Self-Reported Change in Antisocial Attitudes and Reoffending Among a Sample of 2,337 Males Convicted of Violent Offenses

Published date01 January 2022
AuthorTanyia Juarez,Mark V. A. Howard
Date01 January 2022
DOI10.1177/00938548211013576
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2022, Vol. 49, No. 1, January 2022, 3 –19.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211013576
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
3
SELF-REPORTED CHANGE IN ANTISOCIAL
ATTITUDES AND REOFFENDING AMONG A
SAMPLE OF 2,337 MALES CONVICTED OF
VIOLENT OFFENSES
TANYIA JUAREZ
University of New South Wales
MARK V. A. HOWARD
Corrective Services New South Wales
Antisocial attitudes are among the strongest predictors of reoffending; however, there is little evidence to show that treatment-
induced changes in antisocial attitudes correspond to changes in individuals’ risk of recidivism. This study examined relation-
ships between within-treatment change in antisocial attitudes derived from the Measures of Criminal Attitudes and Associates
(MCAA) and reoffending among a large sample of males convicted of violent offenses (N = 2,337). Residual change scores
(RCS) and categories of clinically significant change (CSC) were used as indices of within-treatment change. A number of
MCAA factor scores significantly predicted general and violent reoffending when assessed before and after treatment. RCS
calculations of within-treatment change on the Violence and Antisocial Intent factors were also significantly associated with
general reoffending outcomes. There was no evidence that within-treatment change on any measure had predictive validity
for violent reoffending.
Keywords: antisocial attitudes; within-treatment change; violence; reoffending
Violent crime is a prevalent issue that has significant ramifications for the individual and
broader economic and health costs (Klepfisz et al., 2014). Accordingly, research has
devoted attention to developing and evaluating programs aimed at reducing violent offend-
ing. Research has shown interventions that adhere to principles of the Risk Need Responsivity
(RNR) model can be effective in reducing reoffending among individuals convicted of gen-
eral and violent offenses (Andrews, Zinger et al., 1990; Dowden & Andrews, 2000). The
risk principle states that the intensity of treatment should match the risk level of the person;
the responsivity principle informs how treatment should be delivered to accommodate indi-
vidual learning styles, motivation, and cognitive abilities; and the need principle proposes
AUTHORS’ NOTE: The authors are thankful to the University of New South Wales, particularly Professor
Richard Kemp, for overseeing this study. It is noted that the second author was employed by CSNSW at the time
of completing this study. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tanyia Juarez, School
of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Library Walk, Kensington, NSW 2033, Australia; e-mail:
z5148486@zmail.unsw.edu.au.
1013576CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211013576Criminal Justice and BehaviorJuarez, Howard /
research-article2021
4 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR
that treatment should target criminogenic needs, or dynamic risk factors that have a causal
relationship with likelihood of reoffending (Bonta & Andrews, 2017).
One dynamic risk factor commonly targeted in treatment is that of antisocial attitudes.
Antisocial attitudes are cognitions, beliefs, or values that condone, justify, or minimize
antisocial and criminal behaviors (Walters & DeLisi, 2013). Attitudes in general have been
described as a “pre-condition” for behavior, in which the evaluative component of an atti-
tude influences subsequent behavior (Allport, 1935). As such, it is not surprising that atti-
tudes are highly predictive of behavior (Mills et al., 2002). Antisocial attitudes have been
shown to be among the strongest predictors of general reoffending (Eisenberg et al., 2019;
Gendreau et al., 1996) and have similarly shown strong associations with violent behavior
(Harris et al., 1993; Stefanile et al., 2017; Stith et al., 2004). Antisocial attitudes have been
identified as one of the “big four” criminogenic needs for offending alongside antisocial
personality traits, history of antisocial behavior, and antisocial associates (Bonta & Andrews,
2017). The importance of antisocial attitudes in criminal behavior is aligned with the social
learning theory foundations of the RNR model and the critical role of antisocial associates
in developing and maintaining such attitudes (Kabiri et al., 2020; Mills et al., 2002).
WITHIN-TREATMENT CHANGE
In accordance with the need principle, a critical premise of most interventions is that
change in the severity of a person’s criminogenic needs will result in changes in their likeli-
hood of reoffending (Andrews, Bonta et al., 1990; Bonta & Andrews, 2017). A number of
studies have sought to examine this by assessing differences in individuals’ dynamic risk
factors between pretreatment and posttreatment (Klepfisz et al., 2014; Lewis et al., 2013).
Several studies have demonstrated that people show improvement on measures of antisocial
attitudes (for a recent review, see Banse et al., 2013) and other dynamic risk factors
(Heffernan et al., 2019; Papalia et al., 2020; Serin et al., 2013) after treatment. In contrast,
there is little research examining whether within-treatment change has a relationship with
reoffending outcomes (Klepfisz et al., 2016; Serin et al., 2013). For example, a systematic
review examining 24 studies concluded that there was no statistically robust evidence that
interventions to address antisocial attitudes reduce reoffending (Banse et al., 2013). This
conclusion was informed by findings that few studies have assessed whether within-treat-
ment change in antisocial attitudes predict reoffending, and fewer have demonstrated sig-
nificant associations between change and outcomes.
Evidence for the relationship between within-treatment change in antisocial attitudes
and reoffending is particularly lacking for individuals convicted of violent offenses and
evaluations of violence treatment programs (Serin et al., 2013). One study by Klepfisz and
colleagues (2014) assessed change in self-reported procriminal attitudes before and after
treatment among a sample of 42 adult males with histories of violent offending. They
found change across treatment, as assessed by simple differences, reliable change, and
clinically significant change, was not significantly associated with violent recidivism.
Similarly, Woessner and Schwedler (2014) examined pre- to posttreatment changes in pro-
criminal attitudes among 185 males with convictions for sexual and violent offending.
They found that the magnitude of reductions in procriminal attitudes over the course of
treatment was not significantly related to odds of committing further general, sexual, or
violent offenses.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT