Quantifying the Decline in Juvenile Sexual Recidivism Rates.
Caldwell, Michael F.
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Jul 18 , 2016, No Pagination Specified.
Data from several sources have indicated that violence in general (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2012; Finkelhor & Jones, 2004; Sickmund, & Puzzanchera, 2014), and sexual recidivism in adult offenders (Duwe, 2014; Helmus, 2009; Wisconsin Department of Corrections, 2015), has declined substantially in recent decades. This finding is significant because the potential effectiveness of public policies intended to reduce sexual violence in society rests in part on the base rate for re-offense of adjudicated violent offenders. This study examined whether the recidivism base rate for juvenile sexual recidivism has undergone a similar decline in recent decades. We examined 106 studies from 98 reports or data sets involving 33,783 cases of adjudicated juvenile sexual offenders that were carried out between 1938 and 2014. Results showed a weighted mean base rate for sexual recidivism of 4.92% over a mean follow-up time of 58.98 months (SD = 50.97, Median = 52.75). The year of initiation of the study predicted the sexual recidivism rate after controlling for the follow-up time (FΔ = 14.72, p = .0002). Studies conducted between 2000 and 2015 reported a weighted mean sexual recidivism rate of 2.75%; 73% lower than the rate of 10.30% reported by studies conducted between 1980 and 1995. The implications for public policies, risk assessment methods, and clinical services are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
Building a Multidisciplinary Pipeline of Researchers in Child Abuse and Neglect:
Rationale: Child abuse and neglect is a significant public health concern in the United States and around the world. According to the most recent statistics, in fiscal year 2014, there were over three million referrals for some form of child maltreatment. The magnitude of the problem, the devastating short and long term consequences, and the importance of co-occurring contextual factors make this a challenging area of research requiring research from multiple disciplines. Despite the scope, size, and costs associated with child abuse and neglect, however, there is a dearth of scholars trained to conduct research in child abuse and neglect. As noted in the recent Institute of Medicine (2014) report by the Committee on Child Maltreatment Research, Policy, and Practice for the Next Decade, “Existing research and service system infrastructures are not sufficient for responding to this public health challenge”.
This exciting new annual summer training institute is designed to help assure a continued pipeline of researchers interested in advancing science regarding abuse and neglect. This requires an innovative, multi-disciplinary approach that can take into account the multi-determined nature of this public health problem and its multiple and cascading outcomes. Beginning in 2017, 15 competitively selected trainees will receive awards to attend a week long summer institute. Training activities of the institute will begin prior to the summer and extend beyond the on-site week-long training to include individual follow-up mentoring provided by trainers matched to participants’ interests. Institute presenters (trainers) represent diverse fields (e.g., anthropology, criminology, genetics, law, medicine, psychology, public health, and social work), methodological expertise, and cultural backgrounds. This project is funded by the National Institute of Child and Human Development (NICHD) and executed through a collaboration of two senior scholars (Drs. Melissa Jonson-Reid from Washington University and Cathy Spatz Widom of John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York).
The competitive award will fund 15 early career or transitioning scholars with backgrounds in a variety disciplines, including criminology, economics, law, neuroscience, genetics, medicine, psychology, psychiatry, public health, public policy, social work, orsociology. Applicants need not have expertise in child maltreatment but must have some training related to children’s health and development prior to the summer institute. Costs of materials, food, lodging, travel, and communication with mentors are provided as part of the award. The first summer training institute will be held in St Louis, Missouri at Washington University with subsequent years alternating between New York City and St. Louis.
Timeline and application procedures for Year One follow:
Timeline:
• October 15, 2016 - January 6, 2017: Applications accepted
• January 6, 2017: Final due date for applications
• February 15, 2017: Awardees will be notified and pre-seminar readings will be distributed.
• May 22 - May 26, 2017: 4 1/2 day seminar to be held at Washington University in St. Louis
• June, 2017: Follow-up calls with mentors
• July 15, 2017: Submission of final draft of brief research proposal (6 pages)
• August 15, 2017: Trainees receive feedback and suggestions for funding
Participant Commitment:
Trainees must be able to attend the onsite training, complete the readings prior to the seminar, and adhere to the timeline for research plans.
Eligibility:
Applicants must have completed their PhD or MD (or equivalent degree). Applicants must meet early career scientist criteria [meaning that the scholars must not yet have been a PI on any grant beyond the R03 or R21 (developmental) levels] OR be established researchers who are interested in transitioning to research on child maltreatment but lack methodological training in this area.
All participants will be required to have some training related to children’s health or development to serve as a foundation for participation. However, prior training specific to child maltreatment is not needed. Participants must demonstrate an interest in pursuing research relevant to epidemiology (causes and consequences), prevention or intervention in the area of child maltreatment. Participants must also indicate how this training will advance them in their chosen careers.
For this institute, we will accept up to 15 participants with a minimum of at least four different specialties or disciplines represented. Applicants from under-represented ethnic/racial groups, persons with disabilities, or persons from disadvantaged backgrounds are especially encouraged to apply.
Application Process:
Submit these materials:
(1) Completed application form (see below)
(2) A 2-3 page statement of interest describing why this training will be beneficial to you, what work related to child maltreatment, if any, you have done, and a brief rationale for and discussion of a research study you hope to conduct in the future (this latter section will form the foundation for the brief proposal project);
(3) Curriculum vitae; and
(4) A letter from a senior researcher or administrator at your institution indicating their enthusiasm regarding the anticipated benefits of your participation and the support of the institution for any needed release time in order to participate, as no stipend will be provided.
Applications should be submitted to:
Melissa Jonson-Reid, PhD
Professor and Director Brown Center for Violence and Injury
Summer Training Institute on Child Abuse and Neglect
Campus Box 1196, 1 Brookings Drive
St Louis, Mo 63130
Or electronically by e-mail to: jonsonrd@wustl.edu
Due Date: Applications must be submitted no later than Friday, January 6, 2017.
Review Process:
Applicants will be reviewed by the Summer Training Institute Co-Directors (Melissa Jonson-Reid, PhD and Cathy Spatz Widom, PhD) and at least one additional institute presenter. Applications will be rated according to relevance of interest, likelihood to benefit from the training content (i.e., coming from disciplines/training programs not already benefiting from such material), promise as a researcher in this area, and strength of support letter. We will select up to 15 participants, with an aim of achieving broad diversity in discipline, topical interest and ethnic and experiential backgrounds.
Questions can be directed to:
Melissa Jonson-Reid, PhD (jonsonrd@wustl.edu)
Cathy Spatz Widom, PhD (cwidom@jjay.cuny.edu)
Call for Papers: From the Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice: New Developments in the Treatment of Psychopathy.
Guest Editor: Dr Simon Draycott, University of Surrey and Broadmoor Hospital, s.draycott@surrey.ac.uk Focus: The effectiveness of psychological therapy with psychopaths has been a topic of intense interest in recent years. From a perspective of therapeutic nihilism, a more nuanced perspective has begun to emerge. It is clear that individuals designated as psychopathic may not respond as well as other individuals to psychological therapy, and particularly to offence-focused therapy. However, the question of whether psychopathy itself is or is not treatable remains open. Moreover, a detailed understanding of what underpins the reduced effectiveness of offence-focused therapy for psychopaths, or whether this reduced efficacy is a universal effect, remain to be elucidated. This issue aims to bring together an up-to-date overview of current science and practice in the treatment of psychopathy. This may include focused systematic reviews on particular topics in the treatment of psychopathy as well as empirical and theoretical papers. Potential topics might include: • Specialist interventions for individuals with high levels of psychopathy, whether psychological, medical, social or environmental. • Mechanisms of change or resistance to change over treatment in psychopathy. • Motivation or readiness for change in psychopathy. • Outcomes for psychopaths in empirically validated therapies, whether these are focused on offending or on mental health. • Interventions focused on the early precursors of psychopathy in children or adolescents. • Theoretical models relevant to developing interventions for psychopathy, or understanding the responsiveness of psychopaths to treatment. Ultimately, this special issue aims to provide practitioners, researchers and students with a comprehensive overview of the state of the art in the treatment of psychopathy. Submission Procedure: Submissions to this journal are through the ScholarOne submission system here: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jcrpp Please visit the author guidelines for the journal at http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm?id=jcrpp which gives full details. Please ensure you select this special issue from the relevant drop down menu on page four of the submission process. Submission Deadline: October 2017 Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Registered Office: Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA United Kingdom. Registered in England No. 3080506, VAT No. GB 665 3593 06
[idw] To Help or Not to Help?
Informationsdienst Wissenschaft - idw - Pressemitteilung Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung, Kerstin Skork, 29.09.2016 10:17
To Help or Not to Help?
In emergency situations do people think solely of themselves? In a study published in Nature Scientific Reports, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development have shown that readiness to help depends heavily on personality. The results show that most people would help others in emergency situations, some of them even more so than in harmless everyday situations.
It is said that people show their true colors in times of adversity. In a recently published study, scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development have found that extreme conditions bring out the good in people as well as the bad. In their experiments, prosocial and altruistic people in particular often helped others even more in an emergency situation than in a relaxed and non-threatening situation, whereas selfish participants became less cooperative. “Emergency situations seem to amplify people’s natural tendency to cooperate,” says Mehdi Moussaïd, researcher in the Center for Adaptive Rationality at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development.
The researchers invited 104 participants act out scenarios in a computer game that they developed specifically for the experiment. In this “help- or-escape dilemma game,” participants under time and monetary pressure had to decide whether they were willing to risk taking time to help others before reaching their goal or saving themselves in two different situations—one everyday and one emergency situation. After the game, the researchers measured participants’ social value orientation—that is, their concern for others—and categorized them as having a prosocial or individualistic profile.
The first scenario was an everyday situation in a train station. The players’ goal was to catch a train. The time available for the game was 60 seconds. Participants who succeeded in catching the train won a bonus of 1 euro; there was no penalty in case of failure. On their way to the platform, the participants met eight other travelers who each needed help finding their own train. Participants chose between a button to help or a button to end the game (“escape”), which in reality would have corresponded to heading directly to the train platform. Whether they would succeed in catching their train in time, however, was determined at random by the computer, depending on the point at which participants left the game. Ending the game early increased the chances of success. The more people they helped and the more time elapsed, the lower the participants’
chances of winning the game.
The second scenario was an emergency situation in a train station. After an explosion, participants had to leave the building as quickly as possible. This time, they only had 15 seconds to escape, and they risked losing 4 euros if they didn’t make it out of the building in time. There was no bonus in case of success. To emphasize the alarming nature of the situation, the researchers added a red blinking frame to the computer screen. Here again, participants encountered eight other travelers who were each in need of help, and the procedure was otherwise the same as in the first scenario.
Overall, participants helped others less in the emergency situation because of the time pressure they were under. However, when the researchers focused on individual participants, they found that many of those categorized as prosocial were more helpful in the emergency
situation: 44% of them were more ready to help in the emergency than in the everyday situation. The opposite was true of participants categorized as individualistic, 52% of whom reduced their cooperative behavior in the emergency situation.
“Our game-based approach offers a new way of studying human cooperation and could help authorities to manage crowd behaviors during mass emergencies,” says Mehdi Moussaïd.
https://www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/en/media/2016/09/to-help-or-not-to-help