnostic accuracy. Table 4 shows the comparison of the ROC cut-off, sensitivity, specificity and AUC for each of the groups under study.
145
Table 4. Comparative Analysis between Groups: Cut-Off, Sensitivity, Specificity and Area Under the Curve (AUC).
Malingers /Normal Tests Cut-off TOMM-R Digit Span Faces-II VPA-II VPA. Rec. F. Pictures-II 48 11 36 4 23 27 Sensib. (%) 96.55 89.66 94.83 87.93 91.32 84.48 Especif. (%) 98.2 85.96 77.19 87.72 94.74 91.23 AUC (ROC) .981* .949* .910* .933* .953* .913* Cutoff 42 6 28 2 21 16 Malingers/MCI Sens. (%) 89.66 63.79 55.71 65.52 82.76 72.41 Specif. (%) 87.80 100.00 65.85 51.22 87.80 68.29 AUC (ROC) .917* .826* .628 .548 .871* .715* Cutoff 49 11 36 5 23 28 Normal/ MCI Sens. (%) 46.34 70.73 90.24 90.24 58.54 95.12 Specif. (%) 91.23 85.96 77.19 84.21 94.74 89.47 AUC (ROC) .704* .814* .886* .936* .771* .939*
Note. * p < .05; **p < .01; AUC = Area Under the Curve; MCI = Mild Cognitive Impairment; TOMM-R = TOMM Retention subtest; Digit Span = Digit Span, WMS-III subtest; Faces-II = Faces, WMS-III subtest; VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, WMS-III subtest; VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, WMS-III subtest; F. Pictures-II = Family Pictures II, WMS-III subtest. As for which of the tests can discriminate malingerers from individuals with no memory deficits who answered honestly, our results showed that each and every one of the 6 memory tests used in this study were found to be significant at different levels, both in their differences in their mean scores and in their diagnostic accuracy (AUC), with Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates exhibiting the highest diagnostic accuracy (AUC = .981 and AUC = .953, respectively). In terms of sensitivity (probability of detecting malingering) and specificity (probability of detecting non-malingering), only the TOMM and the Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates proved valid for forensic applications. Despite of the statistical significance, both in term of the mean differences (Table 2) and the diagnostic accuracy (AUC), the Digit Span, Faces-II, Verbal Paired Associates, and Family pictures -II (Table 4) entailed a greater risk of wrong or false diagnosis in comparison to the other tests. Figure 1 shows the different paths of the ROC curve, and the cut-off points for malingerers and non- malingerers in each test.
146
G. Snchez et al.
Figure 1. Comparison of Malingerers and Normal in Test Performance.
100
80 Tomm-R WMS.DigitSpan WMS.Faces-II WM.F.Picture-II WM.VPA-II WMS.VPA.Rec
Sensitivity
60
40
20
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 100-Specificity
Note. TOMM-R = TOMM, Retention subtest; WMS. Digit Span = Digit Span, WMS-III subtest; WMS. Faces-II = Faces, WMS-III subtest; WMS.F. Pictures-II = Family Pictures II, WMS-III subtest; WMS.VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, WMS-III subtest; WMS.VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, WMS-III subtest.
Table 3 shows that TOMM, Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, the Digit Span and Family Pictures-II tests statistically discriminated malingers from the MCI group. However, Faces-II and Verbal Paired Associates-II tests were not able to discriminate both of these groups. Figure 2 shows the path of each of the curves for the different tests at various cut-off points.
Memory malingering assessment Figure 2. Comparison of Malingerers and MCIs in Test Performance.
147
100
80
Sensitivity
60
40
Tomm-R WMS.DigitSpan WMS.Faces-II WM.F.Picture-II WM.VPA-II WMS.VPA.Rec
20
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 100-Specificity
Note. TOMM-R = TOMM, Retention subtest of Memory Malingering (TOMM) test; WMS. Digit Span = Digit Span, Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) subtest; WMS.Faces-II = Faces, Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) subtest; WMS.F.PicturesII = Family Pictures II, Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) subtest; WMS.VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) subtest; WMS.VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) subtest. On the whole, the comparison of the area under the ROC curve between normal and MCI groups (Table 4) in the different tests revealed diagnostic accuracy was good, the Family Pictures-II and Verbal Paired Associates obtained the highest values (AUC = .939 and AUC = .936, respectively), with Family Pictures-II showing greatest sensitivity and specificity. The sensitivity and specificity of the other tests was poor and increased the risk of false diagnosis with the TOMM test showing the lowest sensitivity (Figure 3).
148
G. Snchez et al.
Figure 3. Comparison of MCIs and Normal in Test Performance.
100
80
Sensitivity
60
40
Tomm-R WMS.DigitSpan WMS.Faces-II WM.F.Picture-II WM.VPA-II WMS.VPA.Rec
20
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 100-Specificity
Note. TOMM-R = TOMM, Retention subtest; WMS.Digit Span = Digit Span, WMS-III subtest; WMS.Faces-II= Faces, WMS-III subtest; WMS.F.Pictures-II = Family Pictures-II, WMS-III subtest; WMS.VPA-II = Verbal Paired Associates-II, WMS-III subtest; WMS.VPA.Rec. = Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates, WMS-III subtest. Of all the test, the TOMM and the Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates in the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) had the greatest predictive power in discriminate sincere subjects from malingers. The TOMM showed good diagnostic accuracy and discrimination power between the normal group (M = 49.89, 95% CI [49.80, 49.99]) and malingerers (M = 30.88, 95% CI [28.23, 33.53] as illustrated by the ROC curve with good sensitivity and specificity above 96% with a cut-off value 48. The Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates in the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) also showed good diagnostic accuracy and discrimination power between the normal group (M = 23.93, 95% CI [23.85, 24.01]) and malingerers (M = 16.79, 95% CI [18.08, 22.58] as illustrated by the ROC curve with good sensitivity and specificity above 91% with a cut-off value 23. Langeluddecke and Lucas (2003) comparison on the WMS-III of 25 claimants with mild brain damage involved in litigation and 50 other individuals with severe brain
149
damage but no involvement in litigation showed that two subtests of the WMS-III i.e., the Auditory Recognition Delayed (80% sensitivity and specificity of 91.8%), and the list of Words-II (81% sensitivity and specificity of 95.6%) were significant discriminators. Faces-I and -II subtests showed good specificity (96% and 98%, respectively), but low sensitivity (32% and 28%, respectively). Hacker and Jones (2009) study of 27 individuals with traumatic brain injury, 30 normal and 30 malingerers using the Auditory Recognition Delayed of Verbal Paired Associates subtest of the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) reported low levels of sensitivity (40-73%) and high specificity (95-100%). Vilar-Lpez et als. (2007) study on 35 Spanish psychology undergraduates considered normal (n = 14) and a group with post-concussion syndrome (in litigation or not) (n = 12) showed that, in comparison to other techniques, the effectiveness of TOMM test was similar with a cut-off point of 45 in the second part of the test (not the retention test). Our results for the TOMM test and Verbal Paired Associates (recognition) were consistent with their findings: a) both tests obtained the highest values with honest subjects (normal group) being significantly different from the informed malingerers group), b) both tests have shown that the MCI group obtained higher scores than the group of informed malingerers, and c) malingers obtained the lowest scores. Discussion Forensic experts are often under intense pressure from the courts to submit expert evaluations and reports under tight deadlines. This underscores the need for designing a simple but accurate and reliable fast screening psychometric instrument for detecting the malingering of memory impairment. The total implementation time for the combined WSM and TOMM tests was 35-40 minutes, including the time interval specified between tests. Care was taken in applying the different parts of the tests, and in observing the 15-minute waiting period between the administration of TOMM trials 1and 2 and the Retention test (trial 3) as it functions as a distraction. During this time interval, the first subtest of the WSM i.e., the Verbal Paired Associates I was administered prior to proceeding to the TOMM-R (trial 3) followed by the Verbal Paired Associates II. Although the tests are simple, there is no reason to believe they are less accurate and reliable than the application of a battery of complex memory tests that reiterate information obtained in each of the tests.
150
G. Snchez et al. In the present study, the test of memory malingering (TOMM) and 5 of the 11
subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) were used to design the fast screening scale. Bearing in mind that some of the participants had cognitive impairments, it was vital to save time and energy, prevent fatigue, and to ensure the participant did not have the opportunity to reflect on their responses to the tests. A key limitation of studies assessing memory deficits is the small population size for patients with amnesia or malingering. One option is to assign normal subjects with no memory disorder who are instructed to feign to an experimental group (Jelicic, Ceunen, Peters, & Merckelbach, 2011; Powell, Gfeller, Hendricks, & Sharlan, 2004). Notwithstanding, the assumption that the behaviour of informed malingerers is comparable to the behaviour of real malingerers who really feign the core symptoms of a disorder is highly controversial given that the motivations of these population types are clearly different. In this study the responses to different memory tests applied to a MCI group diagnosed through the Mini-Mental State Examination (Folstein et al., 1975) were analyzed with a 24-29 cut-off for the Spanish version (Lobo et al., 1979). It is worth noting that the Delayed Auditory Recognition of paired words (auditory memory), a subtest of the Wechsler Memory Scale, in combination with the TOMM (visual memory) accurately discriminated sincere subjects from malingerers. However, in this study the cut-off point ( 48) for the TOMM test was higher than the cut-off points reported by other authors using the same test (Powell et al., 2004; Teichner & Wagner, 2004; Vilar-Lpez et al., 2007, 2008). Though some authors have proposed the TOMM-R should be optional and need be administered only if the Trial 2 cut-off score is below 45 given that the Retention test scores are analogous to TOMM trial 2, and Trial 3 detects only a small number of malingerers (Booksh, Aubert, & Andrews, 2007; Greve & Bianchini, 2006), we consider this exclusion would undermine test reliability and validity, and would be remiss in forensic contexts. The main drawback underlying the predictive power of these tools is that they depend entirely on varying cut-off criterion for each test. The path of the ROC curve for each psychometric instrument allows for visual and statistical comparison, providing a single measure for all cut-offs of diagnostic accuracy; notwithstanding, establishing the appropriate cut-off point varies according to the circumstances. One option is to seek the highest sensitivity when the disorder or illness is severe and manifest, when the disease is treatable, or when the results of false positives do not entail psychological
151
trauma or financial loss. High specificity should be required for severe disorders or diseases, difficult to treat or practically incurable illnesses, and when it is crucial for medical or psychological reasons to detect non-existent ailments. Thus, a test with a positive predictive power (PP+) should be used when false positives can have serious repercussions. A higher overall cut-off value is desired when the disorder or disease is severe but curable, or when both false positives and false negatives involve severe trauma. In general, we are aware of the difficulty in establishing commonly agreed "optimal cut-offs" which in any case requires previously establishing the objectives of diagnosis and cost/benefits entailed. But this depends mainly on the context, and in many cases it is simply impossible to know the cost and potential benefits, economic or otherwise. The best approach is to find a adequate balance between specificity and sensitivity, being the most commonly used criteria in clinical and psychological detection techniques. As neither sensitivity nor specificity assess the probability of making a correct diagnosis, two further indices were developed i.e., the positive predictive power (PP +), and the negative predictive Power (PP-). Unfortunately, these indicators have the drawback that they depend on the prevalence base rate (the total number of individuals who are actually positive in the total population), and this value never depended on the cut-off point in our test. Whereas sensitivity and specificity, and thus the ROC curve and the positive and negative probability ratios are all independent of the prevalence of a disease, the positive and negative predictive values are highly dependent on the sample size. Regardless of the controversy, we recommend that malingering should always be diagnosed on the basis of several sources: autobiographical interview, clinical evaluation, and quantitative analysis of the different techniques. Having a battery of complex tests to detect malingering is impractical for judicial contexts as it is time consuming and the results are reiterated in each test. In this study the results for the Test of memory malingering (TOMM) and the Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates (WMS-III) provided an accurate and fast screening method for the detection of malingering. A further limitation of this study was sample size i.e., locating and assessing real malingerers is problematic since by definition they strive to conceal their deceit. Thus, further studies are required on larger populations to ensure greater reliability and
152
G. Snchez et al.
generalization of the results, which may be crucial for determining personal outcomes in judicial contexts. Moreover, no matter how well informed malingerers may be trained, one should be cautious in extrapolating the results to individuals involved in litigation and who stand to obtain or lose financial compensation or other benefits. In short, in this study the Recognition of Verbal Paired Associates subtest and the TOMM exhibited the greatest accuracy, and provide a fast, valid and reliable screening method for detecting the malingering. Acknowledgements Support for this research was provided by a grant from the Autonomous Government of Castilla y Len (Spain) (SA051A08). References American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Arce, R., Faria, F., Carballal, A., & Novo, M. (2006). Evaluacin del dao moral en accidentes de trfico. Desarrollo y validacin de un protocolo para la deteccin de simulacin. [Evaluating psychological injury in motor vehicle accidents (MVA): Development and validation of a protocol for detecting simulation]. Psicothema, 18, 278-284. Ardolf, B. R., Denney, R. L., & Houston C. M. (2007). Base rates of negative response bias and malingered neurocognitive dysfunction among criminal defendants referred for neuropsychological evaluation. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21, 899916. doi: 10.1080/13825580600966391 Bender, S. (2008). Malingered traumatic brain injury R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 69-86). New York: The Guilford Press. Berry, D. T., & Schipper, L. J. (2008). Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment using standard neuropsychological tests. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (pp. 237-252). New York: The Guilford Press. Booksh, R. L., Aubert, M. J., & Andrews, S. R. (2007). Should the retention trial of the Test of memory Malingering be optional? A reply. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 87-89. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2006.11.002
153
Bradford, J. M., & Smith, S. M. (1979). Amnesia and homicide: The Padola case and a study of thirty cases. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 7, 219-231. Burgueo, M. J., Garca-Bastos, J. L., & Gonzlez-Buitrago, J. M. (1995). Las curvas ROC en la evaluacin de las pruebas diagnsticas [ROC curves for the assessment of diagnostic tests]. Medicine Clinic, 104, 661-670. Delain, S. L., Stafford, K. P., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2003). Use of the TOMM in a criminal court forensic assessment setting. Assessment, 10, 370-381. doi: 10.1177/1073191103259156 Flowers, K. A., Bolton, C., & Brindle, N. (2008). Change guessing a forced-choice recognition task and the detection of malingering. Neuropsychology, 22, 273-277. doi: 10.1037/0894-4105.22.2.273 Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh P. R. T. (1975). Mini-Mental State: A practical method for grading the cognitive state patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189-198. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 Garca, G., Negredo, L., & Fernndez, S. (2004). Evaluacin de la simulacin de problemas de memoria dentro del mbito legal y forense [Evaluating the simulation of memory problems within the legal and forensic fields]. Revista de Neurologa, 38, 766-774. Gast, J., & Hart, K. (2010). The performance of juvenile offenders on the Test of Memory Malingering. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 10, 53-68. doi: 10.1080/15228930903173062 Greve, K. W., & Bianchini, K. J. (2006). Should retention trial of the Test of Memory Malingering be optional? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21, 117-119. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2005.06.009 Hacker, V. L., & Jones, C. (2009). Detecting feigned impairment with the Word list recognition of the Wechsler Memory Scale- 3rd edition. Brain Injury, 23, 243249. doi: 10.1080/02699050902748315 Irwin, R. J. (2009). Equivalence of the statistics for replicability and area under the ROC curve. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 62, 485487. doi: 10.1348/000711008X334760 Iverson, G. L., & Franzen, M. D. (1996). Using multiple objective memory procedures to detect simulated malingering. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 18, 38-51. doi: 10.1080/01688639608408260
154
G. Snchez et al.
Jasinski, L. J., Berry, D. T., Shandera, A. L., & Clark, J. A. (2011). Use of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Digit Span subtest for malingering detection: A metaanalytic review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 33, 300314. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2010.516743 Jelicic, M., Ceunen, E., Peters, M. J. V., & Merckelbach, H. (2011). Detecting coached feigning using the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67, 850-855. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20805 Jelicic, M., & Merckelbach, H. (2007). Evaluating the authenticity of crime-related amnesia. In S. A. Christianson (Ed.), Offenders memories of violent crimes (pp. 215-233). New York: Wiley. Jimnez, F., & Snchez, G. (2002). Sensibilidad al fingimiento de la Escala Psiquitrica Fp de Arbisi y Ben-Porath (1995, 1998) en la adaptacin espaola del MMPI-2 [Sensibility to the fake-bad of the Psychiatric Scale Fp of Arbisi and Ben-Porath (1995, 1998) in the Spanish adaptation of the MMPI-2]. Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnstico y Evaluacin Psicolgica, 14(2), 117-134. Jimnez, F., & Snchez, G. (2003). Fingimiento de la imagen e ndice de Simulacin FK de Gough en la adaptacin espaola del MMPI-2 [Faking good image and the Goughs F-K simulation index in the Spanish adaptation of the MMPI-2]. Revista de Psicologa General y Aplicada, 56, 305-317. Jimnez, F., Snchez, G., & Tobn, C. (2009). A social desirability scale for the MMPI2. Which of the two: Wiggins (WSD) or Edwards (ESD)? The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 1, 147-163. Kirk, J. W., Harris, B., Hutaff-Lee, C. F., Koelemay, S. W., Dinkins, J. P., & Kirkwood, M. W. (2011). Performance on Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) among a large clinic-referred pediatric sample. Child Neuropsychology, 17, 242-254. doi: 10.1080/09297049.2010.533166 Kopelman, M. D. (1987). Crime and amnesia: A review. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 323-342. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2370050307 Langeluddecke, P. M., & Lucas, S. K. (2003). Quantitative measures of memory malingering on the Wechsler Memory Scale-Third Edition in mild head injury litigants. Archives of Clinical Neuropsycology, 18, 181-197. doi: 10.1016/S08876177(01)00195-0
155
Larrabee, G. J. (2003). Detection of symptom exaggeration with the MMPI-2 in litigants with malingered neurocognitive dysfunction. The Clinical
Neuropsychologist, 17, 54-68. doi: 10.1076/clin.17.1.54.15627 Lobo, A., Ezquerra, J., Gmez, F., Sala, J., & Seva, A. (1979). El Mini Examen Cognoscitivo: Un test sencillo, prctico, para detectar alteraciones intelectuales en pacientes mdicos [The "Mini-Examen Cognoscitivo": A simple and practical test to detect intellectual dysfunctions in psychiatric patients]. Actas Luso-Espaolas de Neurologa, Psiquiatra y Ciencias Afines, 7, 198-202. Luna, K., & Martn-Luengo, B. (2010). New advances in the study of the confidence accuracy relationship in the Memory for events. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2, 55-71. Martins, M., & Martins, I. P. (2010). Memory malingering: Evaluating WMT criteria. Applied Neuropsychology, 17, 177-182. doi:
10.1080/09084281003715709 Merckelbach, H., & Christianson, S. A. (2007). Amnesia for homicide as a form of malingering. In S. A. Christianson (Ed.), Offenders memories of violent crimes (pp. 165-190). New York: Wiley. Mittenberg, W., Azrin, R., Millsaps, C., & Heilbronner, R. (1993). Identification of malingered head injury on the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised. Psychological Assessment, 5, 34-40. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.5.1.34 Mittenberg, W., Patton, C., Canyock, E. M., & Condit, D. C. (2002). Base rates of malingering and symptom exaggeration. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 1094-1102. doi: 10.1076/jcen.24.8.1094.8379 Muoz-Cspedes, J. M., & Pal-Lapedriza, N. (2001). La deteccin de los posibles casos de simulacin despus de un traumatismo craneoenceflico [The detection of possible cases of simulation after a traumatic brain injury]. Revista de Neurologa, 32, 773-778. Oorsouw, K. V., & Cima, M. (2007). The role of malingering and expectations in claims of crime-related amnesia. In S. A. Christianson (Ed.), Offenders memories of violent crimes (pp. 101-213). New York: Wiley. Oorsouw, K. V., & Merckelbach, H. (2010). Detecting malingered memory problems in the civil and criminal arena. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 97-114. doi: 10.1348/135532509X451304
156
G. Snchez et al.
Ord, J., Greve, K. W., & Bianchini, K. J. (2008). Using the Wechsler Memory Scale-III to detect malingering in mild traumatic brain injury. The Clinical
Neuropsychologists, 22, 689-704. doi: 10.1080/13854040701425437 Pintea, S., & Moldovan, R. (2009). The receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis: Fundamentals and applications in clinical psychology. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 9, 49-66. Powell, M., Gfeller, J., Hendricks, B., & Sharlan, M. (2004). Detecting symptom- and test-coached simulators with the Test of Memory Malingering. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 693-702. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2004.04.001 Rogers, R. (2008). Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Rosenfeld, B., Edens. J., & Lowmaster, S. (2011). Measure development in forensic psychology In B. Rosenfeld & S. Penrod (Eds.), Research methods in forensic psychology (pp. 26-42). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Santosa, M., Hautus, M., & OMahony, M. (2011). ROC curve analysis to determine effects of repetition on the criteria for same-different and A NOT-A tests. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 66-77. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.07.015 Sharland, M. J., & Gfeller J. D. (2007). A survey of neuropsychologists beliefs and practices with respect to the assessment of effort. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 213-223. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2006.12.004 Slick, D. J., Sherman, E. M. S., & Iverson, G. L. (1999). Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: Proposed standards for clinical practice and research. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 13, 545-561. doi: 10.1076/13854046(199911)13:04;1-Y;FT545 Streiner, D. L., & Cairney, J. (2007). Whats under the ROC? An introduction to receiver operating characteristics curve. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 52, 121-128. Sweet, J. J., Condit. D. C., & Nelson, N. W. (2008). Feigned amnesia and memory loss. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 218-236). New York: The Guilford Press. Sweet, J. J., Ecklund-Johnson, E., & Malina, A. (2008). Forensic neuropsychology: An overview of issues and directions. In J. E. Morgan & J. H. Ricker (Eds.), Textbook of clinical neuropsychology (pp. 870-890). London: Taylor and Francis.
157
Sweet, J. J., King, J. H., Malina, A. C., Bergman, M. A., & Simmonds, A. (2002). Documenting the prominence of forensic neuropsychology at national meetings and in relevant professional journals from 1990 to 2000. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 16, 481-494. doi: 10.1076/clin.16.4.481.13914 Teichner G., & Wagner, M. T. (2004). The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM): Normative data from cognitively intact, cognitively impaired, and elderly patients with dementia. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 455-464. doi: 10.1016/S0887-6177(03)00078-7 Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of Memory Malingering. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Tombaugh, T. N. (1997). The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM): Normative data from cognitively intact and cognitively impaired individuals. Psychological Assessment, 9, 260-268. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.9.3.260 Tombaugh, T. N. (2002). The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in forensic psychology. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2(3-4), 69-96. doi: 10.1300/J151v02n03_04 Tombaugh, T. N. (2011). Test de simulacin de problemas de memoria (TOMM): Manual [Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM): Manual]. Madrid: TEA Ediciones. Vilar-Lpez, R., Gmez-Ro, M., Santiago-Ramajo, S., Rodrguez-Fernndez, A. Puente, A. E., & Prez-Garca, M. (2008). Malingering detection in a Spanish population with a known-groups design. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 23, 365-377. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2008.01.007 Vilar-Lpez, R., Santiago-Ramajo, S., Gmez-Ro, M., Verdejo-Garca, A., Llamas, J. M., & Prez-Garca, M. (2007). Detection of malingering in a Spanish population using three specific malingering tests. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 379-388. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2007.01.012 Wechsler, D. (2004). WMS-III. Escala de Memoria de Wechsler-III. Manual de aplicacin y puntuacin [WMS-III. Wechsler Memory Scale-III: Application and scoring manual]. Madrid: TEA Ediciones. West, L. K., Curtis, K. L., Greve, K. W., & Bianchini, K. (2011). Memory in traumatic brain injury: The effects of injury severity and effort on the Wechsler Memory Scale-III. Journal of Neuropsychology, 5, 114-125. doi:
10.1348/174866410X521434
158
G. Snchez et al.
Zilkowska, A. M. (2007). Specialized test for detecting memory malingering. Przeglad Psychologiczny, 50, 165-179.
THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS OF A COGNITIVE-BEHAVIOURAL TREATMENT WITH JUVENILE OFFENDERS

Santiago Redondo, Ana Martnez-Catena, and Antonio Andrs-Pueyo
Dept. of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatment, University of Barcelona, Barcelona (Spain) (Received 12 February 2012; revised 30 March 2012; accepted 1 April 2012) Abstract Several treatment evaluations have highlighted the effectiveness of cognitivebehavioural programmes with both youth and adult offenders. This paper describes the application and assessment of a cognitivebehavioural treatment (adapted to Spanish from Ross and Fabianos Reasoning & Rehabilitation Programme) with juvenile offenders serving community orders in an educational measure called in Spanish libertad vigilada (similar to parole). The intervention comprised six different therapeutic components: self-control, cognitive restructuring, problem solving, social skills/assertiveness, values/empathy, and relapse prevention. Treatment effectiveness was tested using a quasi-experimental design involving two groups and pre/post evaluation. The results show that the programme was effective (with low to moderate effect sizes) in improving participants social skills and self-esteem, as well as in reducing their aggressiveness. However, the intervention had no positive influence on empathy, cognitive distortions or impulsiveness. These results are in line with those of many other correctional studies, in which the treatment applied had a significant but partial effect on participants. Keywords: juvenile offenders; correctional treatment; cognitive-behavioural programmes; Reasoning & Rehabilitation; effectiveness assessment. Resumen Diferentes estudios han puesto de manifiesto la eficacia de los programas cognitivo-conductuales aplicados como tratamiento en delincuentes adultos y jvenes. Este trabajo describe la aplicacin y evaluacin de un tratamiento cognitivo-conductual (una adaptacin del programa Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin de Ross y Fabiano), aplicado a delincuentes juveniles que cumplen sus sanciones en condiciones de libertad vigilada y en contextos comunitarios. El programa de intervencin inclua seis componentes teraputicos: autocontrol, reestructuracin cognitiva, resolucin de problemas, habilidades sociales / asertividad, valores/empata y la prevencin de recadas. La efectividad del tratamiento se evalu mediante un diseo cuasiexperimental en dos grupos y se realiz una evaluacin pre / post-tratamiento. Los resultados muestran que el programa fue efectivo (con una magnitud del tamao del efecto entre baja y moderada) en la mejora de las habilidades sociales de los participantes y la autoestima, as como en la reduccin de su agresividad. Sin embargo, la intervencin no tuvo influencia positiva en la empata, las distorsiones cognitivas y la impulsividad. Estos resultados estn en lnea con muchos otros estudios anlogos, en los que el tratamiento aplicado tuvo un efecto significativo, aunque parcial, en los participantes. Palabras clave: delincuentes juveniles; tratamiento penitenciario; programas cognitivoconductuales, Razonamiento y Rehabilitacin, evaluacin de la eficacia.
Correspondence: Santiago Redondo Illescas, Passeig Vall dHebrn, 171 (Edifici Ponent), 6 planta, 08035- Barcelona (Spain). E-mail: sredondo@ub.edu ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context
160
S. Redondo et al.
Introduction Most current psychological treatments with youth and adult offenders are based on the social learning theory of delinquent behaviour, coupled with a cognitivebehavioural model (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Hollin, 2006; McGuire, 2006; Moore, 2011; Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Smith, & Porter, 2003). Social learning theory asserts that antisocial behaviour is learned by means of the differential association with offenders, the imitation of them, the acquisition of anti-social definitions or beliefs, and the differential reinforcement of criminal values and acts (Akers, 2009; Yarbrough, Jones, Sullivan, Sellers, & Cochran, 2011). In relation to this theory, the cognitivebehavioural model of treatment usually involves a combined intervention that addresses the thinking, emotions and social skills of juvenile offenders. It has been shown to be the most effective approach in this field (Day, 2009; Echebura, Fernndez-Montalvo, & Amor, 2006; Lipsey, 2009; Piquero, Jennings, & Farrington, 2009; Redondo, 2008; Ross & Fontao, 2010). Currently the most widely-accepted theory of offender rehabilitation is the riskneed-responsivity model (Andrews & Bonta, 2010), which distinguishes between static and dynamic risk factors for crime. Static risk factors are all those criminogenic influences that are related to an individuals past experiences (for instance, having suffered child abuse) and to his/her basic patterns of personality (such as a psychopathic profile). Although they contribute to an increased risk of crime, static risk factors are generally not modifiable. By contrast, dynamic factors are changeable variables. Some of them such as antisocial cognitions, criminal routines, drug addictions and social skills deficits, are typically connected with crime and can be modified by means of an appropriate intervention (Ogloff, 2002; Ogloff & Davis, 2004). In Andrews and Bontas model the dynamic factors mentioned are considered as criminogenic needs when establishing the objectives of offender treatments (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Hollin & Palmer, 2006). At present, one of the best-known programmes of offender intervention is the Reasoning & Rehabilitation Programme (R&R) developed by Ross and Fabiano (1985). This comprises different treatment techniques, each of which has previously been shown to be effective in this field. The main purpose of the R&R programme is to improve participants thinking skills, training them to be more reflexive (as opposed to
Therapeutic effects of CBT
161
reactive), open-minded, and capable of planning. In the intervention modeling, roleplaying, rehearsal, cognitive exercises and reinforcement strategies are used. The original design of this programme included 38 two-hour sessions in groups of 6 to 12 participants (Porporino & Fabiano, 2000). Nevertheless, different versions of the R&R programme have altered its format according to offence type and criminal severity of participants (Hollin & Palmer, 2006). The main components of the programme include interpersonal cognitive problem-solving skills, social skills, self-control, emotional management, creative thinking, critical reasoning, values enhancement, and metacognition (McGuire, 2006). Several analyses of treatment programmes with adult and juvenile offenders in different countries, including the first evaluation of the R&R programme from the Pickering Experiment (Ross, Fabiano, & Ewles, 1988) have shown that the R&R programme is effective in changing certain psychological variables related to crime (social skills, assertiveness, cognitive skills and distortions, impulsivity and empathy), and in decreasing violent behaviour and recidivism (Blud, Travers, Nugent, & Thornton, 2003; Clarke, Simmonds, & Wydall, 2004; Friendship, Blud, Erikson, Travers, & Thornnton, 2003; Hollin & Palmer, 2009; Kethineni & Braithwaite, 2010; Martn, Hernndez, Hernndez-Fernaud, Arregui, & Hernndez, 2010; Piquero et al., 2009; Wilson, Bouffard, & Mackenzie, 2005). A specific meta-analysis of 19 applications of the R&R programme for reducing criminal recidivism reported a small average effect size, r = .14, equivalent to a 14% reduction in recidivism in treated groups compared with control groups. In that study effectiveness was obtained for both high-risk and low-risk offenders and for both institutional and community applications (Tong & Farrington, 2006). In a more general meta-analysis of 548 treatment programmes including different counselling styles, restorative programmes, skills building programmes and multiple coordinated services conducted with juvenile offenders between 1958 and 2002, Lipsey (2009) found a small, = .062 (equivalent to a decrease of 6%), average effect size in terms of recidivism reduction. Similarly, Morales, Garrido, and Snchez-Meca (2010) obtained an average small recidivism reduction, r = .072, in a meta-analysis of 31 experimental or quasi-experimental studies of treatments with serious juvenile offenders aged 12 to 21 years old. In this review behavioural, cognitive, cognitive-behavioural, educational and non-behavioural programmes were included. The highest effect size, r = .175, was obtained by cognitivebehavioural programmes. A meta-analysis by Piquero et al. (2009) reviewed 34
162
S. Redondo et al.
programmes including strategies of social and cognitive skills, modelling, reinforcement and relaxation training designed to improve self-control in boys and adolescents. These programmes reduced previous problematic behaviours by between 13% and 33%. Some of these meta-analyses of offenders rehabilitation included different output measures of treatment effectiveness such as institutional, vocational or psychological adjustment, and recidivism (for instance, Garret, 1985; zabaci, 2011; Redondo, Garrido, & Snchez-Meca, 1997). In contrast, more recent meta-analyses normally offer only results on recidivism (for instance, Lipsey, 2009; Morales et al., 2010). In general, the effectiveness results for the short-term psychological or behavioural output variables are higher than for the long-term measure of recidivism. For example, in Redondo et al.s (1997) meta-analysis of 57 European programmes the average effect of treatments on short-term variables such as social skills was r = .20, while the recidivism reduction was lower, r = .12. According to the results of several meta-analyses (Hollin, 2006; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2009; Lipsey, 2009; Morales et al., 2010; Redondo, Snchez-Meca, & Garrido, 1999, 2002) the average effectiveness of offender treatment can be improved if programmes have the following characteristics: they have a sound theoretical basis and are applied by trained therapists; they provide participants with training in pro-social skills and habits; they restructure offenders thinking and values; they are of longer duration and greater intensity; and they use relapse prevention and other specific strategies to generalize social behaviour to the community context. The Reasoning & Rehabilitation Programme (R&R), initially designed in Canada (Ross & Fabiano, 1985), has been adapted in different countries and for several distinct types of offenders and application settings. One of these adaptations is the Prosocial Thinking Programme, adapted in Spain by Garrido (2005) for interventions with juvenile offenders. This is a manual-based programme that includes components of self-control, meta-cognition, interpersonal and emotional skills, critical reasoning and values training (Redondo, 2008). Following this, a number of versions have been generated in Spain for specific contexts. The objective of the present study was to conduct a pilot evaluation of one of these R&R treatment versions, in this case, one applied to youth offenders serving community orders.
Therapeutic effects of CBT Method Participants
163
The sample comprised juvenile offenders from Barcelona (Spain), all of whom were serving educational and probation sentences for property or violent crimes. Initially, 33 participants (23 boys and 10 girls) aged 15 to 20 years old (M = 17.67; SD = 1.42) were assessed, although due to programme drop-out the analysis presented here is based on the final sample of 28 subjects. The participants were chronic property and violent youth offenders living with their families or in governmental facilities. The participants were selected according to their intervention needs and the following two criteria: sufficient motivation for treatment and adaptability to the timing application of the treatment programme. These criteria were evaluated in the context of the initial interviews. The sample was divided into two study groups: 17 youths were assigned to the treatment group and 11 to the control group. The two groups were matched in relation to several sociodemographic and criminal features that were considered relevant as risk factors (Ellis, Beaver, & Wright, 2009; Farrington, 2010; Loeber, Farrington, Stouthamer-Loeber, & White, 2008; Lsel & Bender, 2003; Murray, Farrington, & Eisner, 2009): age, sex, criminal records, offence type, and structure and characteristics of the family. In order to guarantee that the two groups were broadly similar, statistical tests were applied (see Table 1). The treatment programme The psychological programme tested here is a group-based cognitivebehavioural treatment for juvenile offenders. The Prosocial Thinking Programme (Garrido, 2005) is the Spanish adaptation of the Reasoning & Rehabilitation Programme for youths (Ross & Fabiano, 1985). The treatment aims to help offenders develop more adaptive and prosocial interactions and to reduce the participants probability of relapse as regards antisocial and aggressive behaviours. The programme taps the following treatment domains: Self-control aims to teach the participants different strategies of self-observation and self-control (Hay, Meldrum, Forrest, & Ciaravolo, 2010; Ross & Fontao, 2008). To this end, the participants were trained in functional analysis (i.e. in paying attention to the background and consequences) of their cognitive, emotional and behavioural
164
S. Redondo et al.
responses. In this treatment component, special attention is paid to the emotion of anger. Juveniles are taught to recognize cognitive and emotional precursors and the initial stages of anger, as well as how to respond to them. Specifically, written exercises, pooling of ideas, role-playing and the viewing of a movie are used. In the current application, the juveniles watched the film Falling Down, in which the protagonist often loses control. Cognitive restructuring aims to teach the participants how to detect and modify the cognitive distortions that frequently precede anger and trigger off violent behaviour (McGuire, 2006). Here, juveniles are taught, through various examples and exercises, about the cognitive biases most frequently observed among young people, and are introduced to what might be more realistic and appropriate ways of thinking. Social problem-solving trains the participants in the use of more effective cognitive strategies with which to face and solve interpersonal problems and conflicts (Biggam & Power, 2002; Calvete, 2007; DZurilla & Nezu, 1999; McMurran & McGuire, 2005). Social skills and assertiveness seeks to improve the participants basic social skills and assertiveness in order to facilitate their interpersonal relationships, acceptance of others, and achievement of rewards (Hollin & Palmer, 2001). They are trained (especially by means of role playing) in verbal and non-verbal communication, in the identification of factors that facilitate or hinder their interactions, and in how to communicate assertively rather than through aggression or passivity. Values and empathy addresses the participants moral development, or their lack of positive beliefs and attitudes concerning values such as respect for life, integrity, freedom and the rights of other people. Moral development has shown an inverse correlation with the probability of recidivism (Van Vugt et al., 2011). The therapeutic intervention is essentially based on the discussion of moral dilemmas (Palmer & Begum, 2006). Relapse prevention aims to help the participants to consolidate the personal improvements made during treatment. To this end, the subjects are taught to identify their own risk factors and those situations (i.e. the cognitive, physiological, behavioural and environmental signals) that have frequently been precursors of their crimes. The participants are also trained in appropriate strategies and coping styles in an attempt to break the cycle of relapse into aggression and antisocial behaviour (Dowden, Antonowicz, & Andrews, 2003; Marlatt & Donovan, 2005).
165
Overall, the programme encourages the youths to participate actively in the group in order to exchange experiences, to facilitate positive modelling between one another, and to foster the generalization of new behaviours that have been learned in the treatment sessions. The programme implies a total treatment dosage of about 40 hours. All the applications were carried out by skilled psychologists and supervision was also provided: a senior psychologist directly participated in six sessions on the programme (one for each intervention ingredient), and then gave feedback to the psychologists in charge of the study. Instruments A semi-structured interview was used with each participant to collect data about his/her personal and family circumstances and history of delinquent and violent behaviour, in addition to the official records held by the Juvenile Justice System. In relation to family circumstances, family composition, the socioeconomic and educational level of the family members and their relationships were explored. In terms of participants variables, the interview focused on their educational and vocational levels, their interpersonal relationships, and their personal skills and social support. The following self-report instruments were chosen to assess the psychological adjustment and social skills variables, which served as indicators of treatment effectiveness: Empathy, measured by means of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1983; adapted to Spanish by Mestre, Prez-Delgado, Fras, & Samper, 1999); this is a self-report questionnaire comprising 28 items on a 5-point Likert-type scale (range: 28140). Social skills and assertiveness, evaluated through the Escala de Habilidades Sociales [Social Skills Scale] (Gismero, 2000); this is a self-report scale comprising 33 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale (range: 33-132). Cognitive style, assessed by means of the Attitude Toward Interpersonal Peer Violence (Slaby, 1989; translated to Spanish using the back-translation method [Berry, 1980]); this scale includes 14 items that score between 1-4 points (range: 14-56). Aggressiveness, measured with the Aggression Questionnaire-Refined version (Bryant & Smith, 2001; Spanish adaptation by Gallardo-Pujol, Kramp, Garca-Forero,
166
S. Redondo et al.
Prez-Ramirez, & Andrs-Pueyo, 2006). The Spanish version of this questionnaire composed by 12 items rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (range: 12-60). Self-esteem, evaluated through the Rosenbergs Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965; Spanish adaptation by Martn, Nez, Navarro, & Grijalvo, 2007); it is a selfreport scale comprising 10 items answered on a 4-point scale (range: 10-40). Impulsiveness, assessed by means of Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, BIS-10 (Barratt, 1985; adapted to Spanish by Luengo, Carrillo-de-la-Pea, & Otero, 1991). BIS-10 is scale composed of 34 items rated on a 4-point a Likert self-report scale (range: 34-136). Procedure and Design Only the treatment group subjects participated in the programme described before, while the control subjects were taken from those on the waiting list for future applications. Nevertheless, all the subjects (treatment and control) also received the training and social assistance usually administered by the juvenile justice services. The programme was assessed using a quasi-experimental design involving two equivalent groups, treatment and control, and pre/post evaluation. The equivalence of the groups was explored by means of Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Treatment effectiveness was assessed on the basis of participants pre/post scores on the six abovementioned indicators of therapeutic change (empathy, social skills, cognitive style, aggressiveness, self-esteem and impulsiveness). Data analysis In terms of data analysis, the main statistical procedure used was mixed design analysis of variance (ANOVA). As there are six dependent variables, six repeated measures ANOVAs were performed, one for each of these variables. In each ANOVA the within-subjects factor corresponds to the assessment time (pre/post) and the between-subjects factor to the group (treatment/control). Taking into account that the population size, as a clinical one, is not too much large, and that with the design of this study, an alpha of .05 is associated with a beta of .721 (that is, the assumption of the standard .05 alpha-level implies a risk about 1/4 to reject falsely the hypothesis of interest), a compromise analysis was performed to estimate the correspondent alpha for .05 with alpha/beta = 1. Results showed an alpha and beta = .136. Nevertheless, it does
167
not change results interpretation for the hypothesis of the interest of the study: time X group interaction (see Table 3). Results Descriptive results As the subjects were not randomly assigned to the groups, the first analysis presented here aimed to check that the treatment and control groups were equivalent (Table 1). To this end, various sociodemographic and criminal characteristics that are often related to criminal risk were compared in the two groups. The only variable to present a significant difference between the groups was the proportion of subjects sentenced for a violent crime, which was higher in the treatment group. The treatment group and the control group showed equivalent pre-treatment mean scores in all domains except for social skills, where the treatment group scored significantly lower than the control group. A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to evaluate the differences between control and pre-treatment groups. The results of the test were in the expected direction and significant, z = -2.14, p < .05. Table 1. Sociodemographic andCcriminal Descriptive Analysis of the Sample. Sample descriptives Treatment Group Sociodemographic Sex (male) Age Unemployed/ not studying Drug use Non-traditional family Number of siblings Dysfunctional family Low socioeconomic level Criminal Age of first offense Sentenced for a violent crime Offence committed in group 14.82 (1.02) 76.5% 62.5% 15.56 (0.73) 33.3% 33.3% 64.00 4.63 1.96 .293 .051 .234 70.6% 17.41 (1.42) 17.6% 82.4% 41.2% 3.18 (3.05) 29.4% 17.6% 63.6% 17.67 (1.32) 27.3% 100.0% 55.6% 2.33 (2.45) 55.6% 22.2% 0.15 85.5 0.45 2.17 0.49 108.00 1.70 0.08 1 .276 .647 .258 .682 .684 .232 1 Control Group 2/U p
168 Previous criminal records
S. Redondo et al. 41.2% 25.0% 85.7% 28.6% 3.96 0.03 .082 1
Recognition of responsibility for offence Effectiveness results
The ANOVA results regarding the different criterion variables are shown in tables 2 and 3. In Table 2, the main results of the analysis for the treatment and control groups. In Table 3 shows the ANOVA outcome results related with the time and group effects ant the i groups x time interaction effect..
Table 2. Mean and Standard Deviation for Outcome Variables for the Treatment and Control Groups. Control Group (n = 11) Treatment Group (n = 17) Pre Outcome Variables Empathy Social Skills Cognitive Style Aggressiveness Self-Esteem Impulsiveness M(SD) 77.71(8.54) Post M(SD) 76.41(12.29) Pre M(SD) 81.36(9.28) Post M(SD) 77.82(8.62)
86.00(12.85) 93.12(14.19) 97.64(12.47) 94.82(15.08) 30.69(3.36) 30.82(6.45) 28.24(5.25) 29.38(3.93) 20.00(5.81) 29.41(4.47) 30.64(6.79) 29.91(7.56) 31.18(4.07) 30.45(7.16) 32.64(6.38) 29.27(5.10)
53.88(13.95) 50.29(19.04) 62.46(21.62) 59.82(10.11)
On the social skills measure there was a significant interaction between Group X Time, F(1, 26) = 6.80, p < .05, with the partial eta squared statistic indicating a smallto-medium effect size (P2 = .21). The results for the aggressiveness measure also showed a significant interaction between the independent variables Group X Time, F(1, 26) = 7.42, p < .01, with the partial eta squared statistic again indicating a small-tomedium effect size (P2 = .22). A significant effect for the Group X Time interaction was likewise observed on the self-esteem measure, F(1, 26) = 4.22, p < .05, with the partial eta squared statistic indicating a small effect size (P2 = .14). Finally, the results for the three remaining variables (empathy, cognitive style and impulsiveness) showed neither a main group effect nor a time effect nor a Group X Time interaction effect.
169
Table 3. Analysis of Variance of the Outcome Variables for the Treatment and Control Groups. F p 1- Outcome Variables Effect P 2* Empathy Group Time Group x Time Social Skills Group Time Group x Time Cognitive Style Group Time Group x Time Aggressiveness Group Time Group x Time Self-Esteem Group Time Group x Time Impulsiveness Group Time Group x Time 0.51 2.53 0.55 1.83 1.28 6.81 0.08 0.97 0.55 0.66 0.01 7.42 0.69 0.24 4.22 2.44 1.13 0.03 .483 .128 .471 .181 .274 .024 .796 .332 .464 .425 .961 .016 .415 .631 .055 .132 .309 .875 .003 .054 .142 .517 . 228 .751 .025 .114 .212 .712 .019 .116
Note. *P2 = Effect size: Eta partial square; df(1, 26). Discussion The main purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a Spanish version of the R&R programme, applied to juvenile offenders serving community orders. The results obtained show that the treatment partially improved some of the psychological target variables. Specifically, the programme was effective (with low to medium effect sizes) in increasing participants social skills and self-esteem, as well as in reducing their aggressiveness. Scores for social skills in the treatment group showed a positive ascending trend of medium magnitude. Scores for aggressiveness in the treatment group showed a positive decreasing trend of medium magnitude between the pre and post assessment points, whereas aggressiveness scores increased in the control group. Finally, in relation
170
S. Redondo et al.
to self-esteem the ANOVA for the treatment group revealed a positive ascending pattern (of low magnitude in this case), while scores in the control group fell. These positive results in terms of short-term psychological and behavioural variables are consistent with the general improvements reported for various juvenile offender treatments (Garret, 1985; Lipsey, 2009; Morales et al., 2010; Redondo et al., 1997) and specific R&R applications (Tong & Farrington, 2006). The literature suggests that social skills, aggressiveness and self-esteem may be considered as dynamic risk factors that can be influenced, to some extent, by treatment. The present results confirm this. However, the applied intervention did not have a positive influence on empathy, cognitive style or impulsiveness, which are also regarded as dynamic risk factors. Both the treatment and the control group showed similar scores for these three variables on the pre- and post-intervention measures, and the comparison of means showed no statistically significant within-subjects differences. Although the objectives of this intervention were also to improve empathy and reduce impulsiveness, these variables are probably personal factors that are not completely dynamic or susceptible to change in the treatment setting. More disconcerting is that no significant change was observed in cognitive distortions, which are clearly considered changeable dynamic factors. The reasons for this may be both substantive and methodological. Firstly, the treatment application described had a restricted intensity which probably limited its effects. Secondly, the small group sizes may have made it difficult to detect statistical significant differences between the groups given that the effects of treatment are probably low. In addition to the abovementioned dynamic factors, most of the participants (91%) exhibited another important dynamic risk factor, namely drug abuse, which was not addressed by the treatment programme. It is possible, therefore, that this widespread problem negatively interfered with the potential improvement in other therapeutic targets such as anti-social cognitions, empathy or impulsivity. In addition, one can speculate that other possible uncontrolled static risk factors (as erratic family education, experienced victimization, risk personality traits, etc.) had a negative influence on the participants, making it more difficult for them to benefit from treatment. In summary, the cognitive-behavioural intervention applied here did significantly improve some of the dynamic risk factors it targeted, although it failed to achieve all the proposed aims. As the literature about correctional interventions has shown, treatment efficacy increases when a programme has a sound theoretical basis
171
and is applied by well-trained therapists, when it teaches participants new pro-social skills, thinking styles and values, when it has greater duration and intensity, and when it applies relapse prevention. In principle, the programme described here meets all these prior requirements, with the exception perhaps of its limited duration and intensity. Indeed, it is likely that in the context of such a complex and multifactor problem as delinquency, the intensity and duration of the applied intervention were insufficient to produce more relevant changes in the participants. From a methodological point of view the main limitations of this study concern the small sample size, the fact that subjects were not randomly assigned to groups and the measurement of treatment effectiveness exclusively by means of short-term and self-report data. Although these problems are quite frequent in the field of offender treatment, for both practical and ethical reasons, the small number of participants in the two groups does constitute an important limitation, which probably reduces the likelihood of obtaining statistically significant results. This aspect needs to be resolved in future studies through the inclusion of more subjects in both groups. As regards the evaluation of the effectiveness of the programme, we plan to assess recidivism among participants over a longer follow-up period. Up to now only psychological measures of treatment efficacy can be offered. Another limitation has to do with the method of data analysis, since the literature (Walker & Maddan, 2009) recommends using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Although this approach was initially considered, the use of MANOVA requires additional assumptions that need not be fulfilled in an ANOVA. Hence, the statistical procedure chosen was another robust test, the bivariate analysis of variance (ANOVA), which is also useful as regards the goals of this paper. Finally, it must be acknowledged that even if some of these difficulties could have been resolved, one would not expect a psychological treatment to produce a radical transformation in participants behaviour. A more reasonable goal would be for treatment, in conjunction with other environmental and social interventions, to produce certain significant changes in the behaviours and values of participants. In this context, and in line with the general results of the evaluative correctional literature, this cognitive-behavioural programme has been partially but significantly effective in improving specific psychological variables, namely social skills, self-esteem and aggressiveness, all of which are relevant correlates of delinquent behaviour.
172
S. Redondo et al. Acknowledgements This work has been carried out within the framework of research project
SEJ2005-09170-C04-01, funded by Spanish Ministry of Education and Science, and PSI2009-13265, supported by Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. The authors would like to thank the Office for Juvenile Justice of the Justice Department of Catalonia (Spain) for its cooperation and the facilities provided during this research. The study benefitted from the contributions of Mara Teresa Mart, Joan Anton Chaparro, Rosa M. Martnez, Claudia Campistol and Mnica Daz. We would especially like to thank Antoni Cano, Mara lvarez and Mnica Antequera, the psychologists who skilfully applied the programme. References Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Andrews, D., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. Barratt, E. S. (1985). Impulsiveness subtraits: Arousal and information processing. In J. T. Spence & C. E. Itard (Eds.), Motivation, emotion and personality (pp. 137-146). North Holland, Holland: Elsevier. Berry, J. W. (1980). Introduction to methodology. In H. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1-28). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Biggam, F. H., & Power, K. G. (2002). A controlled, problem-solving, group-based intervention with vulnerable incarcerated young offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 46, 678-698. doi:
10.1177/0306624X02238162 Blud, L., Travers, R., Nugent, F., & Thornton, D. (2003). Accreditation of offending behaviour programmes in HM Prison Service: What works in practice. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 8, 69-81. doi: 10.1348/135532503762871255 Bryant, F. B., & Smith, B. D. (2001). Refining the architecture of aggression: A measurement model for the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 138-167. doi. 10.1006/jrpe.2000.2302
173
DZurilla, T. J., & Nezu, A. M. (1999). Problem-solving therapy: A social competence approach to clinical intervention (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer. Calvete, E. (2007). Justification of violence beliefs and social problem-solving as mediators between maltreatment and behavior problems in adolescents. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 131-140. Clarke, A., Simmonds, R. & Wydall, S. (2004). Delivering cognitive skills programmes in prison: A qualitative study [Adobe Digital Editions version]. Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/11967/1/Delivering%2520cognitive%2520skills.pdf Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113126. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 Day, A. (2009). Offender emotion and self-regulation: implications for offender rehabilitation programming. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15, 119-130. doi: 10.1080/10683160802190848 Dowden, C., Antonowicz, D., & Andrews, D. A. (2003). The effectiveness of relapse prevention with offenders: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 47, 516-528. doi:
10.1177/0306624X03253018 Echebura, E., Fernndez-Montalvo, J., & Amor, P. (2006). Psychological treatment of men convicted of gender violence: A pilot study in Spanish prisons. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 57-70. doi: 10.1177/0306624X05277662 Ellis, L., Beaver, K., & Wright, J. (2009). Handbook of crime correlates. Oxford, England: Academic Press. Farrington, D. P. (2010). The developmental evidence base: Psychosocial research. In G. J. Towl & D. A. Crighton (Eds.), Forensic psychology (pp. 113-132). Oxford, England: BPS Blackwell. Friendship, C., Blud, L., Erikson, M., Travers, R., & Thornton, D. (2003). Cognitivebehavioural treatment for imprisoned offenders: An evaluation of HM Prison Services cognitive skills programmes. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 8, 103-114. doi: 10.1348/135532503762871273 Gallardo-Pujol, D., Kramp, U., Garca-Forero, C., Prez-Ramrez, M., & Andrs-Pueyo, A. (2006). Assessing aggressiveness quickly and efficiently: The Spanish
174
S. Redondo et al. adaptation of aggression questionnaire-refined version. European Psychiatry, 21, 487-494. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2006.02.002
Garret, C. J. (1985). Effects of residential treatment on adjudicated delinquents: A metaanalysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22, 287-308. doi: 10.1177/0022427885022004002 Garrido, V. (2005). Manual de intervencin educativa en readaptacin social (Vols.12). [Handbook for educative intervention in social re-education]. Valencia, Spain: Tirant lo Blanch. Gismero, E. (2000). Manual de la Escala de Habilidades Sociales [Handbook of the Social Skills Scale]. Madrid, Spain: TEA Ediciones. Hay, C., Meldrum, R., Forrest, W., & Ciaravolo, E. (2010). Stability and change in risk seeking: Investigating the effects of an intervention program. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 8, 91-106. doi: 10.1177/1541204009349398 Hollin, C. R. (2006). Offending behaviour programmes and contention: Evidence-based practice, manuals, and programme evaluation. In C. R. Hollin & E. J. Palmer (Eds.), Offending behaviour programmes: Development, application, and controversies (pp. 33-67). Chichester, England: Wiley. doi:
10.1002/9780470713341.ch2 Hollin, C. R., & Palmer, E. J. (2001). Skills training. In C. R. Hollin (Ed.), Handbook of offender assessment and treatment (pp. 1-32). Chichester, England:
Wiley.$$$$$$$$$ Hollin, C. R., & Palmer, E. J. (2006). Offending behaviour programmes: History and development. In C. R. Hollin & E. J. Palmer (Eds.), Offending behaviour programmes: Development, application, and controversies ( (pp. 1-32). Chichester, England: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/9780470713341.ch1 Hollin, C. R., & Palmer, E. J. (2009). Cognitive skills programmes for offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15, 147-164. doi: 10.1080/10683160802190871 Jolliffe, D., & Farrrington, D. P. (2009). Effectiveness of interventions with adult male violent offenders. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, Information and Publications. Kethineni, S., & Braithwaite, J. (2010). The effects of a cognitive-behavioral program for at-risk youth: Changes in attitudes, social skills, family, and community and peer relationships. Victims & Offenders, 6, 93-116. doi:
10.1080/15564886.2011.534012
175
Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders, 4, 124147. doi: 10.1080/15564880802612573 Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & White, H. R. (2008). Violence and serious theft: Development and prediction from childhood to adulthood. New York, NY: Routledge. Lsel, F., & Bender, D. (2003). Protective factors and resilience. In D. P. Farrington & J. W. Coid (Eds.), Early prevention of adult antisocial behaviour (pp. 130-204). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Luengo, M. A., Carrillo-de-la-Pea, M. T., & Otero, J. M. (1991). The components of impulsiveness: A comparison of the I.7 and the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 675-667. doi: 10.1016/01918869(91)90220-6 Marlatt, G. A., & Donovan, D. M. (Eds.). (2005). Relapse prevention: Maintenance strategies in the treatment of addictive behaviours. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Martn, A. M., Hernndez, B., Hernndez-Fernaud, E., Arregui, J. L., & Hernndez, J. A. (2010). The enhancement effect of social and employment integration on the delay of recidivism of released offenders trained with the R & R programme. Psyhcology, Crime & Law, 16, 401-413. doi: 10.1080/10683160902776835 Martn, J., Nez, J., Navarro, J., & Grijalvo, F. (2007). The Rosenberg self-esteem scale: Translation and validation in university students. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 458-467. McGuire, J. (2006). General offending behaviour programmes: Concept, theory, and practice. In C. R. Hollin & E. J. Palmer (Eds.), Offending behaviour programmes: Development, application, and controversies (pp. 69 -111). Chichester, England: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/9780470713341.ch3 McMurran, M., & McGuire, J. (2005). Social problem solving and offending: Evidence, evaluation and evolution. Chichester, England: Wiley. doi:
10.1002/9780470713488.fmatter Mestre, V., Prez-Delgado, E., Fras, D., & Samper, P. (1999). Instrumentos de evaluacin de la empata [Instruments for the empathy assessment]. In E. PrezDelgado & V. Mestre, (Eds.) Psicologa moral y crecimiento personal (pp. 181190). Barcelona, Spain: Ariel.
176
S. Redondo et al.
Moore, M. (2011). Psychological theories of crime and delinquency. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 21, 226-239. doi:
10.1080/10911359.2011.564552 Morales, L. A., Garrido, V., & Snchez-Meca, J. (2010). Treatment effectiveness in secure corrections of serious (violent or chronic) juvenile offenders. Stockholm, Sweden, Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, Information and Publications. Murray, J., Farrington, D. P., & Eisner, M. (2009). Drawing conclusions about causes from systematic reviews of risk factors: The Cambridge Quality Checklists. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 5, 1-23. doi: 10.1007/s11292-008-9066-0 zabaci, N. (2011). Cognitive behavioural therapy for violent behaviour in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1989-1993. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.05.027 Ogloff, J. R. P. (2002). Identifying and accommodating the needs of mentally ill people in gaols and prisons. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 9, 1-33. doi: 10.1375/pplt.2002.9.1.1 Ogloff, J. R. P., & Davis, M. R. (2004). Advances in offender assessment and rehabilitation: Contributions of the riskneedsresponsivity approach. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10, 229-242. doi: 10.1080/0683160410001662735 Palmer, E. J., & Begum, A. (2006). The relationship between moral reasoning, provictim attitudes, and interpersonal aggression among imprisoned young offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 446-457. doi: 10.1080/10683169908401769 Piquero, A. R., Jennings, W. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2009). Effectiveness of programs designed to improve self-control. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, Information and Publications. Porporino, F. J., & Fabiano, E. A. (2000). Theory manual for reasoning and rehabilitation (Rev. ed.). Otawa, Ontario, Canada: T3 Associates. Redondo, S. (2008). Manual para el tratamiento psicolgico de los delincuentes [Handbook for the psychological treatment of offenders]. Madrid, Spain: Pirmide. Redondo, S., Garrido, V., & Snchez-Meca, J. (1997). What works in correctional rehabilitation in Europe: A meta-analytical review. In S. Redondo, V. Garrido, J. Prez, & R. Barberet (Eds.), Advances in psychology and law (pp. 499-523). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
177
Redondo, S., Snchez-Meca, J., & Garrido, V. (1999). The influence of treatment programmes on the recidivism of juvenile and adult offenders: An European metaanalytic review. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5, 251-278. doi:
10.1080/10683169908401769 Redondo, S., Snchez-Meca, J., & Garrido, V. (2002). Crime treatment in Europe: A review of outcome studies. In J. McGuire (Ed.), Offender rehabilitation and treatment: Effective programmes and policies to reduce re-offending (pp. 113-141). Sussex, England: Wiley. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Ross, R., & Fabiano, E. A. (1985). Time to think: A cognitive model of delinquency prevention and offender rehabilitation. Johnson City, TN: Institute of Social Sciences and Arts. Ross, R., Fabiano, E. A., & Ewles, C. D. (1988). Reasoning and rehabilitation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 32, 29-35. doi: 10.1177/0306624X8803200104 Ross, T., & Fontao, M. I. (2010). Combatting juvenile delinquency: The use of violence prevention and treatment programmes for young offenders. International Journal of Child and Adolescent Health, 3, 353-365. Ross, T., & Fontao, M. I. (2008). The relationship of self-regulation and aggression: An empirical test of personality systems interaction theory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52, 554-570. doi:
10.1177/0306624X07308667 Slaby, R. G. (1989). An evaluation of a violence prevention program. Health program for urban youth. Newton, MA: Education Development Center. Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Smith, C. A., & Porter, P. (2003). Causes and consequences of delinquency: Findings from the Rochester Youth Development Study. In T. P. Thornberry & M. D. Krohn (Eds.), Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 11-56). New York, NY: Plenum Publishers. Tong, L. S., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). How effective is the Reasoning and Rehabilitation programme in reducing reoffending? A meta-analysis of evaluations in four countries. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12, 3-24. doi: 10.1080u10683160512331316253
178
S. Redondo et al.
Van Vugt, E., Gibbs, J., Stams, G. J., Bijleveld, C., Hendriks, J., & Van der Laan, P. (2011). Moral development and recidivism: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55, 1234-1250. doi: 10.1177/0306624X10396441 Walker, J. T., & Maddan, S. (2009). Statistics in criminology and criminal justice (3rd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett. Wilson, D. B., Bouffard, L. A., & Mackenzie, D. L. (2005). A quantitative review of structured, group-oriented, cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 172-204. doi: 10.1177/0093854804272889 Yarbrough, A., Jones, S., Sullivan, C., Sellers, C., & Cochran, J. (2011). Social learning and self-control: Assessing the moderating potential of criminal propensity. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 55, 112. doi: 10.1177/0306624X10396041
IS MISS SYMPATHY A CREDIBLE DEFENDANT ALLEGING INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE IN A TRIAL FOR MURDER?
Antonio Herrera, Inmaculada Valor-Segura, and Francisca Expsito
Universidad de Granada (Spain) (Received 3 May 2011; revised 11 April 2012; accepted 13 April 2012) Abstract Current research has postulated that judicial inferencing and judgement-making are subject to biased appraisals. This study assessed the factors reported in the literature associated to the appraisal of criminality in a mock case of a battered woman standing trial for murdering her husband, and who pleaded legitimate selfdefence in response to an instance of intimate partner violence. A nationwide sample of 169 police officers from different cities in Spain freely volunteered to participate in the study. Using a mock trial design, the defendants prototypicality (prototypical vs. nonprototypical), and physical attractiveness (attractive vs. unattractive) were manipulated. Participants were required to assess the criminality (credibility, responsibility, and controllability) of a battered woman accused of murdering her husband, and who alleged legitimate self-defence in response to an incident of intimate partner violence. The results showed that a defendant perceived as the prototype of a battered woman was judged as having less or no control of the situation; physical attractiveness increased the perception of the defendants responsibility in committing the crime; and an interaction between prototypicality and attractiveness in assigning credibility to the defendants testimony. Moreover, hostile sexism mediated the relationship between the defendants prototypicality and controllability. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for judicial judgement making in cases of battered women who kill their aggressors. Keywords: criminality; sexism. intimate partner violence; prototypicality; attractiveness; Resumen La investigacin ha puesto de manifiesto que el proceso de inferencia y toma de decisiones, es sensible a mltiples sesgos que pueden afectar tales juicios o valoraciones. La presente investigacin trata de analizar algunos de los posibles factores que la literatura ha relacionado con la valoracin de la criminalidad, en un caso en que se juzga a una mujer que ha matado a su marido y que alega, en su defensa, haber sido vctima de violencia de gnero. Participaron en el estudio 169 policas procedentes de distintas ciudades espaolas, de manera voluntaria y annima. Mediante un diseo de escenarios en el que se presentaba un caso judicial ficticio, se manipul la prototipicidad de la acusada (prototpica vs. no prototpica) y su atractivo fsico (atractiva vs. no atractiva). Los participantes tenan que valorar la criminalidad (credibilidad, responsabilidad y controlabilidad) de una mujer, que alegaba haber sido vctima de violencia de gnero, acusada de haber matado a su marido. Los resultados mostraron que cuando se presenta a la acusada como prototipo de mujer maltratada, se le atribua un menor control de la situacin, que el atractivo fsico aumentaba la percepcin de responsabilidad de la acusada en el delito cometido; y una interaccin entre el atractivo fsico y la prototipicidad en la evaluacin de la credibilidad de la acusada. Asimismo, el sexismo hostil de los participantes actuaba como variable mediadora en la relacin entre prototipicidad y la percepcin de controlabilidad de la acusada. Estos resultados tienen implicaciones para la formacin de juicios sobre vctimas de violencia de gnero que asesinen a su agresor y para la atencin a las denunciantes de violencia de gnero que son discutidos. Palabras clave: violencia de gnero; criminalidad; prototipicidad; atractivo; sexismo.
Correspondence: Antonio Herrera Enrquez. Departamento de Psicologa Social. Universidad de Granada. Facultad de Psicologa. E-mail: aherrer@ugr.es ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context
180
A. Herrera et al. Introduction In everyday life, people continuously make judgments based on what is
purported to be unequivocal evidence in the belief that it is factual and valid. However, every inference of reality or particular instance of it is partly conditioned by the inferrers perception (Surez, Prez, Soto, Muiz, & Garca-Cueto, 2011). Several studies have consistently shown that jury decision-making is based on exogenous extralegal criteria (Hammon, Berry, & Rodrguez, 2011). Some studies have focused on judge and jury decision-making in order to examine the impact of physical features (e.g. the defendants attractiveness) and cognitive attributes (prototypicality) on the appraisal of criminality (the defendants credibility, responsibility, and controllability) that drives the verdict and sentencing (Bollingmo, Wessel, Eilertsen, & Magnussen, 2008; Efran, 1974; Leventhal & Krate, 1977). The influence of physical attractiveness on the appraisal of criminality The defendants or plaintiffs physical attractiveness are among the most frequently assessed variables in relation to interpersonal perceptions and decisionmaking (Agthe, Sprrle, & Maner, 2011; Sheppard, Goffin, Lewis, & Olson, 2011). The influence of physical attractiveness has been extensively examined in the field of Social Psychology, and its effects have been reported in an array of contexts (Lemay, Clark, & Greenberg, 2010; Moore, Filippou, & Perrett, 2011). Thus, attractive people are often perceived as having positive personality features and attributes in consonance with the implicit theory that beauty is goodness (Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972; Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991). This cognitive bias is also known as the halo effect (Thorndike, 1920), whereby a subjective perception of a single positive trait of a person may be extended or carried-over from one desirable trait to another leading to a biased positive global assessment of that person. This author was the first to empirically research this common error in reasoning. Similarly, Asch (1946) proposed that attractiveness was a central trait in interpersonal perception that prompted a chain reaction whereby a person was perceived to have other positive and desirable traits. Likewise, Moore et al. (2011) found that people with physically attractive facial features were perceived to have additional positive personal qualities such as intelligence.
Prototypicality and attractiveness
181
The halo effect is intertwined with implicit personality theory (Kelly, 1955) that claim the first features we perceive become the working framework for the perception of further future characteristics and attitudes. Hence, the halo effect embodies the widely held belief that physically attractive individuals are more sociable, friendly, warm, competent and intelligent than unattractive individuals (Feingold, 1992; Langlois et al., 2000). Likewise, Fiore, Taylor, Mendelsohn, and Hearst (2008) found that in an internet dating scenario, individuals with facially attractive photographs were perceived more favourably than unattractive people. Similar results have been reported in studies on social networking sites (Brand, Bonatsos, DOrazio, & DeShong 2012; Guguen, Lourel, Charron, Fischer-Lokou, & Lamy, 2009). In the occupational field, Sheppard et al. (2011) found a relation between target attractiveness and the accuracy of trait judgments within a mock job interview. Generally, attractive targets were rated more positively and more accurately, calling into question the assumption that biases are responsible for the more positive ratings that attractive individuals receive. Implications for practice and for future research are discussed. As for the legal scenario, physical attractiveness has been observed to produce a lenity bias effect i.e., the tendency to perceive and treat an attractive person in a benevolent or indulgent way (Griffin & Langlois, 2006). Furthermore, a study of mock jurors who appraised the criminality of attractive and unattractive defendants found that jurors tended to find unattractive defendants more guilty than attractive ones (Patry, 2008). This finding corroborates the halo effect and personality theory (Kelly, 1955) that sustain our initial perception of features influences the perception of later ones. Influence of prototypicality on the appraisal of criminality According to prototype theory (Rosch, 1975), the more features and attributes an item has in common with a prototype, the more the item is judged to be prototypical of a category. Russell and Melillo (2006) have applied prototype theory to the forensic contexts by examining how the defendants prototypical attributes (i.e., the degree to which an individual fits the prototype of a battered woman) influenced jury verdicts. The characteristics used to define the defendants prototypicality or non-prototypicality were physical characteristics such as physical age or demeanour; social characteristics as social network, number of children, employment status, or dependency on husbands income; behavioural characteristics as withdrawn, timid, and justifying her husbands
182
A. Herrera et al.
aggressive behaviour; psychological characteristics such as feeling guilty, confused, frightened, and so forth. The results of this study corroborate the prototype effect on jury verdicts i.e., an attractive/non-prototypical battered woman who dared to challenge her husband tended to be convicted of manslaughter. In comparison, a passive prototypical battered woman who was afraid of challenging her husband tended to be found not guilty on the grounds of legitimate self-defence. Expsito and Herrera (2009) found that batterers were attributed more typically masculine characteristics than victims, and victims were attributed more typically feminine characteristics. Consequently, victims of gender violence are portrayed by typically feminine characteristics, to such an extent that the legal definition itself is almost identical to the prototypical standards defining battered women (Walker, 2009). Terrance, Plumm, and Thomas (2011) study on the relationship between the victims gender and perceptions of gender violence showed that when the gender of the victim fitted the prototype of a victim of gender violence i.e., a woman, they were more positively perceived than male victims. Moreover, the further the defendant accused of killing her husband moved away from jurors' beliefs of what a battered woman should be, the harsher their verdicts became (Terrance & Matheson, 2003). The analysis of the psychosocial factors (beliefs, mental schemata, stereotypes) involved in decision-making has revealed difference in the way juries evaluated typical victims of battery in contrast to atypical victims. Thus, jurors preconceptions regarding the behaviour considered to be normal in cases of intimate partner violence influenced the verdict i.e., they conferred greater credibility to a typical victims testimony than to the testimony of an atypical victim (Bollingmo et al., 2008; Klippenstine & Schuller, 2012). Furthermore, beliefs and attitudes towards gender violence are variables that have been found to influence judgement making and mediate the response to incidents of intimate partner violence (Gracia, Garca, & Lila, 2009). In addition, Valor-Segura, Expsito, and Moya (2008) have observed that traditional attitudes to gender were linked to a greater tendency to blame the victims of gender violence. Ferrer, Bosch, Ramis, Torres, and Navarro (2006) analysis of the beliefs and attitudes of students (both boys and girls), and young males who had received no training or coaching regarding gender violence found that the latter held attitudes and beliefs that were more tolerant of gender violence.
183
One of the variables undeniably influencing the response to intimate partner violence is ideology concerning gender and gender roles i.e., attitudes towards the roles and responsibilities regarded to be appropriate for men and women, and beliefs about the relationship between both (Moya, 2003, p. 9). Recent theories have reconceptualised the traditional view of sexism that reinforces traditional gender roles with the notion of ambivalent sexism that has two interrelated sub-components: hostile sexism and benevolent sexism that also serve to propagate patriarchal dominance and social structures (Expsito, Moya, & Glick, 1998; Glick & Fiske, 1996). Expsito, Herrera, Moya, and Glick (2010) found that benevolently sexist women may embrace traditional gender roles in part to avoid antagonizing their intimate male partners, which ultimately perpetuates the male-dominant status quo. Moreover, gender violence was associated more with sexist descriptions of men than with non-sexist descriptions of men. The ideological variable that best predicted the tendency to blame the victims of gender violence was hostile sexism (Cohn, Dupuis, & Brown, 2009; Durn, Moya, Mejas, & Viki, 2010; Valor-Segura, Expsito, & Moya, 2011). Bearing in mind the findings of current research, a field study was carried out to assess the effect of the defendants prototypicality and attractiveness, and the mediating effects of ideological variables (sexist beliefs) on the appraisal of criminality in a mock trial of a female defendant accused of killing her husband, who pleaded legitimate-self defence in response to her aggressor. Succinctly, the following hypotheses were assessed: a) A defendant attractiveness effect was expected on the appraisal of criminality i.e., attractive victims would be perceived as more credible, less responsible, and less in control of the situation than unattractive victims. b) A defendant prototypicality effect was expected on the appraisal of criminality i.e., a prototypical battered woman would be perceived as more credible, less responsible, and less in control of the situation than a defendant who did not fit the standard prototype of a battered woman. c) A hostile sexism effect was expected to mediate the relationship between the defendants prototypicality and the control of the situation.
184
A. Herrera et al. Method
Participants The sample consisted of 169 police officers (153 men and 16 women) from different police stations nationwide, age range 21 to 60 years, mean age 33.35 years (SEM = .72). The police officers participating in this study belonged to the Spanish National or Local Police Force. A total of 42.6% of the police officers were stationed in Seville, 29.6% in Santiago de Compostela, 13% in Malaga, 10% in Almeria, and 4.7% in Madrid. Procedure and experimental design The sample was obtained through incidental sampling of police stations in the Spanish cities of Seville, Santiago de Compostela, Malaga, Almeria, and Madrid. Participants freely volunteered and were assured their data would remain anonymous and confidential. Participants were randomly assigned (i.e., were rotated in all four experimental conditions), and a total of 169 questionnaires were administered in alternate order i.e., almost 50% of the participants (n = 85) were first administered the written description of a trial followed by the appraisal of the defendants criminality before undergoing ideological assessment. Alternatively, the remaining sample underwent ideological assessment prior to the written description of a trial followed by the appraisal of the defendants criminality. Of the 169 participants, 34 completed the non-prototypical-unattractive condition, 43 the non-prototypical-attractive condition, 43 the prototypical-unattractive condition, and 49 the prototypical-attractive condition questionnaires. Two independent variables were manipulated while participants read the written recreation of a simulated trial of a battered woman who had murdered her husband, and pleaded legitimate self-defence in response to her aggressor. Participants were asked to perform the role of the jury, read the case, and complete the questionnaire. A 2 (defendant attractiveness: attractive vs. unattractive) X 2 (defendant prototypicality: prototypical vs. non-prototypical) full factorial design was carried out to assess the effects on the evaluation of criminality (credibility, responsibility, and controllability). In addition, the mediating effect of hostile sexism on the relationship
185
between prototypicality and control of the situation was assessed. The design sensitivity analysis of the sample of 169 police officers revealed the probability of detecting (1-) significant differences ( < .05) for a medium effect size was 99.99%. Material and measures A written recreation of a mock trial of a battered woman who had killed her husband, and pleaded legitimate self-defence in response to her aggressor was manipulated by the following experimental conditions: a) prototypicality (defendant is described as a prototype of a battered woman vs. the defendant is described as a nonprototype of a battered woman); and b) physical attractiveness (the defendant is
described as an attractive woman vs. the defendant being described as an unattractive woman). The descriptions of the defendant as prototypical or non-prototypical of a battered woman were based on the characteristics outlined in the battered woman syndrome (Walker, 2009). The prototypical battered woman was described as follows: Mara is a 36-year old housewife with two children (6 and 3-year old) who has been married for 10 years. During the trial, Mara is described as wearing sun glasses that hide her face, poor personal appearance and dress, and is timid in answering to the judges or lawyers questions. The non-prototypical battered woman was described as follows: Mara is a financial consultant of a leading company; she has no children, and has been married for ten years. During the trial, Mara is described as a well-dressed fashion conscious woman, calm and resolute in her interactions with the judge and lawyers. The physical attractiveness variable was defined using the facial features described in the literature for defining an attractive woman i.e., large eyes, small chin and nose, prominent cheeks and thick lips (Cunningham, 1986; Cunningham, Roberts, Barbee, Druen, & Wu, 1995; Johnston & Franklin, 1993). The attractive battered woman was described as follows: Mara is an attractive woman with thick lips, smooth harmonious facial features, straight blonde hair, and a slender and elegant appearance. The unattractive battered woman was described as follows: Mara is an unattractive woman with thin lips, stern and jarring facial features, dark bundled hair, and is neither slender nor elegant in appearance.
186
A. Herrera et al. In addition, the following information was given to all of the experimental
conditions: Mara is a woman on trial for stabbing her husband to death. At her trial, Mara pleaded legitimate self-defence claiming she had feared her husband would kill her during a violent domestic argument. Mara can hardly give details on how the events happened, she appeared confused and her testimony did not appear to cohere with the admissible evidence (her husband was found dead on his bed with several stab wounds to the back, and there were no signs of a struggle). In her version of the events, she claimed that during her history of intimate partner violence, she had always felt she was incapable of standing up to her husband. She said she couldnt understand how she could have killed him, she couldnt remember anything about what followed the argument with her husband, and she only remembered seeing him lying on their blood stained bed before she decided to phone the police. Her defence lawyer entered a not guilty plea on the grounds that she had acted in legitimate self-defence in response to a history of continuous abuse. Participants were evaluated using the following measures: Sociodemographic variables: gender, age, academic and employment status, religious and political affiliation, sentimental affairs or relationship with their partner. Criminality was assessed on the basis of: a) the defendants credibility (How credible is Maras testimony?) with respondents using a 7-point Likert type scale where (1= Totally unbelievable, 7= Totally believable); b) the defendants responsibility (To what extent was Mara responsible for the episodes of battery and to what extent was she to blame for this situation?) was measured on a 7-point Likert type scale where (1 = Totally responsible for the episodes of battery, 7 = No responsibility for the episodes of battery); and c) control of the situation (To what extent was Mara in control of the situation and events for which she was committed for trial?) as measured on a 7-point Likert type scale where (1 = Had no control of the situation, 7 = Was fully in control of the situation). Two further items were introduced as manipulation checks: a) Defendants attractiveness (Do you think the defendant is physically attractive?) dichotomous (Yes/No) response format; and b) Battered Woman Prototypicality (To what extent does Mara fit the prototype of a battered woman?) as measured on a 7-point Likert
187
type scale where (1 = Doesnt fit the prototype of a battered woman at all, 7 = Completely fits the prototype of a battered woman). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996; Spanish version by Expsito, Moya, & Glick, 1998) consists of 22 items on a 6-point Likert type scale where (0 = Totally disagree, 5 = Totally agree). The inventory measures two subcomponents of sexism: hostile sexism and benevolent sexism, each consisting of 11 items. The coefficient alpha for the entire scale was .91, for the hostile sexism subscale .92, and for the benevolent sexism subscale .86; the results were similar to those obtained in other studies e.g., Glick, Sakalli-Ugurlu, Ferreira, and Aguiar-deSouza (2002) who reported .83 for the hostile subscale and .83 for the benevolent subscale. Results Preliminary analysis Initial statistical analysis revealed that the order of presentation of the information had no effect on the results i.e., no significant differences were observed among variables: a) defendants credibility, F(1, 167) = 0.82, ns; b) defendants responsibility, F(1, 167) = 2.53, ns; and c) defendants control of the situation, F(1, 168) = 3.09, ns. Moreover, the results corroborated the adequacy of the experimental manipulations regarding the defendants attractiveness (Do you think the defendant is physically attractive?) i.e., the participants who read the scenario describing the defendant as an attractive woman identified her correctly, 2(1, N = 84) = 23.05, p < .001; and the participants who read the scenario describing the defendant as an unattractive woman identified her correctly, 2(1, N = 85) = 51.86, p < .001. As for the defendant being the prototype of a battered woman (To what extent did Mara fit the prototype of a battered woman?), the manipulation was successful, F(1, 167) = 46.33, p < .001, p2 = .21, 1- = .99. Thus, participants tended to consider the defendant fitted the prototype of a battered woman when she was prototypical rather than a non-prototypical of a battered woman (Ms 5.05 vs. 3.30 for a prototypical and non-prototypical battered woman, respectively).
188
A. Herrera et al.
Effect of the defendants prototypicality and attractiveness on the appraisal of criminality (credibility, responsibility, and controllability) In order to assess the effect of prototypicality and attractiveness on the appraisal of the defendants criminality, ANOVAs with a full factorial design were undertaken with factors the defendants prototypicality and attractiveness, and dependent variables: the defendants credibility, responsibility, and control of the situation. The results showed a principal effect of the defendants attractiveness on the responsibility for the situation and events, F(1, 165) = 4.75, p < .05, p2= .03; 1- = .58. Thus, greater responsibility for the situation and events was attributed to attractive defendants (M = 5.42, SD = 1.87), than to unattractive defendants (M = 5.99, SD = 1.43). In addition, the results revealed a principal effect of prototypicality on control of the situation, F(1, 165) = 8.08, p < .01, p2 = .05, 1- = .81. Thus, a defendant described as prototypical of a battered woman was judged to have less control of the situation (M = 3.26, SD = 1.72) than a non-prototypical battered woman (M = 4.05, SD = 1.85). Moreover, the results confirmed an interaction between prototypicality and attractiveness on the defendants credibility, F(1, 165) = 4.08, p < .05, p2 = .02; 1- = .52 (see Figure 1). Thus, attractive prototypical defendants predicted greater credibility than attractive non-prototypical defendants (4.18 vs. 3.30, respectively). In comparison, unattractive non-prototypical defendants were assigned less credibility than attractive non-prototypical defendants (M = 3.85 vs. M = 3.72, respectively). The other remaining effects were not significant, Fs < 2, ns. Figure 1. Interaction between Prototypicality and Attractiveness on the Defendants Credibility. 7 6 5 Defendants credibility 4 3 2 1 Prototypical Non-Prototypical Attractive Unattractive
189
Hostile sexism as a mediator between prototypicality and control of the situation The mediating role of hostile sexism on the defendants prototypicality and controllability of the situation was assessed following the recommendations of Baron and Kenny (1986), who defined three conditions necessary for mediation. First, the independent variable (prototypicality) must influence the mediating variable (hostile sexism). Second, the mediating variable must be related to the dependent variable (controllability). Third, there should be a significant relationship between the independent and dependent variable; after it has been introduced, the mediating variable loses partially or totally its effect. Regression analysis was performed to assess these conditions. Figure 2 shows that the variable prototypicality was significantly negatively related to control of the situation ( = -.21, p = .006). Thus, prototypical defendants were judged to be less in control of the situation. Moreover, an independent regression analysis found a significant negative relationship between prototypicality and hostile sexism ( = -.17, p < .05), and between hostile sexism and control of the situation ( = .29, p = .001). Furthermore, in the third stage of regression analysis, prototypicality was observed to partially lose its effect on controllability of the situation when the hostile sexism variable ( = -.21, p = .012) was introduced. The Sobel Test (Sobel, 1982) that was carried out to determine the significance of the fall in the prototype effect on the dependent variable found a significant indirect prototype effect on controllability of the situation through hostile sexism (Z = -1.99, p < .05). Hence, the statistical analysis underscored that hostile sexism partially mediated the relation between the defendants prototypicality and controllability.
Figure 2. The Mediating Role of Hostile Sexism on the DefendantS Prototypicality and Controllability. Hostile Sexism = -.17* = .29*** ( = .25**)
Prototype = -.21** ( = -.21*)
Controllability
Note. * p .05; ** p .01; *** p .001; the score after introducing the independent variable and the mediating variable at the same time appears between brackets.
190
A. Herrera et al. Discussion Contrary to the hypothesis that attractive women defendants accused of
murdering their husbands would receive a more benevolent appraisal of criminality, the results showed unattractive women defendants were attributed less criminal responsibility. Consequently, the stereotype that attractiveness diminishes criminal responsibility is unfounded in cases of battered women who murder their husbands. In this study, the opposite effect was observed i.e., in this evaluation context the effect was also found but inversely with the opposite sign. A plausible explanation is that the attractiveness of a battered woman accused of murdering her husband is inconsistent with the prototype of a battered woman: young, battered, physically weak and frail woman (Walker, 2009) i.e., physically unattractive. Likewise, research on the influence of prototypes or stereotypes on the appraisal of gender violence by judges and juries (e.g., Terrance & Matheson, 2003), has shown that the further the defendant moved away from jurors' beliefs of what a battered woman should be, the harsher their verdicts became. The findings of this study have shown that the physical attractiveness of a battered woman hindered rather than advanced a plea of legitimate self-defence i.e., physical attractive battered women were attributed greater responsibility for the episodes of intimate partner violence. As for the effect of prototypicality on the appraisal of criminality, the data showed it predicted controllability i.e., atypical defendants were attributed greater control of the situation. A possible explanation may lie in heuristic reasoning involving the tendency to use shortcuts i.e., speedy and cost-effective cognitive processing in judgement making (Faria, Arce, & Novo, 2002). A good example is the heuristics of counterfactual thinking (Roese & Olson, 1997), in this study this reasoning shortcut was grounded on the assumption that a defendant who failed to fit the prototype of a battered woman (i.e., a well dressed, attractive woman who was calm and resolute) must have had some control of the situation, which undermined alternative hypotheses such as she had acted in legitimate self-defence. These findings and interpretation have been systematically reported in the literature i.e., people who behave atypically and violate the expectations of others are perceived as having greater intentionality as their behaviour is judged be the result of their own free will (Jones & Davis, 1965; Lurigio, Carroll, & Stalans, 1994; Russel & Melillo, 2006).
191
According to the hypothesis of this study, a principal effect was expected of both the defendants prototypicality and attractiveness on the appraisal of criminality i.e., a physically attractive prototypical defendant would be judged to be more credible, less responsible, and less in control of the situation. The results partially substantiated the hypothesis in the appraisal of credibility in terms of the interaction between the defendants prototypicality and attractiveness i.e., greater credibility was attributed to attractive prototypical defendants than to unattractive non-prototypical defendants. Thus, the results highlight that the stereotype what is beautiful is good is only applicable to a prototypical battered woman defendant on trial for murdering her husband (Dion et al., 1972; Eagly et al., 1991). Furthermore, in line with the initial hypothesis of this study, the relationship between prototypicality and control of the situation was partially mediated by a hostile sexism effect i.e., high hostile sexism scores mediated the relationship between the prototype of a battered woman and control of the situation. These results underscore the need for training related to the handling of domestic violence complaints by law enforcement officers that challenges dominant ideologies about gender, gender roles, and gender violence, particularly, since the police is the first law enforcement agency to respond to allegations of intimate partner violence. The results of this study highlight that the judgement making of law enforcement officers in cases of battery was conditioned by variables such as physical attractiveness or the prototype of a battered woman. Two fundamental due process requirements of criminal law are the presumption of innocence, and the battered womans right to a fair hearing without the risk of revictimization (i.e., to doubt the battered womans allegation and motives rather than pursue the aggressor) that contributes to the high prevalence of unreported cases of domestic violence commonly referred to as silent cases (Chu & Sun, 2010; Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad, 2012). In the absence of any legally admissible evidence, assumptions that battered women accused of murdering their husbands are responsible for and in control of the situation and events demoralizes and deters them from reporting their aggressors (Arce, Faria, Carballal, & Novo, 2009; Chu & Sun, 2010).
192
A. Herrera et al. Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science with the R&D project Ideologa sexista y differencias de poder en el origen y mantenimiento del acoso sexual (Ref. PSI2011-29720). References Agthe, M., Sprrle, M., & Maner, J. K. (2011). Does being attractive always help? Positive and negative effects of attractiveness on social decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1042-1054. doi: 10.1177/0146167211410355 Arce, R., Faria, F., Carballal, A., & Novo, M. (2009). Creacin y validacin de un protocolo de evaluacin forense de las secuelas psicolgicas de la violencia de gnero [Creation and validation of a forensic protocol to assess psychological harm in battered women]. Psicothema, 21, 241-247. Asch, S. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258-290. doi: 10.1037/h0055756 Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi:
10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Bollingmo, G. C., Wessel, E. O., Eilertsen, D. E., & Magnussen, S. (2008). Credibility of the emotional witness: A study of ratings by police investigators. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14, 29-40. doi: 10.1080/10683160701368412 Brand, R. J., Bonatsos, A., DOrazio, R., & DeShong, H. (2012). What is beautiful is good, even online: Correlations between photo attractiveness and text attractiveness in mens online dating profiles. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 166-170. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.023 Chu, D. & Sun, I. (2010). Reactive vs. proactive attitudes toward domestic violence: A comparison of Taiwanese male and female police officers. Crime and Delinquency. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/0011128710372192 Cohn, E. S., Dupuis, E. C., & Brown, T. M. (2009). In the eye of the beholder: Do behavior and character affect victim and perpetrator responsibility for acquaintance rape? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 1513- 1535. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00493.x
193
Cunningham, M. R. (1986). Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasiexperiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 925-935. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.50.5.925 Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Barbee, A. P., Druen, P. B., & Wu, C. (1995). Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours: Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 261-279. doi: 10.1037//00223514.68.2.261 Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290. doi: 10.1037/h0033731 Durn, M., Moya, M., Megas, J. L., & Viki, G. T. (2010). Social perception of rape victims in dating and married relationships: The role of perpetrators benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 62, 505-519. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9676-7 Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but.: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128. doi:
10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109 Efran, M. G. (1974). The effect of physical appearance on the judgment of guilt, interpersonal attraction, and severity of recommended punishment in a simulated jury task. Journal of Research in Personality, 8, 45-54. doi: 10.1016/00926566(74)90044-0 Expsito, F., & Herrera, M. C. (2009). Social perception of violence against women: Individual and psychosocial characteristics of victims and abusers. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 1, 123-145. Expsito, F., Herrera, M. C., Moya, M., & Glick, P. (2010). Don't rock the boat: Women's benevolent sexism predicts fears of marital violence. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 36-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01539.x Expsito, F., Moya, M., & Glick, P. (1998). Sexismo ambivalente: Medicin y correlatos [Ambivalent sexism: Measurement and correlates]. Revista de Psicologa Social, 13, 159-169. doi: 10.1174/021347498760350641 Faria, F., Arce, R., & Novo, M. (2002). Heurstico de anclaje en las decisiones judiciales [Anchore in judicial decision-making]. Psicothema, 14, 39-46. Feingold, A. (1992). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304-341. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.111.2.304
194
A. Herrera et al.
Ferrer, V. A., Bosch, E., Ramis, M. C., Torres, G., & Navarro, C. (2006). La violencia contra las mujeres en la pareja: Creencias y actitudes en estudiantes universitarios/as [Domestic violence: Beliefs and attitudes in university students]. Psicothema, 18, 359-366. Fiore, A. T., Taylor, L. S., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Hearst, M. (2008). Assessing attractiveness in online dating profiles. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 8, 797-806. doi: 10.1145/1357054.1357181 Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentianing hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491 Glick, P., Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C., & Aguiar-de-Souza, M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 291-296. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.t01-100068 Gracia, E., Garca, F., & Lila, M. (2009). Public responses to intimate partner violence against women: The influence of perceived severity and personal responsibility. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12, 648-656. Griffin, A. M., & Langlois, J. H. (2006). Stereotype directionality and attractiveness stereotyping: Is beauty good or is ugly bad? Social Cognition, 24, 187-206. doi: 10.1521/soco.2006.24.2.187 Guguen, N., Lourel, M., Charron, C., Fischer-Lokou, J., & Lamy, L. (2009). A web replication of Snyder, Decker, and Bersheids (1977) experiment on the selffulfilling nature of social stereotypes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 600602. doi: 10.1080/00224540903238503 Hammond, E. M., Berry, M. A., & Rodriguez, D. N. (2011). The influence of rape myth acceptance, sexual attitudes, and belief in a just world on attributions of responsibility in a date rape scenario. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 16, 242-252. doi: 10.1348/135532510X499887 Jones, E. E. & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 219-266). New York, NY: Academic Press. Johnston, V. S. & Franklin, M. (1993). Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 183-199. doi: 10.1016/0162-3095(93)90005-3
195
Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton. doi: 10.4324/9780203405987 Klippenstine, M. A., & Schuller, R. (2012). Perceptions of sexual assault: Expectancies regarding the emotional response of a rape victim over time [Special issue]. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18, 79-94. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2011.589389 Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretic review. Psychological Bulletin, 26, 390-423. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.126.3.390 Lemay, E. P., Clark, M. S., & Greenberg, A. (2010). What is beautiful is good because what is beautiful is desired: Physical attractiveness stereotyping as projection of interpersonal goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 339-353. doi: 10.1177/0146167209359700 Leventhal, G., & Krate, R. (1977). Physical attractiveness and severity of sentencing. Psychological Reports, 40, 315-318. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1977.40.1.315 Lurigio, A. J., Carroll, J. S., & Stalans, L. J. (1994). Understanding judges' sentencing decisions: Attributions of responsibility and story construction. In L. Heath, Tindale, R. S., Edwards, J., Posavac, E. J., Bryant, F. B. Henderson-King, E., Suarez-Balcazar, Y., & Myers, J., (Eds.), Applications of heuristics and biases to social issues (pp. 91-115). New York, NY: Plenum Press. Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad. (2012). Macroencuesta de violencia de gnero 2011, 2012 [2011-2012 survey on gender violence]. Madrid, Spain: Observatorio de la Violencia de Gnero. Retrieved from
http://www.observatorioviolencia.org/upload_images/File/DOC1329745747_mac roencuesta2011_principales_resultados-1.pdf Moore, F. R., Filippou, D., & Perrett, D. I. (2011). Intelligence and attractiveness in the face: beyond the attractiveness halo effect. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 9, 205-217. doi: 10.1556/jep.9.2011.3.2 Moya, M. (2003). El anlisis psicosocial de gnero [Psychosocial analysis of gender]. In J. F. Morales & C. Huici (Eds.), Estudios de psicologa social (pp. 175-222). Madrid: UNED. Patry, M. W. (2008). Attractive but guilty: Deliberation and the physical attractiveness bias. Psychological Reports, 102, 727-733. doi: 10.2466/pr0.102.3.727-733 Roese, N. J. & Olson, J. M. (1997). Counterfactual thinking: The intersection of affect and function. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
196
A. Herrera et al. (Vol. 29, pp. 1-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 104, 192-233. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192 Russell, B. L., & Melillo, L. S. (2006). Attitudes toward battered women who kill: Defendant typicality and judgments of culpability. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 219-241. doi: 10.1177/0093854805284412 Sheppard, L. D., Goffin, R. D, Lewis, R. J., & Olson, J. (2011). The effect of target attractiveness and rating method on the accuracy of trait ratings. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10, 24-33. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000030 Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. doi: 10.2307/270723 Surez, J. A., Prez, B. S., Soto, A. S., Muiz, J., & Garca-Cueto, E. (2011). Prejuicios, estereotipos y asignacin de culpa [Prejudices, stereotypes, and culpability assignation]. Revista Electrnica de Metodologa Aplicada, 16(1), 1-12. Terrance, C., & Matheson, K. (2003). Undermining reasonableness: Expert testimony in a case involving a battered woman who kills. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 37-45. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00005 Terrance, C. A., Plumm, K. M., & Thomas, S.A. (2011). Perceptions of domestic violence in heterosexual relationships: Impact of victim gender and history of response. Partner Abuse, 2, 208-223. doi: 10.1891/1946-6560.2.2.208 Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25-29. doi: 10.1037/h0071663 Valor-Segura, I., Expsito, F., & Moya, M. (2008). Atribucin del comportamiento del agresor y consejo a la vctima en un caso de violencia domstica [Attribution of the aggressors behavior and advice to the victim in a case of domestic violence]. Revista de Psicologa Social, 23, 171-180. doi: 10.1174/021347408784135896 Valor-Segura, I., Expsito, F., & Moya, M. (2011). Victim blaming and exoneration of the perpetrator in domestic violence: The role of beliefs in a just world and ambivalent sexism.
The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14, 195-206. doi:
10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n1.17 Walker, L. E. A. (2009). The battered woman syndrome. New York, NY: Springer.
Instructions
Presentation The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, the Official Journal of the Sociedad Espaola de Psicologa Jurdica y Forense, publishes empirical articles, theoretical studies and focused reviews of topics dealing with psychology and law (e.g., legal decision making, eyewitness). Only original papers (not published or submitted elsewhere) will be published. Papers driven to both legal systems, inquisitorial and adversarial, will be welcome as well as papers based in concrete laws of a European country. Neither the Editors nor Publishers accept responsibility for the views or statements expressed by the authors. Paper submission Manuscripts should be submitted electronically to the Editors to the e-mail address of the journal (ejpalc@usc.es). Postal address should be used exceptionally (The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, Facultad de Psicologa, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, E-15782 Santiago, Spain). Submission of a paper to this journal implies that it represents original work not previously published, and that it is not being considered elsewhere for publication. Review The manuscripts will be reviewed by two external blind referees. The reviews are anonymous for authors and reviewers. Author identities will be removed before sending out a manuscript to the reviewers. See Application for reviewers in www.usc.es/sepjf. Copyright Authors submitting a manuscript do so with the understanding that if it is accepted for publication the copyright of the manuscript, including the reproduction of the paper in all forms and media, shall be transferred to the publisher. See Copyright transfer and Declaration of originality in www.usc.es/sepjf. Permissions and responsibility The author is responsible for obtaining permission necessary to quote from other works, to reproduce material already published, and to reprint from other publications. The opinions expressed and the contents of the paper are under exclusive responsibility of the author(s) and do not reflect the point of view of The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context. Style Manuscripts must be adhere to the instructions on references, tables, figures, abstract, format, narrative style, etc. as described in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th edition). Manuscripts that do not fit to the style set forth in this manual will not be considered for publication. See more details in www.usc.es/sepjf. Check list of requirements The abstract should be 150-200 words. Title page (include the authors name, affiliations, full contact details). Full paper text (double spaced with numbered pages and anonymised). References (APA style). Tables and figures placed at the end of the paper or attached separately.
The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

____________________________________________________________ CONTENTS Articles
Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making Raluca Enescu and Andr Kuhn 99
Family and socio-demographic risk factors for psychopathy among prison inmates Cirilo H. Garca, Jos Moral, Martha Fras, Juan A. Valdivia and Hctor L. Daz 119
In search of a fast screening method for detecting the malingering of cognitive impairment Guadalupe Snchez, Fernando Jimnez, Amada Ampudia and Vicente Merino 135
Therapeutic effects of a cognitive-behavioural treatment with juvenile offenders Santiago Redondo, Ana Martnez-Catena and Antonio Andrs-Pueyo 159
Is miss sympathy a credible defendant alleging intimate partner violence in a trial for murder? Antonio Herrera, Inmaculada Valor-Segura and Francisca Expsito 179
Volume 4
Number 2
July 2012

The European Journal of Psychology Applied To Legal Context 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The European Journal of Psychology Applied To Legal Context 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISSN: 1889-1861

THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY APPLIED TO LEGAL CONTEXT

Volume 4, Number 2, July 2012

The official Journal of the

ISSN 1889-1861 The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 2012, 4(2)

SERIAL EFFECTS OF EVIDENCE ON LEGAL DECISION-MAKING

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

R. Enescu and A. Kuhn

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

R. Enescu and A. Kuhn

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

R. Enescu and A. Kuhn

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making Discussion

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

R. Enescu and A. Kuhn

Serial effects of evidence on legal decision-making

10.2307/1415696 Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking. New York, NY: Harper.

Psychopathy among prison inmates

Psychopathy among prison inmates

Psychopathy among prison inmates

.57 .73 .84 .70 .81

.78 .49 .45 .48 .46

Age of first Imprisonment

.22 Psychopathy -.55

Number of times in prison 31% Length of sentence 6% e16

Severity of offense Income Time spent in prison 13% e18

Figure 1. Standardized Model Estimated by the Maximum Likelihood Method.

Psychopathy among prison inmates Discussion

Psychopathy among prison inmates

130 Personality and

C. H. Garca et al. Individual Differences, 51, 584-588. doi:

Psychopathy among prison inmates

C. H. Garca et al. Appendix A

Dumb people deserve to be deceived

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Figure 1. Comparison of Malingerers and Normal in Test Performance.

80 Tomm-R WMS.DigitSpan WMS.Faces-II WM.F.Picture-II WM.VPA-II WMS.VPA.Rec

Tomm-R WMS.DigitSpan WMS.Faces-II WM.F.Picture-II WM.VPA-II WMS.VPA.Rec

Figure 3. Comparison of MCIs and Normal in Test Performance.

Tomm-R WMS.DigitSpan WMS.Faces-II WM.F.Picture-II WM.VPA-II WMS.VPA.Rec

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

Memory malingering assessment

THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS OF A COGNITIVE-BEHAVIOURAL TREATMENT WITH JUVENILE OFFENDERS

Therapeutic effects of CBT

Therapeutic effects of CBT Method Participants

Therapeutic effects of CBT

Therapeutic effects of CBT

168 Previous criminal records

S. Redondo et al. 41.2% 25.0% 85.7% 28.6% 3.96 0.03 .082 1

Recognition of responsibility for offence Effectiveness results

53.88(13.95) 50.29(19.04) 62.46(21.62) 59.82(10.11)

Therapeutic effects of CBT

Therapeutic effects of CBT