Tests of the Attachment and Developmental Dynamic Systems Theory of Crime (ADDSTOC): Toward a Differential RDoC Diagnostic and Treatment Approach
| Author | Marc A. Lindberg,Dana Zeid |
| DOI | 10.1177/0306624X17750353 |
| Published date | 01 September 2018 |
| Date | 01 September 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2018
Article
International Journal of
Offender Therapy and
Tests of the Attachment and
Comparative Criminology
2018, Vol. 62(12) 3746 –3774
Developmental Dynamic
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
Systems Theory of Crime
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X17750353
DOI: 10.1177/0306624X17750353
journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo
(ADDSTOC): Toward a
Differential RDoC Diagnostic
and Treatment Approach
Marc A. Lindberg1 and Dana Zeid2
Abstract
The Attachment and Developmental Dynamic Systems Theory of Crime was tested
on 206 male inmates. They completed measures tapping attachments, clinical issues,
adverse childhood events, peer crime, and crime addictions. A significant path model
was found, going from insecure parental attachments to adverse childhood events, and
then on to the behavioral crime addiction and criminal peers scales. Peer crime was
also predicted by insecure parent attachments and the crime addiction scale. Finally,
the crime addiction, peer crime, and insecure parental attachment scales predicted
frequencies of criminal behavior. The model also fit a sample of 239 female inmates.
The notions of crime addiction, in this context of adverse events and insecure parental
attachments, offered newer and more powerful explanations than previously offered
by social learning theories on why some individuals are more likely to associate with
peers engaging in criminal behavior, and also how these combine to predict degrees
of criminal behavior. By moving beyond main effects models, it was found that a focus
on systems of interactions was robust in theory and application. However, profile
data from the Attachment and Clinical Issues Questionnaire showed that individual
differences in Research Domain Criteria diagnoses are fundamental to treatment
settings. Such approaches to reducing rates of recidivism and substance abuse should
also enhance outcomes in many domains, including HIV prevention, costs to health
care, and at the same time increase overall public safety.
1Marshall University, Huntington, WV, USA
2The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA
Corresponding Author:
Marc Lindberg, Department of Psychology, Marshall University, 1 John Marshall Drive, Huntington,
WV 25701, USA.
Email: lindberg@marshall.edu
Lindberg and Zeid
3747
Keywords
theories of crime, peer crime, ACE, attachment and crime, crime addiction, ACIQ,
RDoC, recidivism, criminal profiling
The purpose of this study was to test the Attachment and Developmental Dynamic
Systems Theory of Crime (ADDSTOC) through path analysis, a form of structural
equation modeling. ADDSTOC attempts to move beyond analyses of main effects
toward a focus on tested interactions between variables, with a special emphasis on
development (Mulvey, 2014). This theory places a central focus on interactions
between childhood attachments, adverse childhood events (ACEs), addictions to crim-
inal behaviors, and associations with peers who engage in criminal behavior. Because
these interactions span multiple disciplines, including criminology, psychiatry, devel-
opmental psychology, and physiology, we begin with a simple, theoretical presenta-
tion of the model. The reader may consider following along the discussion by viewing
Figure 1, which provides a graphical overview of the model. This discussion will be
followed by a more specific outline of our predictions of the paths alongside their basis
in previous literature
In ADDSTOC, crime is considered in terms of its psychopathological development,
with the identification of casual pathways that overlap with many of those involved in
the development of several other psychological disorders (i.e., substance misuse,
depression, personality disorders). As with these disorders, degrees of criminal behav-
ior are partially explained by insecure parental attachments. For those not familiar
with general attachment theory, it should first be noted that the present view of attach-
ment deviates from classic relationship-based theories of crime in that it emphasizes
the types of feelings and behaviors that are directed to parents and caretakers in
infancy, and then to peers in childhood, and romantic interests and peers in adulthood,
allowing for further specification beyond the classic secure/insecure attachment
dichotomy. For example, individuals exhibiting avoidant attachment (a form of inse-
cure attachment) to mother will react to stress by avoiding contact with her during
times of stress. On the contrary, an individual exhibiting mixed/disorganized attach-
ment (another form of insecure attachment) will engage in seemingly uncoordinated
attachment behaviors toward that attachment figure when under distress, sometimes
exhibiting excessive dependence and/or confusion toward attachment figures (“cling-
ing”) and other times avoiding them completely. Attachment security is fundamental
to healthy psychological development, as individuals depend upon secure relation-
ships to develop effective interpersonal strategies for handling emotions and
unpredictability.
In the absence of developing secure attachments, alternate strategies for dealing
with negative affect and unpredictability are learned and ingrained as habit. Indeed,
insecure attachments have also been found to be involved in poor compliance with
authorities, poorer parental supervision and sensitivity, and poorer conscience devel-
opment (Thompson, 2009; van IJzendoorn, 1997). Furthermore, because insecure
attachments predict poorer “theory of mind,” or the ability to read the thoughts and
3748
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 62(12)
feelings of self and others, they are theorized to have deleterious effects on social rela-
tions, peer acceptance, and the internal stress. In adulthood, these patterns or habits of
cognition and behavior continue and are often manifested in the development of psy-
chopathology and socially aberrant behaviors.
It should be noted that, independently, insecure attachments do not necessarily lead
to later criminal behavior and psychopathology. ADDSTOC predicts that insecure
attachments interact with childhood trauma in predicting criminal behavior. Here, we
conceptualize trauma as existing on a quantitative scale such that frequency of expo-
sure to adversity predicts later outcomes. We theorize that security of attachment can
moderate this relationship, with secure attachments buffering the effects of trauma and
insecure attachments exacerbating them.
Of course, many individuals experiencing frequent early trauma and insecure early
attachments do not engage in criminal behavior. ADDSTOC theorizes that genetic pre-
dispositions conferring greater proclivity for feelings of power, prestige, and excite-
ment associated with criminal behavior can be manifested or exacerbated by chaotic,
stressful environments. A desire for these feelings as a compensatory mechanism of
comfort in the absence of secure attachment may drive individuals with a baseline pro-
pensity for crime addiction toward behaviors that will produce these feelings.
ADDSTOC further emphasizes that peer relationships are a crucial consideration in
the development of criminality. Insecurely attached individuals with baseline tenden-
cies for seeking out external power and control associated with criminal behavior and
who are exposed to stressful environments are theorized to seek the company of fellow
delinquent peers. Here, it is theorized that engaging in behaviors with delinquent peers
will increase or incubate these feelings of thrill and power. Integration into aberrant
peer groups is further encouraged through the absence of existing secure relationships.
In summary, predisposing attachment insecurity, stress, temperament, and peer rela-
tionships interact in a complex pathway to predict criminal behavior.
In addition, in line with theories of developmental psychopathology emphasizing
equifinality and multifinality, ADDSTOC allows for a focus on individual differences
in causal patterns and is in line with the relatively new Research Domain Criteria
(RDoC) for diagnoses and interventions in psychiatry (Insel, 2013). RDoC is an inno-
vative initiative supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) aimed at devel-
oping more accurate, personalized psychiatric diagnosis in terms of empirically
established biological, psychological, and social domains. Through its development of
unique individual Attachment and Clinical Issues Questionnaire (ACIQ) profiles
(Lindberg & Thomas, 2011) alongside population-based statistical models, ADDSTOC
allows for personalized study and treatment of criminals.
In summary, ADDSTOC integrates biological, psychological, and social influences
in an interacting pathway in its prediction of criminal behavior. Although existing lit-
erature has addressed each of these factors in isolation, we argue that empirical valida-
tion of a complex, interacting system is essential for the robust conceptualization of
the development of criminality, as each of these components is dependent upon the
others in its predictive power. We now turn to our model’s specific hypothesized paths
and their predicted interactions in the context of existing literature.
Lindberg and Zeid
3749
Hypothesis 1
ADDSTOC predicts that the path to criminality begins...
To continue reading
Request your trial