Cognitive and Mental Health Factors

Chapter 6

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter Outline 6.1 Ambition and Planning 6.1.1 Educational or Occupational Aspirations 6.1.2 Educational Commitment 6.1.3 Future Orientation 6.1.4 Work Orientation 6.2 Authority-Related Attitudes 6.2.1 Authoritarianism 6.2.2 Belief in the Legitimacy/Value of the Criminal Justice System 6.2.3 Rebelliousness/Defiance Toward Authority 6.3 Moral/Political Attitudes 6.3.1 Belief in a Just World 6.3.2 Levels of Moral Reasoning 6.3.3 Neutralization 6.3.4 Right-Wing/Left-Wing Political Persuasion 6.3.5 Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Deviant/Non-Conforming Behavior 6.3.6 Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Illegal Drug Use 6.3.7 Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Illegal/Antisocial Activity 6.4 Negativity 6.4.1 Alienation 6.4.2 Cynicism 6.4.3 Guilt/Remorse/Shame 6.4.4 Negative Affect 6.5 Self-Reflected Attitudes 6.5.1 Individualism/Collectivism 6.5.2 Internal–External Locus of Control 6.5.3 Happiness/Life Satisfaction 6.5.4 Self-Esteem/Self-Concept 6.5.5 Selfishness/Self-Centeredness 6.6 Social Preferences 6.6.1 Attachment to Others 6.6.2 Enjoying School 6.6.3 Familism 6.6.4 Preference for Violent Television Programs 6.7 Learning Ability and Intelligence 6.7.1 Academic Performance/Achievement (Grade Point Average) 6.7.2 Intelligence

Handbook of Crime Correlates. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804417-9.00006-5 Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

260 260 260 260 260 260 260 262 262 262 262 264 264 266 266 267 267 268 268 268 268 269 270 270 270 271 271 271 273 273 273 273 274 275

6.7.3 Intelligence Averages (Ecological) 6.7.4 Verbal Intelligence 6.7.5 Performance Intelligence 6.7.6 Intellectual Imbalance 6.7.7 Word Categorization Skills 6.7.8 Language Learning 6.7.9 Learning Disabilities in General 6.7.10 Reading Ability 6.8 Mental Illness 6.8.1 Mental Illness in General 6.8.2 Autism Spectrum Disorders 6.8.3 Depression, Subclinical 6.8.4 Depression, Clinical 6.8.5 Bipolar Depression 6.8.6 Schizophrenia 6.8.7 Self-Mutilation 6.8.8 Suicide 6.8.9 Suicide Rates (Ecological) 6.9 Mental/Behavioral Disorder 6.9.1 Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder 6.9.2 Enuresis 6.9.3 Gambling Addiction 6.9.4 Language Impairment (Stuttering) 6.9.5 Obsessive Compulsive Disorder 6.9.6 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder 6.9.7 Somatic Disorder 6.9.8 Tourette Syndrome/Tic Disorders 6.10 Drug Addiction/Dependence 6.10.1 Drug Dependence/Substance Abuse in General 6.10.2 Alcohol Abuse 6.10.3 Alcoholism 6.11 Other Cognitive Conditions 6.11.1 Attention Span 6.11.2 Executive Functioning 6.12 Highlights



280 280 280 280 283 283 283 284 285 285 285 287 289 289 289 290 290 290 294 294 294 294 294 294 297 297 297 300 300 300 301 303 303 303 304

275 275

259

260  Handbook of Crime Correlates

In this chapter, cognitive variables are examined in relation to criminal and antisocial behavior. Most of the variables can be put into one of three categories: (1) attitudes and preferences, (2) intellectual variables, and (3) mental health/illnesses. Topics will be considered in that particular order.

6.1 AMBITION AND PLANNING Several types of attitudes and preferences will be considered. The initial category involves an individual’s goals and plans for the future.

6.1.1 Educational or Occupational Aspirations Just three studies were located that examined connections between educational and/or occupational aspirations and criminality. Table 6.1.1 shows that two of the three studies found that persons with relatively low aspirations report greater criminal involvement, but the other study found no significant correlation. One additional study reported that low aspirations predict gang membership.

6.1.2 Educational Commitment The extent to which people are committed to becoming educated or believe in the value of education is assessed based on self-reports. As shown in Table 6.1.2, many studies of these beliefs and commitments have been published, nearly all of which have concluded that they are inversely correlated with involvement in delinquent and criminal behavior. The two exceptions involved self-reported illegal drug use. In the case of antisocial indicators, the findings are limited to just seven studies, five of which reported significant inverse correlations.

6.1.3 Future Orientation A fable about the ant who worked all day preparing for winter and the grasshopper who spent his time playing the

fiddle dramatizes the fact that some people seem to live for today, while others are always preparing for the future. Several studies have been undertaken to determine if future orientation is related to delinquent behavior. Table 6.1.3 shows that nearly all relevant studies have found that delinquents are less future oriented than is true for persons in general.

6.1.4 Work Orientation People vary in the extent to which they are focused on work. Table 6.1.4 shows that the research findings are scarce and inconsistent regarding any correlation between work orientation and offending.

6.2 AUTHORITY-RELATED ATTITUDES What sort of relationship does one want to have with people who are in authority? For children, most authority figures are parents and teachers. Later in life, those in authority are often bosses and government officials. Numerous types of attitudes have been explored regarding their possible relationship to criminal and delinquent behavior. These include opinions about education, as well as cynicism and empathy. Other attitudinal variables to be examined in this section are those of present/future orientation and locus of control.

6.2.1 Authoritarianism Authoritarianism (also called right-wing authoritarianism) refers to the tendency to favor individuals who base their reasoning about truth and morality predominantly on statements made by authority figures. To measure authoritarianism, respondents are given statements such as “Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn” (Altemeyer 1981). Those providing affirmative responses to such statements are deemed to hold strong authoritarian attitudes. As shown in Table 6.2.1, two studies were located regarding an association between authoritarianism and

TABLE 6.1.1  Educational or Occupational Aspirations and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Beal & Crockett 2010:261 (occupational)

Negative

OCEANIA Australia: A Carroll et al. 2009:Table 1 ­(educational) New Zealand: BRE Wright et al. 1999b ­(occupational, at age 21)

NORTH AMERICA United States: KG Hill, Howell et al. 1999:311 (aspirations, gang ­membership, longitudinal)

TABLE 6.1.2  Educational Commitment and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data Delinquency

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant

Negative

ASIA China: WH Chui & Chen 2011 EUROPE Germany: D Baier 2014:117 (violent, adolescents); Switzerland: Vazsonyi 1997:92 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Latimer et al. 2003:9 (school aspirations); United States: Pine 1965; Epps 1967; GF Jensen 1969; Bachman et al. 1971; Kelly & Balch 1971; Elliott & Voss 1974; Figueira-McDonough 1983; LaGrange & White 1985; Figueira-McDonough 1986; DC Rowe 1986:523; Simcha-Fagan & Schwartz 1986:691; HR White et al. 1987:729; Wiatrowski & Anderson 1987; Grande 1988; Hawkins et al. 1988:263; Levine & Singer 1988:392; Gardner & Shoemaker 1989:490; DC Gottfredson et al. 1991:213; Agnew & White 1992:486; Cernkovich & Giordano 1992; Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 1993:691 (longitudinal); Steinberg et al. 1994:761 (school orientation); PH Jenkins 1995 (adolescents); Joseph 1996; Katimas et al. 1996; Herrenkohl et al. 2000 (violent delinquency); Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 2002:116 (♂s, school motivation, r = −.29); Chapple et al. 2005:372 (♂s, violent r = .52, property r = .39; ♀s, violent r = .45, property r = .41); Staff et al. 2010*; Li & Lerner 2011:239* (school engagement); TML Wong et al. 2013:Table 3 (school motivation); Wang & Fredricks 2014 (school engagement) OCEANIA New Zealand: BRE Wright et al. 1999b (at age 21)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Lurigio et al. 2008 (gang membership); Esbensen et al. 2009:325 (gang membership)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Kelly & Balch 1971; Burkett & Jensen 1975; Finnell & Jones 1975; Smith & Fogg 1978; Krohn et al. 1984; Johnston et al. 1986:29; Hawkins et al. 1988:263; McBride et al. 1991; Agnew & White 1992:486; Free 1994; Staff et al. 2010*; Li & Lerner 2011:239* (school engagement, use)

EUROPE Sweden: Stattin & Magnusson 1996:621 (CD) NORTH AMERICA United States: KG Hill, Howell et al. 1999:311 (commitment, gang membership, longitudinal); Melde & Esbensen 2011:534 (gang membership, longitudinal); Weerman 2012:280 (school bonding, gang membership); D Peterson & Morgan 2014:Table 2 (commitment, gang membership)

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  261

ASIA China: Zhang & Messner 1996 EUROPE Britain: Mitchell & Shepherd 1967; Wadsworth 1979; Sweden: Jonsson 1967:204 NORTH AMERICA United States: Healy & Bronner 1936:62; Merrill 1947:105; Polk & Halferty 1966; Rhodes & Reiss 1969; Sampson & Laub 1993b:111; Marshall & Webb 1994:334; Ward & Tittle 1994; Cao et al. 2004 (among low SES adolescents)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Ginsberg & Greenley 1978; Goe & Bachtel 1985

262  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.1.3  Future Orientation and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: van der Put et al. 2012:309 (aspiring for a better life)

EUROPE Portugal: Gouveia-Pereira et al. 2017 NORTH AMERICA Canada: LaGrange & Silverman 1999* (property & violent offenses, adolescents); Clinkinbeard 2014:Table 2

NORTH AMERICA Canada: LaGrange & Silverman 1999* (♀s, adolescents); United States: Peters et al. 2005

Positive Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Siegman 1961

Negative

EUROPE Germany: Trommsdorff & Lamm 1980 NORTH AMERICA United States: Barndt & Johnson 1955; Davids et al. 1962; Quay 1965a; Siegman 1966; Stein et al. 1966; Stein, Sarbin & Kulik 1968; Landau 1975

TABLE 6.1.4  Work Orientation and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data Overall NORTH AMERICA United States: Staff et al. 2010* (preference for working long hours)

Illegal Drugs NORTH AMERICA United States: Staff et al. 2010* (preference for working long hours)

Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Steinberg et al. 1994:761 (adolescents)

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Positive Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cohn & Modecki 2007:365* (♂s)

Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cohn & Modecki 2007:365* (♀s)

Various studies have been conducted to assess people’s opinions about their confidence in the legal system under which they live. As shown in Table 6.2.2, all of the studies located on people’s opinions regarding the criminal justice system have concluded that offenders are less supportive of statements about its legitimacy or value than are non-offenders.

6.2.3 Rebelliousness/Defiance Toward Authority

TABLE 6.2.1  Authoritarianism and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

6.2.2 Belief in the Legitimacy/Value of the Criminal Justice System

NORTH AMERICA United States: Eisenman et al. 1980 (marijuana use)

offending. They provided evidence of an inverse correlation between self-reported delinquency and authoritarianism, although one of the studies only found this to be true for females. Among males, there was no significant correlation (Table 6.2.1).

Studies have been undertaken to determine if offenders and non-offenders can be distinguished in terms of their general tendency to be rebellious, particularly toward authority figures (Rigby et al. 1987). As shown in Table 6.2.3, all of these studies have shown that criminal and antisocial individuals have more antagonistic attitudes toward authority than persons in general (Gorsuch & Butler 1976; Kazdin 1987b:189).

6.3 MORAL/POLITICAL ATTITUDES Morality and politics obviously are at the heart of conceptualizing and legitimizing what is considered crime and delinquency. This section will explore several ways in which attitudes pertaining to morality and politics seem to intersect with offending behavior.

6.3.1 Belief in a Just World Some people believe that the world is basically just or fair in the sense that people will be rewarded roughly in proportion to the degree they do good things (and punished in proportion to their doing bad things). Others see the world as inherently unfair, where many of the undeserving get rewarded, and those who do good often get punished

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  263

TABLE 6.2.2  Belief in the Legitimacy/Value of the Criminal Justice System and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Delinquency

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Peterson, Urban & Vondracek 1975; Carr, Napolitano & Keating 2007:467 (value the CJS for reducing crime)

ASIA China: Chui & Chan 2011 NORTH AMERICA United States: Chapple et al. 2005:372 (both violent & property offenses); Cohn & Modecki 2007:365; Cohn et al. 2010:303 (rule-violating behavior)

Positive Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Lurigio et al. 2008 (attitudes toward police, gang membership)

TABLE 6.2.3  Rebelliousness/Defiance Toward Authority and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Britain: TC Gibbens 1962 NORTH AMERICA Canada: LeBlanc 1992:344; United States: J Conger & Miller 1966; K Stein et al. 1966; Hindelang 1972; S Feldman & Weinberger 1994

MIDDLE EAST Turkey: Corapcioglu & Erdogan 2004 (in correctional centers) NORTH AMERICA United States: Tolman 1938; van der Put et al. 2012:309

EUROPE Britain: Reicher & Emler 1985*; Russia: Ruchkin et al. 1998b; Scotland: Reicher & Emler 1985*; N Emler & Reicher 1987; Tarry & Emler 2007:176 (r = .29) NORTH AMERICA United States: GF Jensen 1969; Buffalo & Rogers 1971; Hindelang 1973; Cernkovich 1978a; Cernkovich 1978b; Ginsberg & Greenley 1978; J Brook & Newcomb 1995:406; LE Ross 1994:80; Stacy & Newcomb 1995 OCEANIA Australia: Rigby et al. 1989; Heaven 1993:71

EUROPE Finland: Pulkkinen 1990 NORTH AMERICA United States: Blumenfield et al. 1972:607; GM Smith & Fogg 1978; R Jessor & Jessor 1977; R Jessor & Jessor 1978; DB Kandel 1978; Wingard et al. 1980; Chassin 1984; Johnston et al. 1986; Newcomb et al. 1986; Simcha-Fagan et al. 1986; J Stein et al. 1987; H White et al. 1987; Newcomb & Bentler 1988a; Cloninger et al. 1988

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Alleyne & Wood 2010 (anti-authority attitudes, gang membership) NORTH AMERICA United States: de Blois & Stewart 1980 (CD); KA Dodge 1985 (CD); Maziade et al. 1985 (CD)

Not significant Negative

(cynically stated: “No good deed goes unpunished”). Of course, most people are probably somewhere in the middle regarding these two belief options. Since 1980, many studies have sought to understand why people vary in their belief in a just world (BJW) (see Furnham 2014). However, only a few studies bearing on

the possible association between the BJW and offending behavior were located. As shown in Table 6.3.1, with a couple of failures to find significant correlations, most of these studies indicate that self-reported delinquency and antisocial behavior are inversely correlated with BJW.

264  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.3.1  Belief in a Just World and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cohn & Modecki 2007:365 (♂s)

EUROPE Britain: López-Pérez et al. 2017:Table 2 (among prisoners)

Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cohn & Modecki 2007:365 (♀s) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Donat et al. 2014:Figure 1*

ASIA India: Donat et al. 2014:Table 1* EUROPE Germany: Donat et al. 2014:Table 1*; Portugal: Correia & Dalbert 2008 (bullying)

6.3.2 Levels of Moral Reasoning In the late 1950s, psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1958) built on work by Jean Piaget (1932) suggesting that everyone develops a moral sense through identifiable stages, with some proceeding through these stages more rapidly than others (Carpendale 2000). Kohlberg’s basic idea is that a young child’s sense of right and wrong is entirely dictated by personal feelings of pleasure and pain, but that as children mature, this sense of morality gives way to moral principles based on what they are told by authority figures (e.g., parents, politicians, religious leaders, God). However, at what Kohlberg considered the highest stages of moral reasoning, one makes moral judgements based on certain universal principles, the most important being respect for the life and well-being of others in their social orbit: the broader the orbit, the higher level of morality one has reached. To determine the degree to which a person has a welldeveloped sense of morality, Kohlberg and his supporters usually present subjects with various moral dilemmas, none of which have an obvious right or wrong solution. An example might be someone who is extremely poor who faces the choice of either his/her mother dying of a treatable disease or stealing the medicine from a pharmacy to save her life. Respondents are asked what they would do under this set of conditions and are then asked to explain why they would make that particular decision. The kinds of reasoning respondents give for their decisions are thought to give researchers insight into where they fall on Kohlberg’s moral reasoning continuum (Rest 1979). Over the years, many studies have sought to determine if the moral reasoning of offenders differs from that of non-offenders. In other words, with age controlled, do offenders reason at lower levels than their law-abiding peers along the Kohlberg continuum? Table 6.3.2a provides a summary of the available evidence regarding

official measures of crime and delinquency. One can see that the evidence is mixed, although most studies have reported that persons involved in crime and delinquency reason at levels that are below those of persons who have never been convicted. A number of studies have also examined the relationship between moral reasoning and unofficial offending. Table 6.3.2b displays these results. As one can see, while several findings failed to report significant relationships, most of the results suggest that offenders exhibit less well-­ developed moral reasoning at a given age than do nonoffenders. The only exception involves illegal drug use, for which neither of the two studies found a significant negative correlation with moral reasoning, and one actually reported a positive correlation.

6.3.3 Neutralization Engaging in acts of delinquency and crime often causes feelings of guilt and shame. As a result, offenders are thought to make excuses for their antisocial behavior (Sykes & Matza 1957). For example, offenders might excuse engaging in thievery by believing “It’s okay to steal something from someone who is rich and can easily replace it” (Morris & Copes 2012:448). Or they might justify an assault or a rape by asserting that the victim deserved it or was just asking for it. Several studies have been undertaken to test the hypothesis that delinquents and criminals are more likely to espouse neutralization arguments regarding criminal conduct than are persons in general. As Table 6.3.3 shows, all of the available studies have found a positive relationship between neutralizing tendencies and offending. In addition, a few studies indicate that gang members, especially those with aggressive tendencies, are more likely to endorse neutralizing statements than are non-gang members.

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  265

TABLE 6.3.2a  Levels of Moral Reasoning and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data General

Delinquency

Recidivism

Positive

NORTH AMERICA United States: Petronio 1980:56 (N = 38)

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Kantner 1985 (♂s)

NORTH AMERICA United States: CO Weber 1926; Ruma 1967; Hudgins & Prentice 1973; Miller et al. 1974; Haviland 1977; Kendall et al. 1977 (♂s); Schmidlin 1977; Hains & Ryan 1983:1540

EUROPE Germany: Bock & Hosser 2014 (SES & IQ controlled, ♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Petronio 1980

Negative

MIDDLE EAST Israel: Addad & Leslau 1990* NORTH AMERICA Canada: Parlett et al. 1975; United States: Ravitch 1973; Deardorff & Finch 1975; Parlett et al. 1975; Kantner 1976; Griffore & Samuels 1978; Hartnett & Shumate 1980; Craig & Truitt 1996

ASIA Taiwan: Chen & Horwitt 2007 EUROPE Britain: Eshel et al. 1968; Scotland: Emler et al. 1978*; Netherlands: Brugman & Aleva 2004 (♂s) MIDDLE EAST Israel: Sagi & Eisikovits 1981; Addad & Leslau 1990* NORTH AMERICA Canada: Trevethan & Walker 1989; Chandler & Moran 1990 (moral development); United States: Betke 1944; Kohlberg 1958; Rest et al. 1969; Fodor 1972; Hickey 1972; Hudgins & Prentice 1973; Hawk & Peterson 1974; McColgan 1976; McColgan 1976; Jurkovic & Prentice 1977; Hains & Miller 1980; Gavaghan et al. 1983; Hains 1984; Hanson & Mullis 1984; Basinger & Gibbs 1987; Lee & Prentice 1988; Chandler & Moran 1990 (♂s); Bartek et al. 1993 (♀s) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Stams et al. 2006

EUROPE Denmark: Hosser et al. 2008 (♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Jennings et al. 1983; Buttel 2002 OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Stams et al. 2006* (psychopathy); Van Vugt et al. 2011 (moral cognition r = −.20, moral emotion/empathy r = −.11)

TABLE 6.3.2b  Levels of Moral Reasoning and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

NORTH AMERICA United States: LanzaKaduce et al. 1983:450

Positive

Not significant

EUROPE Britain: Tarry & Emler 2007:176; Netherlands: Beerthuizen et al. 2013:466* (♀s); Scotland: Emler et al. 1978*; Renwick & Emler 1984* OVERVIEW Literature Review: Blasi 1980 (5/15 studies)

Negative

ASIA China: C Cheng 2014:138 EUROPE Britain: Renwick & Emler 1984*; Palmer & Hollin 1996:180; Netherlands: Beerthuizen et al. 2013:466* (♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Lanza-Kaduce et al. 1983:453; Little & Robinson 1989 (among DUI offenders, ♂s, r = .24); Trevethan & Walker 1989*; GD Walters 2014 (moral disengagement) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Blasi 1980 (10/15 studies); Smetana 1990; Walters 2002; Meta-Analysis: JR Nelson et al. 1990 (mostly based on self-reports); Stams et al. 2006 (d = −.76)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Haier 1976 OVERVIEW Literature Review: Blasi 1980

EUROPE Britain: RJR Blair 1995:12 (APD); O’Kane et al. 1996* (psychopathy, after ­controlling for IQ) NORTH AMERICA United States: Chandler & Moran 1990:243 (APD); Richards et al. 1992 (CD) ASIA China: X Wang, Lei et al. 2017:Table 1 (aggression among ♂ juvenile offenders, moral engagement) EUROPE Britain: O’Kane et al. 1996* (psychopathy); RJR Blair 1997 (psychopathy, ♂s); L Fisher & Blair 1998 (psychopathic tendencies); RJR Blair 1999 (CD); RJR Blair, Monson 2001 (CD); Dhingra et al. 2015 (moral engagement, psychopathy especially Factor 1); Netherlands: van Vugt et al. 2012 (among sex offenders, psychopathy) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Trevethan & Walker 1989 (APD); United States: Fodor 1973 (APD); Campagna & Harter 1975 (psychopathy among delinquent ♂s); Bear & Richards 1981 (CD); McColgan et al. 1983 (CD); Kegan 1986 (APD); Trevethan & Walker 1989* (psychopathy)

266  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.3.3  Neutralization and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Recidivism

Overall

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive

NORTH AMERICA United States: Shields & Whitehall 1994 (adolescents)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Agnew 1994; Costello & Vowell 1999; Wiebe 2003; Wiebe 2004:46 & 49; Wiebe 2006; Esbensen et al. 2009:325* (violent); Morris & Copes 1012

NORTH AMERICA United States: Esbensen et al. 2009:325* (gang membership); Melde & Esbensen 2011:534 (gang membership, longitudinal); D Peterson & Morgan 2014:141 (gang membership & aggression)

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.3.4  Right-Wing/Left-Wing Political Persuasion and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Right-wing higher

Official Data

Self-Report Data

Violent, Sex, or Property

General

NORTH AMERICA United States: LaFree, Jensen et al. 2018:248 (violent religious/ political extremists)

EUROPE Sweden: Rydgren & Ruth 2011 (ecological: municipalities)

Illegal Drug Use

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Lilienfeld et al. 2014 (political conservatism & psychopathy)

Not significant Left-wing higher

6.3.4 Right-Wing/Left-Wing Political Persuasion Political attitudes can be arrayed along a right-wing/ left-wing political spectrum (Judd & Milburn 1980:643; Henningham 1996). In essence, right-wing attitudes emphasize freedom and self-reliance as the most important bases for political decision-making. Left-wing attitudes, on the other hand, place paramount importance on compassion and responsibility for the welfare of everyone as the overriding goal when deciding political issues (Ekehammar et al. 1987; Evans et al. 1996; Bartle 1998:516). A few studies have sought to determine if people who hold different right-wing/left-wing political perspectives vary in their involvement in offending behavior. As one can see by viewing Table 6.3.4, the findings are not consistent. A couple of studies indicate that support for a right-wing political philosophy is positively correlated with psychopathy, and, at an ecological level, with general criminality.

NORTH AMERICA United States: Gergen et al. 1972; Gordon 1972; Ritter 1972; BD Johnson 1973; Kohn et al. 1985

However, illegal drug use appears to be positively correlated with having liberal (left-wing) political attitudes.

6.3.5 Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Deviant/Non-Conforming Behavior The word deviance is difficult to precisely define, partly because its meaning can vary from one culture or even subculture to another. Nevertheless, most forms of deviance tend to be statistically unusual as well as morally unpopular within a given society. Table 6.3.5 summarizes the results of studies undertaken to determine if individuals who engage in delinquency and crime are more or less tolerant of deviance than those who rarely or never do. Findings suggest that liberal and tolerant attitudes toward deviance in general are positively correlated with offending according to nearly all available research.

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  267

TABLE 6.3.5  Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Deviant/Non-Conforming Behavior and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data General

Delinquency

NORTH AMERICA United States: Calabrese & Adams 1990 (accepting antisocietal norms) OCEANIA New Zealand: Krueger et al. 1994

EUROPE Belgium: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bogaert & Rushton 1989; Vermeiren et al. 2004:572*

Self-Reported Data Recidivism

Overall

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Belgium: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* (delinquency); Britain: Reicher & Emler 1985; Netherlands: Junger-Tas 1992 NORTH AMERICA United States: Hogan & Mookherjee 1981:54; Agnew 1991; Empey & Stafford 1991; Thornberry et al. 1991; Jensen & Rojek 1992; Vermeiren et al. 2004:572*

NORTH AMERICA United States: Suchman 1968; R Blum 1970; R Jessor & Jessor 1977; Ginsberg & Greenley 1978; CS Sellers et al. 1993

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Mills & Kroner 1997

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.3.6  Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Illegal Drug Use and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Not significant

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Violent, Sex, or Property

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Farrington, Loeber & Berg 2012:110 (homicide)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Thornberry et al. 1994; Zhang et al. 1997

Illegal Drugs NORTH AMERICA United States: Martino & Truss 1973; Cockerham 1977; Kohn et al. 1979; Wingard et al. 1979; Fors & Rojek 1983:214; Krohn et al. 1984; Winfree & Griffiths 1985; Burkett & Warren 1987; Blau et al. 1988; Brook et al. 1988:151; O’Donnell et al. 1995b:534; Rienzi et al. 1996:343; Marsiglia et al. 2010 (pro-drug attitudes, Mexican American adolescents)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior NORTH AMERICA United States: Dinh et al. 2002:302 (externalizing behavior & gang involvement, adolescent Hispanics)

EUROPE Britain: DJ West & Farrington 1973:52

Negative

6.3.6 Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Illegal Drug Use

6.3.7 Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Illegal/Antisocial Activity

Quite a few researchers have examined the possible association between liberal attitudes toward drug use and offending behavior. Table 6.3.6 summarizes the results of these studies. As can be seen, all but one of the studies reported a significant positive correlation between liberal attitudes toward illegal drug use and criminal or antisocial behavior (including the actual use of illegal drugs).

One of the most prominent criminological theories of the 20th century is known as differential association theory (Sutherland 1947). A major tenet of this theory is that crime results from individuals subscribing to “an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to law violations” (Cressey 1952:44). Table 6.3.7 shows that there is considerable support for this hypothesis, particularly regarding delinquency.

268  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.3.7  Tolerant/Favorable Attitudes Toward Illegal/Antisocial Activity and Offending Behavior. Official Data Nature of Relationship

Positive

Violent, Sex, or Property NORTH AMERICA United States: Farrington & Loeber 2011:64 (homicide, toward delinquency); Farrington, Loeber & Berg 2012:110 (homicide)

Self-Reported Data

Clinical/ Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Illegal Drugs

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

NORTH AMERICA Canada: SW Baron 2003 (self-control statistically controlled)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Simourd & Van de Ven 1999; United States: van der Put et al. 2012:308 (favorable attitudes toward law violations)

ASIA China: Chui & Chan 2011 (adolescents) EUROPE Britain: DJ Smith & McAra 2004:Table 2; France: Hartjen & Priyadarsini 2003; Germany: Oberwittler 2004:222; Seddig 2014 (pro-violence attitudes, violent crime) NORTH AMERICA United States: Matsueda & Heimer 1987; Heimer & Matsueda 1994 (prodelinquency attitudes, ♂s); YH Lee 1998 (Korean Americans, favorable attitudes toward law violations); Halgunseth et al. 2013

EUROPE Russia: Knyazev 2004 (adolescents)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: MA Campbell et al. 2007 (antisocial attitudes); United States: KG Hill et al. 1999:311 (gang membership among adolescents, longitudinal); Brownfield 2003 (definitions favorable to law violations, gang membership)

Not significant Negative

6.4 NEGATIVITY People vary in the extent to which they have favorable and unfavorable attitudes toward nearly all aspects of life. This section deals with studies of four different types of negative attitudes: alienation, cynicism, guilt and shame, and negative affect generally.

TABLE 6.4.1  Alienation and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

6.4.1 Alienation A few studies have been published on whether feelings of alienation from one’s social environment are correlated with involvement in crime and delinquency. Table 6.4.1 shows that all of these studies have concluded that offenders are more alienated than non-offenders.

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Delinquency

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Duke & Fenhagen 1975 (♀s); Calabrese & Adams 1990

OCEANIA Australia: Sankey & Huon 1999; New Zealand: Krueger et al. 1994:333 (mostly self-report with some official data)

Not significant Negative

6.4.2 Cynicism

6.4.3 Guilt/Remorse/Shame

A few studies were located concerning cynicism. They compared delinquents and non-delinquents regarding the tendency to be cynical. As shown in Table 6.4.2, most of a relatively few number of studies found a positive relationship between cynicism and offending behavior.

Almost everyone knows what it is like to feel guilty and remorseful for things they have done. Nevertheless, some people rarely, if ever, have such feelings except in the context of risking identification and punishment. As shown in Table 6.4.3, studies of relationships between feelings of guilt,

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  269

remorse, and shame, while limited, all indicate that these feelings are inversely correlated with offending behavior.

TABLE 6.4.2  Cynicism and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data Recidivism

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Fagan & Piquero 2007 (self-reported recidivism; cynicism toward the CJS)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Fagan & Tyler 2005 (cynicism toward the CJS); Reisig et al. 2011 (cynicism toward the CJS) NORTH AMERICA United States: BRE Wright et al. 2001 (cynicism in general)

Not significant

Negative

6.4.4 Negative Affect Negative affect refers to the tendency to be unfriendly toward others and to have a sour outlook on life in general. It can also often include hostility and anger toward others. The word grumpy comes close to meaning the same thing as negative affect, although negative affect can also be linked to anxiety and depression. While negative affect may include degrees of depression, the intention is to consider depression separately (as a form of mental illness later in this chapter). As one can see from Table 6.4.4, the evidence has fairly consistently indicated that delinquents and criminals are more prone than their relatively law-abiding peers to exhibit negative affect. The only exceptions were a couple of studies having to do with illegal drug use.

TABLE 6.4.3  Guilt/Remorse/Shame and Offending Behavior.

Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Huesmann et al. 2002:195 (expressing guilt in childhood & arrest later in life)

EUROPE Netherlands: Schalkwijk et al. 2014 (adolescents, offenders vs. non-offenders) NORTH AMERICA Canada: R Robinson, Roberts et al. 2007; United States: Farrington & Loeber 1999:286 (longitudinal, ♂s)

EUROPE Germany: Hosser et al. 2008 (guilt having to do with crime, ♂s)

EUROPE Sweden: Svensson 2004 (guilt) NORTH AMERICA United States: StouthamerLoeber et al. 2002:116 (♂s, r = .26); Farrington et al. 2003:232 (♂s); Esbensen et al. 2009:325* (violent)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Farrington & Loeber 2011:61 (homicide); Farrington, Loeber & Berg 2012:108 (homicide, ♂s)

EUROPE Germany: Benesch et al. 2014 (CU); Scotland: Cooke & Michie 1997 (antisocial behavior & psychopathy) NORTH AMERICA United States: Fowles & Kochanska 2000 (CU, preschoolers); AB Loper et al. 2001 (psychopathy); Esbensen et al. 2009:325* (gang membership); Melde & Esbensen 2011:530 (feeling guilty in childhood, gang membership, longitudinal); D Peterson & Morgan 2014:141 (gang membership & aggression)

270  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.4.4  Negative Affect and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Delinquency

Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: Conger & Miller 1966:144; HR White et al. 1987:729; Caspi, Moffitt et al. 1994* (negative emotionality) OCEANIA New Zealand: Caspi, Moffitt et al. 1994* (negative emotionality); Krueger et al. 1994:333*

NORTH AMERICA United States: Stice & Gonzales 1998:21* OCEANIA New Zealand: Krueger et al. 1994:333*

NORTH AMERICA United States: Lerner & Vicary 1984; Labouvie et al. 1990; Caspi et al. 1994:185; Rothbart et al. 1994 OCEANIA Australia: Heaven 1994:451* (♀s); Krueger et al. 1996

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cameron 1978 (CD); Maziade et al. 1990 (CD); Carlo et al. 1998 (CD)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Stice & Gonzales 1998:21* OCEANIA Australia: Heaven 1994:451* (♂s)

Negative

6.5 SELF-REFLECTED ATTITUDES Attitudes of a self-reflective nature are given attention in this section. The four specific topics addressed are individualism/collectivism, internal–external locus of control, happiness/life satisfaction, and self-esteem/ self-concept.

6.5.1 Individualism/Collectivism Individualism refers to the notion that an individual is autonomous and separate from others, while the concept of collectivism refers to individuals conceiving of themselves as part of a group. Studies have shown that as a general rule, people living in Western cultures tend to be more individualistic, while those from Eastern/Asian cultures are more collectivistic (e.g., Singelis et al. 1995). Examples of the sort of statements used to measure individualism are “I often do my own thing,” “Competition is the law of nature,” and “Everyone must put his/her own interests first,” while statements considered indicative of collectivism are “I usually accept the attitudes of the majority in groups to which I belong,” “I feel good when I cooperate with others,” and “It is much more important to help others than it is to mind your own business” (Le & Stockdale 2005:684; Chen et al. 2015:Table 2). As shown in Table 6.5.1, three studies were located on how individualism-collectivism was related to offending. Based on self-reports, all three studies reported that those who value individualism more than collectivism were more likely to be delinquent (Table 6.5.1).

TABLE 6.5.1  Individualism/Collectivism and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Individualism higher

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: J Sweeney 1999:65 (shoplifting); Le & Stockdale 2005:Table 2 (among Asian Americans)

ASIA China: Du et al. 2014

Not significant Collectivism higher

6.5.2 Internal–External Locus of Control People vary in the extent to which they perceive themselves to be “the captain of their own ship” as opposed to being guided, if not actually controlled, by forces external to themselves (Rotter 1966). Various multi-item questionnaire scales have been developed to measure what is known as internal/external locus of control (Nowicki & Strickland 1973). People who believe they are very much “masters of their own fate” are said to have internal control, whereas those who think that their actions are often being manipulated by outside forces are said to have external control. The two main sources of external control are chance/fate and “powerful others,” either natural or supernatural (Richter et al. 1996).

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  271

A number of studies have been conducted since the 1970s to determine if persons who are most prone toward criminality might be “internals” or “externals.” As shown in Table 6.5.2, most of the research suggests that perceived external control is significantly more common among those who have engaged in delinquency and crime to the greatest extent.

6.5.3 Happiness/Life Satisfaction Little research was located pertaining to any association between offending and happiness. As shown in Table 6.5.3, those located suggest that the association is negative.

6.5.4 Self-Esteem/Self-Concept Self-esteem refers to whether a person views himself/herself in favorable or unfavorable terms. The only method social scientists have for measuring self-esteem involves selfreports (Cobb et al. 1966; Bennett et al. 1971). Obviously, feelings of self-esteem tend to fluctuate as people’s experiences change from day to day. Nevertheless, research has

shown that on average some people have much higher overall feelings of self-esteem than do others (Rosenberg 1965). So much research has been conducted on relationships between self-esteem and offending behavior that findings are summarized in two sub-tables. Table 6.5.4a presents the results pertaining to official data. It shows that the majority of studies indicate that the self-esteem of offenders is below that of other persons. Nonetheless, some exceptions have been reported, suggesting that the relationship does not appear to be strong, especially regarding any association between self-esteem and recidivism. Table 6.5.4b summarizes findings regarding how selfesteem is correlated with self-reported offending as well as with clinical and personality indicators of antisocial behavior. The findings are quite mixed, albeit slightly favoring an inverse correlation.

6.5.5 Selfishness/Self-Centeredness Selfishness or self-centeredness refers to prioritizing one’s own benefit when making decisions, as opposed to prioritizing benefits for others. The concept of self-serving cognitive

TABLE 6.5.2  Internal–External Locus of Control and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data Delinquency

Self-Reported Data Recidivism

Overall

Illegal Drugs

More internal Not significant

More external

NORTH AMERICA United States: Valliant et al. 1983

NORTH AMERICA United States: Conger & Miller 1966:138; Duke & Fenhagen 1975; Beck & Ollendick 1976; Kumchy & Sawyer 1980 OCEANIA Hawaii: EE Werner 1987:31

NORTH AMERICA United States: Farley & Sewell 1976 OCEANIA Australia: Peiser & Heaven 1996 EUROPE Germany: Richter et al. 1996 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Andrews & Friesen 1987

NORTH AMERICA United States: Hogan & Mookherjee 1981; Parrott & Strongman 1984; Keilitz & Dunivant 1986 OCEANIA Australia: JM Shaw & Scott 1991

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Currie et al. 1977; United States: Obitz et al. 1973; Carman 1977

TABLE 6.5.3  Happiness/Life Satisfaction and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

General

Overall

AFRICA Egypt: Megreya 2015:86

ASIA Korea: E Cho 2016

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Valois et al. 2001 (violence, adolescents) OCEANIA Australia: Rigby & Slee 1991 (bullying, adolescents)

TABLE 6.5.4a  Self-Esteem/Self-Concept and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data Victimless

General

Delinquency

Recidivism NORTH AMERICA United States: Byrd et al. 1993

Positive

Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Pandina & Schuele 1983 (drugs); Ress & Wilborn 1983 (drugs)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Trzesniewski et al. 2006:387 (convictions)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Dietz 1969; Calhoun et al. 1984

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cox 1996:21

ASIA South Korea: Kim 1967 EUROPE Britain: Eyo-Isidore 1981; Germany: Imbach et al. 2013 (♂s) MIDDLE EAST Saudi Arabia: Hilmi 1988 NORTH AMERICA United States: Dorn 1968; Fitts & Hamner 1969; HB Kaplan 1975a; Martinez et al. 1979; Lund & Salary 1980; Truckenmiller 1982:84; Singh et al. 1986; Ward & Tittle 1994; Edwards 1996:980

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Gendreau et al. 1979; United States: Gendreau et al. 1979; Thornton, Beech & Marshall 2004 (sex offenders, ♂s)

TABLE 6.5.4b  Self-Esteem/Self-Concept and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

EUROPE Hungary: Piko et al. 2005* NORTH AMERICA United States: Piko et al. 2005*

EUROPE Spain: Luengo et al. 1994 NORTH AMERICA United States: Kinnier et al. 1994

NORTH AMERICA United States: Friedman, Mann & Friedman 1975 (gang membership); Pakiz et al. 1992 (CD); Esbensen & Deschenes 1998* (gang membership, ♂s) OCEANIA Australia: Rigby & Slee 1991 (school age, bullying)

Not significant

EUROPE Spain: Luengo et al. 1994 NORTH AMERICA United States: Atkins 1974; DW Mann 1976; M Gold 1978; McCarthy & Hoge 1984*; Jang & Thornberry 1998 (delinquency); MD Resnick et al. 2004:Table 4 (violent); CT Barry et al. 2007; Esbensen et al. 2009:325 (self-esteem & violent)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Bennett 1974; Galli & Stone 1975; Richek et al. 1975; R Jessor & Jessor 1977; Barrett et al. 1991; S Moore et al. 1996

NORTH AMERICA United States: Esbensen & Deschenes 1998* (gang membership, ♀s); Seals & Young 2003 (adolescents, selfreport bullying) OCEANIA Australia: Rigby & Cox 1994* (self-esteem & bullying, ♂s)

Negative

AFRICA Kenya: Kabiru et al. 2014:Table 3 ASIA China: Leung & Lau 1989 EUROPE Britain: DJ Smith & McAra 2004 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Annis et al. 1971; DE Riggs 1973; Faulkner et al. 2007:159; United States: Peterson et al. 1961; Matchett 1971; GF Jensen 1972a; HB Kaplan 1975a; HB Kaplan 1976; HB Kaplan 1978; HB Kaplan 1980; Bynner et al. 1981:420; Hogan & Mookherjee 1981; R Hogan & Jones 1983:17; McCarthy & Hoge 1984*; Rosenberg 1978; Schweitzer et al. 1992; Fletcher, Darling et al. 1995 (adolescents); Weist et al. 1998 (self-concept); Donnellan et al. 2005:329*; Bámaca & Umana-Taylor 2006 (Mexican American adolescents) OCEANIA Australia: Cole et al. 1989; Heaven 1993:73; Heaven 1996; Rigby & Cox 1996; New Zealand: DM Fergusson et al. 2002 INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Cormier et al. 1973 OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Mier & Ladny 2018 (predominantly self-reported crime & delinquency)

NORTH AMERICA United States: RA Ball 1977:114; Burke et al. 1978; Smith & Fogg 1978; HB Kaplan 1980; Bry et al. 1982; MG Miller et al. 1982; LS Wright & Moore 1982; Bry 1983; Chassin 1984; Dielman et al. 1984; HB Kaplan 1985; Steffenhagen & Steffenhagen 1985; Dielman et al. 1987; H White et al. 1987:729; Blau et al. 1988; Kaestner 1997:168

EUROPE Ireland: O’Moore & Hillery 1989 (school age, bullying); Portugal: Pechorro et al. 2014 (psychopathy) NORTH AMERICA United States: Florian-Lacy et al. 2002 (gang membership); Donnellan et al. 2005:333* (aggression & externalizing behavior, adolescents); Dmitrieva et al. 2014 (among arrested juveniles, gang membership) OCEANIA Australia: Rigby & Cox 1994* (self-esteem & ­bullying, ♀s)

Inverted U-Shape

ASIA China: C Cheng 2014:138

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  273

TABLE 6.5.5  Self-Centeredness and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data

Self-Report Data

Violent, Sex, or Property

Overall

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

NORTH AMERICA United States: McCrady et al. 2008 (SSCD, sex offenses)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Liau, Barriga & Gibbs 1998 (SSCD)

EUROPE France: Chabrol et al. 2011 (SSCD) NORTH AMERICA United States: D Peterson & Morgan 2014:141* (gang membership & aggression)

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.6.1  Attachment to Others and Offending Behavior. Self-Reported Data

Nature of Relationship

Overall

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Chapple et al. 2005:372 (attachment to peers, violent & property, ♀s)

Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Matsueda & Heimer 1987 (attachment to parents & peers); JP Allen, Hauser & Borman-Spurrell 1996 (family attachments, longitudinal); Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 1993:693 (attachment to parents, longitudinal); Marcus & Betzer 1996 (attachment to parents & peers); Cooper, Shaver & Collins 1998:1388*; Chapple et al. 2005:372 (attachment to parents ♂s & ♀s; attachment to peers, violent & property, ♂s)

distortion (SSCD) has similar connotations. To measure these concepts, respondents are asked to rate their degree of agreement with statements such as “I always put my own wellbeing above the wellbeing of others” and “When I really want something, I’ll do whatever it takes to get it.” Research on how these selfishness concepts correlate with offending is limited. Nonetheless, as shown in Table 6.5.5, findings have consistently indicated that criminal and antisocial behaviors positively correlate with selfishness and kindred concepts.

6.6 SOCIAL PREFERENCES This section deals with people’s social preferences relative to their involvement in criminal and antisocial behavior. Specific topics include attachment to others, enjoyment of school, familism, and enjoyment of violent television programs.

6.6.1 Attachment to Others Several studies have investigated the correlation between friendly social attachment to others (i.e., primarily to parents and peers) and offending behavior. Table 6.6.1 shows

NORTH AMERICA United States: Cooper, Shaver & Collins 1998:1388*

NORTH AMERICA United States: Patterson, DeBaryshe & Ramsey 1989 (antisocial behavior, attachment to parents & peers); JP Allen, Porter et al. 2007 (externalizing behavior)

that most of these studies have concluded that offenders are less likely to feel strong favorable attachments to others than is true for non-offenders.

6.6.2 Enjoying School Several studies have sought to determine if individuals who enjoy school are more or less likely to be involved in criminal and antisocial behavior. The results are shown in Table 6.6.2. All studies agree that those who enjoy education the most are least likely to engage in offending behavior.

6.6.3 Familism The concept of familism refers to strong feelings of loyalty and concern for one’s family. It is most often assessed by a parent by asking questions about how important a close-knit family network is in their particular household (Morcillo et al. 2011). As shown in Table 6.6.3, of the few studies located, most of them have concluded that familism is negatively correlated with self-reported delinquency involvement. This conclusion can be partially understood by noting that familism and close parental monitoring of offspring appear to be positively

274  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.6.2  Enjoying School and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Delinquency

Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: McCord et al. 2001; Fine et al. 2016

EUROPE Britain: Graham & Bowling 1995; DJ Smith & McAra 2004:Table 2; Germany: Titzmann et al. 2008 (school bonding); Lösel & Bender 2014; Sweden: Mansel 2003 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Sprott et al. 2005; (longitudinal); United States: Thornberry et al. 1991; Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 1993:691 (longitudinal); Fine, Mahler et al. 2016:1896 (adolescents) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Junger-Tas et al. 2003

NORTH AMERICA United States: Milman & Su 1973 (interest in school)

Positive Not significant Negative

ASIA China NORTH AMERICA United States: KG Hill et al. 1999:311 (school attachment & gang membership, longitudinal); Herrenkohl et al. 2003 (adolescents, teacher ratings of physical aggression)

TABLE 6.6.3  Familism and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Report Data Overall

Drug Use

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Morcillo et al. 2011* (childhood antisocial behavior, Puerto Rican ♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Sommers et al. 1993 (Puerto Rican adolescents); Vega et al. 1993 (Cuban American adolescents)

NORTH AMERICA United States: CR Martinez 2006 (Hispanics)

correlated (Romero & Ruiz 2007), and, as reported in Chapter 4, numerous studies have found parental monitoring to be also inversely correlated with offspring delinquency.

6.6.4 Preference for Violent Television Programs In Chapter 5, studies were reviewed regarding the association between viewing violent mass media and offending behavior. Here, attention is given to the few studies on how preferences for watching violent television programs correlate with antisocial behavior. In Table 6.6.4, one can see that the located studies all agree that these preferences are positively correlated with engaging in aggression and violence. Of course, the causal significance of these findings cannot be discerned from these merely correlational studies (Table 6.6.4).

NORTH AMERICA United States: Smokowski & Bacallao 2006 (aggression, Hispanic adolescents); Morcillo et al. 2011*(childhood antisocial behavior, Puerto Rican ♀s)

TABLE 6.6.4  Preference for Violent Television Programs and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive

EUROPE Britain: Gunter 1983 (aggression) NORTH AMERICA United States: Eron et al. 1972:Table 2 (preference at age 8, violence at age 18, especially for ♂s); Fenigstein 1979 (aggression); Boxer et al. 2009 (aggression)

Not significant Negative

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  275

6.7 LEARNING ABILITY AND INTELLIGENCE No matter how one defines the term, intelligence is undoubtedly one of the hallmark features of the human species. Nonetheless, there is considerable variation in intelligence from one person to another. Some aspects of intelligence appear to be reflected in terms of academic ability, while other aspects are more elusive. In this section, findings of relationships between criminal/delinquent behavior and intelligence (along with related concepts) are summarized.

6.7.1 Academic Performance/Achievement  (Grade Point Average) A very large number of studies have investigated possible links between grades in school and involvement in crime according to official statistics, so much so that the results are presented in two sub-tables. As shown in Table 6.7.1a, nearly all of the research on academic performance and official offending measures has concluded that those with low grades are more likely to be arrested, convicted, or imprisoned. According to all but one study, they are also more likely to recidivate once they have left prison. Regarding unofficial measures of offending, Table 6.7.1b provides a picture that resembles Table 6.7.1a. With just a few exceptions, individuals who do poorly in school as far as grades are concerned are more likely to self-report involvement in crime and delinquency. Most of the exceptions have to do with illegal drugs. Likewise, individuals who obtain poor grades are more likely than their betterperforming classmates to be assessed as having one or more antisocial personality or behavior traits.

6.7.2 Intelligence The first standardized tests of intelligence began to be developed at the beginning of the 20th century in France (McFarland 1981:311). The main objective of the developers was to identify children at an early age who could benefit from remedial help in their academic development (Stelmack et al. 1995:447; Ackerman & Heggestad 1997:219). It is not surprising, therefore, that scores on tests of intelligence correlate more strongly with academic performance than almost any other variable, especially in core subject areas when the full range of both variables is sampled. The correlations reported in most studies are between .50 and .60 (Eysenck 1979; Scarr & Carter-Saltzman 1982:831; Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham 2008). Many studies have explored the relationship between intelligence and offending behavior, so much so that two

sub-tables are used to summarize what has been revealed. Table 6.7.2a summarizes findings from studies based on official crime and delinquency. It shows that most studies have linked offending with significantly lower scores on intelligence tests. In essence, persistent and serious offenders score about eight points (or half a standard deviation) lower than do individuals in the general population (Hirschi & Hindelang 1977; Lynam et al. 1993:187). Nonetheless, there are several exceptions, mostly studies reporting no significant correlation. The greatest number of exceptional studies comes from studying IQ and recidivism. Findings bearing on the association between intelligence and self-reported offending are summarized in Table 6.7.2b. One can see that as with official data, most of the evidence points toward an inverse relationship. Comparing Table 6.7.2b with Table 6.7.2a seems pertinent to an old argument that some have made to explain why most studies have found an inverse correlation between intelligence and criminality: i.e., “only the dumb ones get caught” (Doleschal & Klapmuts 1973). If this were true, one would expect to see little if any significant correlation between IQ and self-reported crime. In fact, by comparing the findings reported in Table 6.7.2a and Table 6.7.2b, one finds almost the same pattern: Both official data and self-reported data largely report significant inverse correlations with IQ. It seems worth noting that one type of self-reported offending exhibits no consistent association with IQ. This involves drug offenses, suggesting that this type of offending is only minimally related to variations in IQ. Table 6.7.2b also summarizes findings regarding links between intelligence and clinical/personality indicators of antisocial behavior. Most of the studies report significant inverse correlations, particularly regarding childhood conduct disorders (CD). Interestingly, most of the studies of IQ and psychopathy reported finding no significant correlation. Finally, to add more complexity to the issue of IQ and offending behavior, one study reported an inverted U-shape relationship between self-reported offending and intelligence (instead of the typical linear relationship). This study was based on a large sample of over 2000 white males (Mears & Cochran 2013). Their IQs ranged from well below normal (i.e., 75–85) to well above normal (i.e., 125–130). The offenses that respondents were asked to report on ranged from running away from home and smoking marijuana to robbery, auto theft, and assault (with the former type of offenses being much more commonly reported than the latter). According to this study, the overall rates of offending were highest for individuals with IQ scores in the low normal range (i.e., 88–93). Offending rates then gradually declined as one moved toward both the highest and the lowest IQ categories. Thus, the self-reported offending rates for the males with IQs below 88 were similar to rates for the males

Nature of Relationship

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

Positive Not significant Negative

EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1989 (violent) NORTH AMERICA United States: Andrew 1979 (violent)

EUROPE Britain: H Ellis 1910:132; Farrington 1993a:16; Farrington 1995 (♂s); Farrington 1997b:97; Denmark: Raine et al. 1994; Sweden: Kirkegaard-Sorensen & Mednick 1977 NORTH AMERICA United States: Silberberg & Silberberg 1971 (arrests); Polk 1975*; Robins 1979 OCEANIA New Zealand: Jakobsen et al. 2012 (conviction, parental criminality, single parent home & peer delinquency controlled, longitudinal) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Siegel & Senna 1988:302; Maguin & Loeber 1996; Foley 2001 (including delinquency)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Kupersmidt & Coie 1998

NORTH AMERICA United States: Myner et al. 1998:77

ASIA China: Gao 1986; Taiwan: Wang & Jensen 2003:74 EUROPE Britain: Burt 1925; Burt 1931; Gibbens 1963; Offord et al. 1978; Farrington 1979; Nagin & Land 1993:352; Finland: Rantakallio et al. 1995; M Cannon et al. 2002 (among schizophrenics); Poland: Zabczyaska 1977; Scotland: Ferguson 1952:29; Sweden: Jonsson 1975:184; Sarnecki & Sollenhag 1985; Stattin & Klackenberg-Larsson 1993:372 (♂s) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Gomme 1982; Frechette & LeBlanc 1987; Tremblay et al. 1992; Le Blanc 1994; United States: Sullivan 1927; Glueck & Glueck 1934b:87; Bond & Fendrick 1936; Healy & Bronner 1936:61; Moore 1936; Moore 1937; Kvaraceus 1945:141; Glueck & Glueck 1950; Reiss & Rhodes 1961:723; Slocum & Stone 1963:205; Palmore & Hammond 1964; Short & Strodtbeck 1965:238; Robins & Hill 1966:329; Polk 1969*; Rhodes & Reiss 1969; Burns 1971; Empey & Lubeck 1971; Kelly 1971; Kelly & Balch 1971*; Venezia 1971; Wolfgang et al. 1972; Feldhusen et al. 1973; Frease 1973; Kelly & Pink 1973; Swift et al. 1973; Kelly 1974; Mauser 1974; Polk et al. 1974; Poremba 1975; GF Jensen 1976:382; Noblit 1976; Ackerman et al. 1977; Bazemore & Noblit 1978; Jerse & Fakouri 1978; Phillips & Kelly 1979; Broder et al. 1981; Eron 1982:201; Elifson et al. 1983:521; Meltzer et al. 1984; Figueira-McDonough 1983; Plutchik 1983:70; Farnworth et al. 1985; Lawrence 1985; Davis, Snager & Morris-Friehe 1991; Lawrence 1991; Beebe & Mueller 1993 (especially for violent delinquency); Steinberg et al. 1994:761; Ward & Tittle 1994; Rowe 1997:150*; Farrington & Loeber 1999:285 (longitudinal, ♂s); Acoca 2000; Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 2002:116 (♂ adolescents); Farrington, Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber 2003:226 (SR + ­parental & teacher reports, ♂s); RB Felson & Staff 2006 OCEANIA Hawaii: Werner 1987:27; Werner & Smith 1992; New Zealand: Williams & McGee 1994 OVERVIEW Literature Review: Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber 1987 (includes some selfreport data); Meta-Analysis: Loeber & Dishion 1983:94 (r = −.23, ♂s)

EUROPE Germany: Richter et al. 1996; NORTH AMERICA United States: Meade 1973:483; Niarhos & Routh 1992; Katsiyannis & Archwamety 1999; Archwamety & Katsiyannis 2000:166 (♂s); Malmgren & Leone 2000; Visian, Burke & Vivian 2001 (after multiple controls); TG Blomberg et al. 2010; TG Blomberg et al. 2011 OVERVIEW Literature Review: Katsiyannis et al. 2008

276  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.7.1a  Academic Performance (Grade Point Average) and Official Offending Behavior.

TABLE 6.7.1b  Academic Performance (Grade Point Average) and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Voelkl et al. 1999:82* (white ♂s); Wright et al. 2001; Felson & Staff 2006

NORTH AMERICA United States: Steffenhagen et al. 1969; Blumenfield et al. 1972; Simon et al. 1974; Finnell & Jones 1975; Agnew & White 1992:486

Negative

ASIA China: Ma et al. 1996; South Korea: Yun, Lee & Kim 2014:10 (violent delinquency) EUROPE Belgium: Born & Gavray 1994:147; Britain: Farrington 1973; Farrington 1979:99; Farrington 1997b:100; Farrington 2012:54 (convictions, longitudinal); Croatia: Modric et al. 2011 (adolescents); Norway: Cochran & Bo 1989; Switzerland: Killias et al. 1994:198 LATIN/CARIBBEAN AMERICA Ghana: Boakye 2013 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hundleby 1982; WG West 1984; Le Blanc et al. 1992; Tremblay et al. 1992; Faulkner et al. 2007:159; United States: Gold 1963:44; Hirschi 1969:111; Polk 1969*; Bachman 1970; Kelly & Balch 1971*; Silberberg & Silberberg 1971; Elliott & Voss 1974; Polk et al. 1974*; Senna et al. 1974*; Polk 1975*; Jensen 1976*; Jensen & Eve 1976; Mann 1976; Bachman et al. 1978; Gold 1978:296; Offer et al. 1979; Krohn & Massey 1980; Akers et al. 1981; Broder et al. 1981; Wiatrowski et al. 1982; Brook et al. 1983; Hogan & Jones 1983:17; Wells & Rankin 1983; McCarthy & Hoge 1984; Menard & Morse 1984:1371; Donovan & Jessor 1985; LaGrange & White 1985; Lawrence 1985; Levine & Singer 1988:392; Tygart 1988; Elliott et al. 1989*; Agnew & White 1992:486; Lynam et al. 1993; Sampson & Laub 1993b; Broidy 1995:551; Joseph 1996; Rowe 1997:150*; Vazsonyi & Flannery 1997; Voelkl et al. 1999:82* (black ♂s); Herrenkohl et al. 2000 (violent delinquency, teens); Windle 2000; McNulty & Bellair 2003:729 (violent, adolescent); JA Fredricks et al. 2004; MD Resnick et al. 2004:Table 4 (violent); SE McCabe et al. 2005 (adolescents); Eitle 2006:740*; Felson & Staff 2006:311; Desmond & Kubrin 2009:594 (violent); Beal & Crockett 2010:261*; TML Wong et al. 2013:Table 3 OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Maguin & Loeber 1996 (especially for ♂s & whites)

EUROPE Britain: Engel et al. 1987; Miller & Plant 1996:397 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Annis et al. 1971; Moyer & Fejer 1972; Bakal et al. 1976; Killeen 1977; Hundleby 1985; United States: Palmore & Hammond 1964; Frumkin et al. 1969; Gossett et al. 1972; Milman & Su 1973; Senna et al. 1974; Galli & Stone 1975; Brook et al. 1977; Kandel et al. 1978; Smith & Fogg 1978; Kirk 1979; Fors & Rojek 1983:213; Krohn et al. 1984; Mills & Noyes 1984; Friedman et al. 1985; Barnes & Welte 1986; Wolford & Swisher 1986; Newcomb et al. 1987:418; White et al. 1987:729; Marston et al. 1988; Weng et al. 1988 (including cigarettes); Elliott et al. 1989; Wallace & Bachman 1991:351; McGee & Newcomb 1992; Bachman & Schulenberg 1993; Shannon et al. 1993; Schulenberg et al. 1994; Brook & Newcomb 1995; Beauvais et al. 1996; Jenkins 1996; Younger et al. 1996; Dozier & Barnes 1997; DS Miller & Miller 1997; Duncan et al. 1998; Yarnold & Patterson 1998; Diego et al. 2003 (marijuana); Eitle 2006:740* (use); Jeynes 2006 (marijuana & cocaine); RG Cox, Zhang et al. 2007; Beal & Crockett 2010:261*

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  277

ASIA China: Wang, Zhou et al. 2012 (bullying) EUROPE Britain: Rutter et al. 1970 (CD); Cochrane 1979:204 (CD); Reitsma-Street et al. 1985 (APD); Hungary: Piko et al. 2005* (externalizing) LATIN/CARIBBEAN AMERICA El Salvador: Olate et al. 2012:Table 3 (gang membership) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Ledingham & Schwartzman 1984 (CD); United States: Moffitt 1990a (CD); Dishion et al. 1991 (CD); Zoccolillo & Rogers 1991 (♀s, intellectual aptitude controlled, CD); Hinshaw 1992 (externalizing behavior); Wentzel 1993 (CD); Brook & Newcomb 1995 (physical aggression); LR Bergman & Magnusson 1997 (physical aggression); Pakiz et al. 1997 (APD); KG Hill et al. 1999:311 (gang membership, longitudinal); KimCohen et al. 2005 (IQ controlled); Piko et al. 2005* (externalizing); Bradshaw, Wasdorp et al. 2013 (bullying); Mueser et al. 2012 (APD) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: J Murray & Farrington 2010 (CD)

TABLE 6.7.2a  Intelligence and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

Delinquency

EUROPE Sweden: Johansson & Ken 2005* (among psychopaths, violent)

Not significant

Negative

General

EUROPE Denmark: Hogh & Wolf 1981* (violent); Hodgins et al. 1996 (violent); Germany: Ristow et al. 2018:Table 1 (pedophilia, ♂s); Sweden: Johansson & Ken 2005* (among non-psychopaths, violent); AL Beckley et al. 2014:Table 1 (♂, violent); Fazel, Wolf et al. 2014:51 (violent, among schizophrenics); Andershed et al. 2016 (convictions, violent) MIDDLE EAST Israel: LJ Cohen et al. 2002 (pedophilia) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Cantor 2004 (♂ pedophiles); Guay et al. 2005 (sex offenders especially low); Blanchard et al. 2007 (♂ pedophiles); United States: Holland et al. 1981 (violent crime convictions) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Kirkegaard 2014:Table 1 (violent crime r = −.65, property crime r = −.47)

Recidivism EUROPE Britain: Calhoun 1928; Hill 1936 NORTH AMERICA United States: Murchison 1926*; Hartman 1940*

EUROPE Germany: Richter et al. 1996* NORTH AMERICA United States: Murchison 1926*; Doll 1930; Townes et al. 1981

EUROPE Britain: Rutter et al. 1970:227 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Valliant & Bergeron 1997; United States: Baker et al. 1929; Maller 1937a; Lichtenstein & Brown 1938 OCEANIA New Zealand: Black & Hornblow 1973:88

EUROPE Britain: Lane & Witty 1935; Marcus 1955 NORTH AMERICA Canada: GT Harris et al. 2007:9 (psychopathy); United States: Tolman 1938; Kirkpatrick 1937; Merrill 1947; Hartman 1940*; AH Roberts et al. 1974:835; Petronio 1980:56 (N = 38); Benda, Corwyn & Toombs 2001:597 OCEANIA New Zealand: Black & Hornblow 1973

EUROPE Britain: Goring 1913; West & Farrington 1973:123; Kolvin et al. 1988 (convictions); Farrington 1993a:15; Farrington 1997b:97; Farrington 2012:54 (convictions, longitudinal); Denmark: Hogh & Wolf 1981*; Kandel et al. 1988 (arrests); Finland: Tiihonen et al. 1993; JA Schwartz et al. 2015 (♂s); Germany: Goppinger 1983; Sweden: Stattin & Klackenberg-Larsson 1993; Stattin et al. 1997* (♂s, convictions); Kratzer & Hodgins 1999; Elmund et al. 2004 NORTH AMERICA United States: Zeleny 1933; Brown & Hartman 1938; McGarvey et al. 1981; Hains & Ryan 1983:1540; Huesmann et al. 1984 (traffic violations & more serious crimes); Eisenman 1990; Eisenman 1991; AD Davis et al. 1991; Lynam et al. 1993 (race & parental SES controlled); Schweinhart et al. 1993; Witte & Tauchen 1993; Guay et al. 2005 (especially low for sex offenders); Loeber et al. 2007 (♂s, longitudinal); Loeber, Menting et al. 2012 (arrests) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Kirkegaard 2014:Table 1 (all crime r = −.49) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Ellis & Walsh 2003 (includes self-report data); Mears & Cochran 2013; Portnoy et al. 2013; Meta-Analysis: Cottle et al. 2001:385 (r = −.14)

ASIA India: Shanmugam 1980 EUROPE Britain: Eilenberg 1961; Gibson & West 1970; Rutter et al. 1975; Moffitt et al. 1981*; Sturge 1982; Farrington 1987a:32; Nagin & Land 1993:352; Farrington 1995 (♂s); Farrington 1997b:100; Denmark: Moffitt et al. 1981*; Kandel et al. 1988*; Finland: Jarvelin et al. 1995; Rantakallio et al. 1995; Spain: Diaz et al. 1994:313; Sweden: Hartelius 1965; Jonsson 1967:200; Jonsson 1975:184; Stattin et al. 1997:204*; Kratzer & Hodgins 1999 (N = 7101 ♂s + 6751 ♀s); Elmund et al. 2004 (among adoptees) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Rogers & Austin 1934; Chandler & Moran 1990; United States: Fernald 1920:527; Goddard 1921; Caldwell 1929; M Elliott 1929:574; Mendenhall 1932; Ruggles 1932; S Glueck & Glueck 1934b:292; Glueck 1935; Lane & Witty 1935; Charles 1936; Moore 1937; Owen 1937; Jameson 1938; CW Mann & Mann 1939; Lichtenstein & Brown 1938; Kvaraceus 1944c; Franklin 1945; Altus & Clark 1949; S Glueck & Glueck 1950; Shulman 1951; Diller 1952; Prentice & Kelly 1973; KM Murphy & D’Angelo 1963:345; Naar 1965; Ahmad 1966; Conger & Miller 1966:191; Robins & Hill 1966:331; Wolfgang et al. 1972:58; Miller et al. 1974; Moffitt et al. 1981*; PL Ellis 1982; Yeudall et al. 1982:261; Menard & Morse 1984; Lawrence 1985; Kandel et al. 1988*; Moffitt & Silva 1988a; Moffitt & Silva 1988b; Denno 1990a; Lipsitt et al. 1990; Mezzich 1990 (violent delinquency); Moffitt et al. 1994; Ward & Tittle 1994; Coughlin & Vuchinich 1996:497; Rowe 1997:150; Kasen et al. 1998:58; McGloin & Pratt 2003 (blacks) OCEANIA Australia: Tennison-Wood 1932; McRae 1934; Frize et al. 2008; Hawaii: Werner 1987:25; Werner & Smith 1992:104; New Zealand: White et al. 1989*; Lynam et al. 1993*; Philippines: Carlota 1982 (♀s) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Hubbard & Pratt 2002 (includes selfreport data, r = −.16)

EUROPE Britain: Frank 1931; Shulman 1951; Farrington, Coid et al. 2006:56 (♂s, “persisters”); Germany: Schwind 1975; Richter et al. 1996:339*; Sweden: Stattin et al. 1997:204*; Stattin et al. 1997* (♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Tibbitts 1931; Shakow & Millard 1935; Niarhos & Routh 1992; RD Duncan et al. 1995 (delinquent ♂s); Archwamety & Katsiyannis 1998 OCEANIA New Zealand: White et al. 1989* (teacher-rated & parent-rated antisocial behavior) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Gendreau et al. 1996:583 (r = −.07)

TABLE 6.7.2b  Intelligence and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Positive

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

NORTH AMERICA United States: Kellam et al. 1980

EUROPE Germany: de Tribolet-Hardy et al. 2014* (psychopathy, among violent criminals) MIDDLE EAST Israel: Ben-Yaacov et al. 2018 (♂s)

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bogaert & Rushton 1989:1075; United States: Broidy 1995:550; Rowe 1997:150; McGloin et al. 2004:618; Fine et al. 2016:706

NORTH AMERICA United States: Wexler 1975; Codina et al. 1998* (♂s)

ASIA China: Cheng, Hung & Decety 2012:626 (psychopathy) EUROPE Britain: Barkataki et al. 2006 (ASP, ♂s); Bate, Boduszek et al. 2014 (psychopathy, both Factors 1 & 2); Germany: Heinzen et al. 2011* (psychopathy, Factor 1); de TriboletHardy et al. 2014* (psychopathy, among violent criminals, after controlling for years of education) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Harpur et al. 1989 (psychopathy, Factor 1); Hart, Forth & Hare 1990 (psychopathy, among ♂ prisoners); United States: Berrien 1934 (psychopathy); Shotwell 1946 (psychopathy, among delinquents); Gurvitz 1947 (psychopathy); CL Crawford 1959 (psychopathy); Kipnis 1965 (psychopathy); Holland, Beckett & Levi 1981 (psychopathy); Walsh, Beyer & Petee 1987 (psychopathy, among violent delinquents); Loney, Frick et al. 2003:Table 3 (callous-unemotionality); Salekin, Neumann et al. 2004:Table 1 (callousunemotionality, among institutionalized ♂ delinquents); Z Walsh, Swogger & Kosson 2004 (physical aggression, among ♂ inmates); Kosson et al. 2007:270 (ASP, among prisoners)

Negative

EUROPE Britain: Gibson & West 1970; West & Farrington 1973:131; Farrington 1997b:97; Farrington 1995; Sweden: Kratzer & Hodgins 1999 NORTH AMERICA United States: Hirschi 1969; Jessor 1976; Moffitt et al. 1981; Wiatrowski et al. 1981; Menard & Morse 1984; TE Moffitt & Henry 1989; Lynam et al. 1993 (race & parental SES controlled); Blackson & Tarter 1994:818; Ward & Tittle 1994; Williams & McGee 1994; McCord & Ensminger 1997 (blacks, violent offending); GatzkeKopp et al. 2002:483 (♂s); SL Leech et al. 2003:90 (violent, property, & status); SS Lee & Hinshaw 2004:Table 2 (♂s, r = −.34); Blanchard, Kolla et al. 2007 (pedophilia); Loeber, Pardini et al. 2007; Beaver, Schwartz et al. 2013; Klika et al. 2013 (parent-reported delinquency) OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt & Silva 1988a White et al. 1989; Lynam et al. 1993 (parental SES controlled); Moffitt et al. 1995; Moffitt et al. 1998:452 (violent offending, self-reports plus some convictions); DM Fergusson et al. 2002 (excluding victimless offenses) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Lipsey & Derzon 1998 (includes official & self-report); Hubbard & Pratt 2002 (♀s); Ttofi et al. 2016

EUROPE Ireland: Timms et al. 1973 NORTH AMERICA United States: Bear & Richards 1981; Codina et al. 1998* (♀s)

EUROPE Britain: Rutter et al. 1970:227 (CD); West & Farrington 1973 (CD); Rutter et al. 1975 (CD); McMichael 1979 (CD); Richman et al. 1982 (CD); Maughan et al. 1985 (CD); Farrington et al. 1990 (CD); Farrington 1993a:15 (CD); O’Kane et al. 1996 (psychopathy); Simonoff et al. 2004 (APD, among twins, longitudinal); RJ Blair, Budhani et al. 2005:329 (psychopathy, adolescent ♂s); Kim-Cohen et al. 2005 (CD); De Brito et al. 2009:Table 1 (CD, ♂s, especially when combined with callous-unemotionality); Broulidakis et al. 2016:Table 2 (CD); Finland: Virkkunen & Luukkonen 1977:222 (APD); Germany: Heinzen et al. 2011* (psychopathy, Factor 2); Lösel & Bender 2014 (mom-rated & self-rated aggression); Netherlands: Wiegman et al. 1992 (CD); Oosterlaan, Scheres & Sergeant 2005:77 (CD/ ODD); Norway: Lindner et al. 2016 (CD); Scotland: May 1975 (CD) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Harpur et al. 1989 (psychopathy, Factor 2); Andre et al. 1994 (CD); LeMarquand et al. 1998:336 (aggression); United States: Solomon 1939 (psychopathy); Van Vorst 1943 (psychopathy, among delinquents); Wechsler 1944 (psychopathy); Wiens et al. 1959 (APD); Robins 1966:156 (psychopathy); Heilbrun 1979 (among prisoners); Schonfeld et al. 1988 (CD); Robins et al. 1991:278 (CD); Wentzel 1993:360 (CD); O’Kane et al. 1996 (APD); PA Arnett et al. 1997:1424 (APD); Elkins et al. 1997 (antisocial behavior, especially when persistent); Lynam & Henry 2001 (CD); Huesmann et al. 2002:193 (childhood aggression); RJ Blair et al. 2004 (APD); Liu, Raine et al. 2004 (externalizing behavior); Z Walsh et al. 2004:1166 (violence among white inmates); Epstein et al. 2006:205 (APD); Neumann & Hare 2008:Table 1 (psychopathy); Vitacco et al. 2008:53 (psychopathy, among mentally ill prisoners); DeLisi e al. 2011 (callous-unemotionality); B Diamond et al. 2012 (physical aggression, among prisoners) OCEANIA New Zealand: Fergusson et al. 2005 (CD) OVERVIEW Literature Review: J Murray & Farrington 2010 (CD); Sanchez de Ribera et al. 2017 (IQ & psychopathy)

Inverted U-Shape

NORTH AMERICA United States: Mears & Cochran 2013:1289 (white ♂s)

280  Handbook of Crime Correlates

in the 120 IQ range and above, both of which were low compared to males in the 88–93 range. Obviously, replicating this somewhat unusual finding would be desirable. Thus, the self-reported offending rates for the males with IQs below 88 were similar to rates for the males in the 120 IQ range and above, both of which were low compared to males in the 88–93 range. Obviously, replicating this somewhat unusual finding would be desirable.

6.7.3 Intelligence Averages (Ecological) In addition to studies of how individual intelligence correlates with offending, studies have also sought to determine if the average intelligence of individuals living in various geographic areas (such as counties, states, or even entire countries) is associated with the average crime rates in those same areas. Table 6.7.3 shows that all of the studies that were located reported that as the average intelligence scores of a geographic region decrease, official crime rates in those regions tend to increase.

6.7.4 Verbal Intelligence As shown in the preceding tables, numerous studies have investigated how people’s varying scores in general or overall intelligence (sometimes called g) correlate with criminal and antisocial behavior. Nearly all of these studies have concluded that IQ and criminality are inversely correlated, although findings have been somewhat mixed regarding antisocial behavior. In addition to general cognitive ability, there are widely recognized sub-components of intelligence, the most common called verbal (or linguistic) and non-verbal (or performance). Oftentimes, verbal intelligence is symbolized as VIQ and non-verbal intelligence is symbolized as PIQ (performance intelligence) (TD Hill et al. 1985; Leckliter et al. 1986; AR Jensen 1998). VIQ mainly pertains to people’s abilities to understand and articulate ideas using language. PIQ, on the

other hand, is comprised primarily of abilities to reason in mathematical or spatial terms with minimal use of language. Table 6.7.4 summarizes the evidence pertaining to VIQ and offending behavior. It reveals that most of the evidence documents an inverse correlation between criminality and VIQ. Regarding clinical and personality measures of antisocial behavior, however, the findings have been rather inconsistent. Specifically, while CD and aggression appear to be inversely correlated with VIQ, two studies of callousunemotionality (a major component of psychopathy) actually reported positive correlations with VIQ.

6.7.5 Performance Intelligence PIQ is largely comprised of items designed to test people’s abilities to reason without the use of language. Examples have to do with the ability to reason in spatial terms and to think mathematically (Rourke & Finlayson 1978). The research finding that autistic children are actually superior to nonautistic children in some PIQ tasks (Shah & Frith 1993) demonstrates that at least some aspects of PIQ can be successfully executed with little language input. Table 6.7.5 summarizes findings from studies of how PIQ correlates with criminal and delinquent behavior. According to all but one of the studies, PIQ scores are inversely correlated with offending behavior.

6.7.6 Intellectual Imbalance Given that there are the two widely recognized aspects of intelligence (i.e., verbal and non-verbal), several researchers have sought to determine if some people are unusually high in one or the other. Findings have shown that while most people are fairly well balanced (in the sense that their verbal and nonverbal IQ scores are roughly equal), some people are high in verbal IQ but quite low in non-verbal IQ (or PIQ). When there are considerable differences between VIQ and PIQ, researchers describe the phenomenon as intellectual imbalance.

TABLE 6.7.3  Intelligence Averages and Offending Rates (Ecological). Nature of Relationship

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

General

ASIA Japan: Kura 2013:Table 2 (government administrative districts, homicide r = −.60) NORTH AMERICA United States: McDaniel 2006 (states, r = −.58, violent); Bartels et al. 2010 (states, violent & property); Beaver & Wright 2011 (adolescent, counties, property); Templer & Rushton 2011 (states, homicide) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Templer, Connelly et al. 2007 (homicide r = −.25; rape r = −.29; assault r = .21); R Lynn 2008 (homicide); Rushton & Templer 2009:344 (113 countries, homicide & rape); Burhan et al. 2014 (homicide)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Pesta et al. 2010 (states)

Positive Not significant Negative

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  281

TABLE 6.7.4  Verbal Intelligence (VIQ) and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data

Official Data General

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Loney, Frick et al. 1998 (CU); Salekin, Neumann et al. 2004:Table 1 (CU, among institutionalized delinquents)

Positive

NORTH AMERICA United States: Gibson, Piquero & Tibbetts 2001* (among blacks)

Not significant

Negative

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

EUROPE Finland: Vermeiren, De Clippele et al. 2002 NORTH AMERICA United States: Silverton 1988b* OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt et al. 1994* (verbal memory & scores)

ASIA Japan: Ogata 2014 NORTH AMERICA United States: Gibson, Piquero & Tibbetts 2001:587* (when combined with an adverse family environment, among blacks) OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt & Caspi 2001

NORTH AMERICA United States: Lynam et al. 1993* (whites) EUROPE Finland: Vermeiren, Schwab-Stone et al. 2002 NORTH AMERICA United States: Bleker 1983; Archwamety & Katsiyannis 1998

EUROPE Britain: Tarry & Emler 2007:176 (r = −.18) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Barker et al. 2007; United States: Silverton 1988b*; Lynam et al. 1993* (blacks); Loeber, Pardini et al. 2007

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Seguin et al. 1995 (aggression, ♂s); Dery et al. 1999 (CD, parental SES controlled); United States: Loney, Frick et al. 1998 (CD); Speltz et al. 1999 (childhood aggression, among ♂s); Brennan, Hall et al. 2003 (persistent aggression); Gatzke-Kopp et al. 2012 (verbal ability, childhood aggression) OCEANIA Australia: Brennan, Hall et al. 2003 (aggression) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Teichner & Golden 2000 (CD)

TABLE 6.7.5  Performance Intelligence (PIQ) and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data General

Delinquency

Self-Reported Data Recidivism

Overall

Positive NORTH AMERICA United States: Loeber, Pardini et al. 2007

Not significant Negative

OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt et al. 1994* (♂s, by age 18, visual spatial scores)

EUROPE Britain: Farrington & Loeber 1999:284 (♂s, longitudinal); Farrington, Ttofi & Coid 2009 (longitudinal) NORTH AMERICA United States: E Cauffman et al. 2005 (spatial reasoning) OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt et al. 1994* (♂s, police contact by age 17)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Archwamety & Katsiyannis 1998

OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt et al. 1994* (age 18, ♂s, visual motor scores, delinquency)

282  Handbook of Crime Correlates

So, is there any correlation between being intellectually imbalanced and criminality? Most studies indicate that the answer is yes (Angenent & de Man 1996; Law & Faison 1996:699). Specifically, criminals have a tendency to have higher PIQ scores than VIQ scores. The evidence in this regard is summarized in Table 6.7.6a for official measures of criminality. In other words, while offenders appear to be below normal in overall intelligence when compared to non-offenders, there is also a tendency for most of the IQ deficiency to be most concentrated in terms of VIQ.

The studies of intellectual imbalance and self-reported offending along with clinical and personality indicators of antisocial behavior are presented in Table 6.7.6b. Most of the evidence comports with Table 6.7.6a that there tends to be a significant imbalance among self-reported offenders, with the greatest deficiencies having to do with VIQ rather than PIQ. The only exception was a study of self-reported drug offending, which found VIQ to be higher than PIQ among drug users. In the case of clinical and personality indicators of antisocial behavior, however, the evidence was

TABLE 6.7.6a  Intellectual Imbalance and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship PIQ higher than VIQ

No significant difference

Official Data General

Delinquency

Recidivism

EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1993:15; Denmark: Moffitt et al. 1981*; Germany: Richter et al. 1996:338; Netherlands: Nijman et al. 2009 (sex offenses) Sweden: Stattin & Klackenberg-Larsson 1993

EUROPE Britain: Payne 1960; Rutter et al. 1975; Sturge 1982; Denmark: Buikhuisen et al. 1988 NORTH AMERICA United States: Werder et al. 1943; Wechsler 1944; Franklin 1945; Sloan & Cutts 1945:96; Altus & Clark 1949; S Glueck & Glueck 1950; Diller 1952; Doppelt & Seashore 1959; Prentice & Kelly 1973; Camp 1966; Matarazzo 1972:433; Ganzer & Sarason 1973; Andrews 1974; Ollendick 1979; Haynes & Bensch 1983; Tarter et al. 1984; Tarter et al. 1985*; Grace & Sweeney 1986; A Walsh et al. 1987; Jensen & Faulstich 1988; Culberton et al. 1989 OCEANIA New Zealand: Lynam et al. 1993:193

EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1995b:941; Denmark: Moffitt et al. 1981:155 NORTH AMERICA United States: Solway et al. 1975; Haynes & Bensch 1981; Blecker 1983

EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1993a:15 OCEANIA New Zealand: Walters 1953

NORTH AMERICA United States: Henning & Levy 1967; Foster 1959; Davis et al. 1991; Law & Faison 1996

VIQ higher than PIQ

TABLE 6.7.6b  Intellectual Imbalance and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

PIQ higher than VIQ

NORTH AMERICA United States: Moffitt et al. 1981*; Maguin et al. 1993; Loeber, Pardini et al. 2007 OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt & Silva 1988c

EUROPE Netherlands: Nijman et al. 2009 (psychopathy) NORTH AMERICA United States: Wechsler 1944:155 (APD); Wechsler 1958:160 (CD); Fisher 1961 (APD); Camp 1977 (CD); Richman et al. 1982 (CD); Kender et al. 1985 (CD) OCEANIA New Zealand: McGee et al. 1986; Henry et al. 1992 (CD)

No significant difference

NORTH AMERICA United States: Meltzer et al. 1984; Tarter et al. 1985*

EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1993a:15 (CD); Finland: Virkkunen & Luukkonen 1977:222 (APD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Strother 1944:398 (APD); Naar 1965 (APD)

VIQ higher than PIQ

NORTH AMERICA United States: Fleming et al. 1982

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  283

mixed, although no studies reported greater VIQ scores relative to PIQ scores among antisocial individuals. Further supporting the conclusion that low VIQ is the main aspect of intelligence associated with offending is a meta-analysis by Isen (2010) involving 131 studies of officially identified offending, self-reported offending, and antisocial behavior. It concluded that for both males and females, offending is most common among individuals whose VIQ is unusually low.

6.7.7 Word Categorization Skills A few studies were located that sought to determine if offending (in the form of psychopathy) might be related to variations in the ability to distinguish concrete words (such as table and computer) from abstract words (such as justice TABLE 6.7.7  Word Categorization Skills and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant Negative

EUROPE Britain: Fisher & Blair 1998 (children, psychopathic traits, moral vs. conventional social rules); Blair, College & Mitchell 2001 (moral vs. conventional social rules, psychopathic traits); Blair, Monson & Frederickson 2001 (moral vs. conventional social rules, psychopathic traits, ♂s) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hare & Jutai 1988 (psychopathy, abstract vs. concrete words); Kiehl, Hare et al. 1999 (psychopathy, abstract vs. concrete words); Kiehl, Smith et al. 2004 (psychopathy, abstract vs. concrete words)

and evil). Other studies sought to determine if individuals with high psychopathic traits were better or worse at distinguishing between rules of a moral nature (e.g., injuring others) from rules of a social conventional nature (e.g., cutting ahead of others standing in a cue). As shown in Table 6.7.7, all of these studies have concluded that individuals with psychopathic traits are less accurate and/or take more time to recognize such semantic distinctions than are persons in general. Obviously, it would be interesting to extend this line of research into other forms of antisocial behavior beyond psychopathy.

6.7.8 Language Learning The acquisition of language is one of the most remarkable human abilities and appears to be instinctual, although the specific language one acquires is culturally determined (Pinker 1994). Despite its instinctiveness, there is considerable variability in how quickly children acquire language and how well they learn it. A few studies were located that examined the association between language skills at a given age and criminal/ delinquent behavior. Table 6.7.8 shows that reduced language learning abilities appear to be associated with greater offending probabilities.

6.7.9 Learning Disabilities in General Learning disabilities are usually defined as significant discrepancies between an individual’s IQ score and his/her academic performance (Broder et al. 1981; Stelmack et al. 1995:447; Winters 1997:452). Thus, persons who perform in school substantially below their measured intellectual ability are said to be learning disabled. Numerous factors may contribute to learning disabilities, including brain abnormalities (John et al. 1977:1405; Kraus et al. 1996), and physical difficulties in hearing or

TABLE 6.7.8  Language Learning and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

General

Delinquency

Overall

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

EUROPE Sweden: Stattin & KlackenbergLarsson 1993* NORTH AMERICA United States: Prentice & Kelly 1963

EUROPE Britain: D West & Farrington 1973; Sweden: Stattin & Klackenberg-Larsson 1993* NORTH AMERICA United States: PH Wolff et al. 1982 (adolescents); Davis, Sanger & Morris-Friehe 1991 (language acquisition speed)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Brownlie et al. 2004 (delinquency)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Rodriguez 1993 (APD)

Positive Not significant Negative

284  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.7.9  Learning Disabilities in General and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

EUROPE Britain: Yule & Rutter 1968; Sweden: Jonsson 1967:198; Gath et al. 1970:219; Jonsson 1975:184; Virkkunen & Nuutila 1976 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Underwood 1976; United States: Mulligan 1972; Mauser 1974; Miller et al. 1974; Poremba 1975; Barrows et al. 1977; Bachara & Zaba 1978; Zinkus & Gottlieb 1978; Keilitz et al. 1979; Lewis et al. 1980; Broder et al. 1981; Post 1981; J Zimmerman et al. 1981; Wilgosh & Paitich 1982; Dunivant 1984; Meltzer et al. 1984 (white ♂s); Roff & Wirt 1984:115; Epstein et al. 1985; Keilitz & Dunivant 1986; Grande 1988; Larson 1988; Sobotowicz et al. 1987; Leone et al. 1991; Grigorenko 2006 OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Casey & Keilitz 1990

NORTH AMERICA United States: California Youth Authority 1982

NORTH AMERICA United States: Malmgren et al. 1999*; Katims et al. 1997 (Mexican Americans); MD Resnick et al. 2004:Table 4 (violent); MK Evans et al. 2014 (violent)

Not significant

Illegal Drugs NORTH AMERICA United States: Maag et al. 1994; Katimas et al. 1996

NORTH AMERICA United States: Broder et al. 1981; J Zimmerman et al. 1981; Malmgren et al. 1999* (after controlling for sex, ethnicity & parental SES); MK Evans et al. 2014 (property)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Yule & Rutter 1968 (CD); Davie et al. 1972b (CD); Rutter et al. 1976 (CD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Harris 1961 (CD); FA Elliott 1978:150 (APD); Williams & McGee 1994 (CD); KG Hill et al. 1999:311 (gang membership) OCEANIA New Zealand: McGee et al. 1986 (CD)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Florian-Lacy et al. 2002 (gang membership)

Negative

communicating (e.g., stuttering) (Cozad & Rousey 1966). Sometimes, the causes may involve a lack of interest in school or an inability to focus attention on information being communicated by teachers (Flicek 1992). A common form of learning difficulty linked to slow reading is known as dyslexia, a condition associated with difficulty recognizing the differences between letters with the same shapes that only differ in their positioning (e.g., p, q, b, d) (Critchley 1972). This condition is also sometimes called “word blindness” (Holzman 1979:78). Research exploring the possibility that persons with higher rates of learning disabilities are more prone toward criminal and antisocial behavior is summarized in Table 6.7.9. One can see that nearly all of the evidence supports the conclusion of a positive relationship between learning

disabilities and offending. The only exceptions have to do with self-reported criminality. As noted earlier, selfreported criminality is usually based on reports by college students about fairly minor forms of offending.

6.7.10 Reading Ability Being able to read is obviously a hard-learned skill. Given that offenders (1) tend to be lower in IQ, especially VIQ, (2) have more learning disabilities, and (3) acquire language at a relatively slow pace, when compared to non-offenders, one would expect reading ability to be inversely correlated with offending. Table 6.7.10 confirms that expectation (with the exception of one study of physical aggression).

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  285

TABLE 6.7.10  Reading Ability and Offending Behavior.

Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Positive Not significant Negative

EUROPE Britain: Maughan et al. 1996 (physical aggression) NORTH AMERICA United States: Brearley 1932:145 (violent)

EUROPE Britain: Critchley 1968; Rutter et al. 1970:247; Sweden: Jonsson 1975:184 NORTH AMERICA United States: Sullivan 1927 (♂s); Lane & Witty 1934; Hill 1935; Fendrick & Bond 1936; S Glueck & Glueck 1950 (literacy); Fabian 1955; Harrower 1955; Margolin et al. 1955; Mulligan 1972 (dyslexia); Herjanic & Penick 1972; Hogenson 1974; Rizzo 1975; Andrew 1978; Andrew 1979; Meltzer et al. 1984:607 (white ♂s) OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt et al. 1994

6.8 MENTAL ILLNESS While difficult to define and identify, mental illness is obviously an important concept in the social and behavioral sciences. The present section reviews research findings on how various types of mental illness as well as mental illness generally are associated with criminality.

6.8.1 Mental Illness in General Research on the possible association between mental illness and criminality has an extensive history. This is partly due to concern about trends begun in the 1950s to move mentally ill persons from mental hospitals and asylums to community-based facilities (Abramson 1972; Solomon et al. 1994). Some have argued that this trend toward more communitybased treatment of mental patients could account for much of the rise in crime rates beginning in the 1960s (Teplin 1983). So, does evidence support the assertion that mentally ill persons have a higher than normal tendency to engage in crime? The evidence for official statistics is summarized in Table 6.8.1a. Readers can see that nearly all of the studies have

NORTH AMERICA United States: Ganzer & Sarason 1973 OCEANIA New Zealand: Rucklidge et al. 2013 (IQ controlled)

NORTH AMERICA United States: StouthamerLoeber et al. 2002:116 (♂s, r = −.18)

EUROPE Britain: Gregory 1965 (CD); Yule & Rutter 1968 (CD); Rutter & Yule 1970 (CD); Scotland: McMichael 1979 (CD); Maughan et al. 1985 (CD); Simonoff et al. 2004 (APD, among twins, longitudinal) NORTH AMERICA United States: Ziskind et al. 1977 (APD); MG Vaughn et al. 2011 (adolescent psychopathy) OCEANIA Australia: D Smart et al. 1996 (CD); New Zealand: S Williams & McGee 1994 (CD)

concluded that mental illness and official statistics on offending probabilities are positively correlated. Of course, the associations are stronger for some forms of mental illness than for others, as some of the subsequent tables will document. Table 6.8.1b shows that self-reported criminality is also positively associated with mental illness in nearly all relevant studies. Likewise, Table 6.8.1b suggests that there is a positive correlation between at least some forms of antisocial behavior (e.g., CD and physical aggression) and mental illness.

6.8.2 Autism Spectrum Disorders Autism refers to a condition characterized by social deficits, minimal speech and language comprehension, and a tendency to engage in repetitive object manipulation. The autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) include both autism and a condition known as Asperger syndrome, the latter referring to various milder forms of autism. In recent years, a few studies have sought to determine if ASDs are correlated with criminal and antisocial behavior. Table 6.8.2 shows that findings have been mixed. It may be relevant to mention that some studies may underestimate

286  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.8.1a  Mental Illness in General and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

Victimless

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

Positive

EUROPE Britain: Wessely et al. 1994 (violent); C Wallace et al. 1998* (violent); Denmark: Gottlieb et al. 1987* (violent); Hodgins 1992* (violent); Eronen et al. 1996* (homicides); Brennan et al. 2000 (violent); Christoffersen et al. 2005:47 (convicted rapists, ♂s); Finland: Tiihonen & Hakola 1994 (violent); Eronen et al. 1996* (violent); Tiihonen et al. 1997*; Rasanen et al. 1998:439 (violent); Norway: Christoffersen et al. 2005 (rape); Sweden: Lindqvist 1986; Hodgins 1992 (violent & property); Adler & Lidberg 1995 (violent); Hodgins et al. 1996; Fazel & Grann 2004 (violent); Fazel & Grann 2006 (violent); Hodgins et al. 2007 (violent); Falk et al. 2014 (violent) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Cote & Hodgins 1992 (violent); United States: Giovannoni & Gurel 1967* (violent); Sosowsky 1978* (violent); Steadman et al. 1978* (violent); Ribner & Steadman 1981 (violent); Gottlieb et al. 1987*; J Swanson et al. 1990 (violent); Link et al. 1992 (violent); Steadman et al. 1994 (violent); Swanson 1994:113; Steadman et al. 1998 (violent); Swartz et al. 1998 (violent); LaFree, Jensen et al. 2018:248 (violent religious/ political extremists, r = .11) OCEANIA Australia: C Wallace et al. 1998* (violent); Mullen et al. 2000 (violent); Wallace et al. 2004 (violent); New Zealand: Arseneault et al. 2000 (violent)

EUROPE Netherlands: Hendricks 1990 (drugs); Sweden: Mueser et al. 1992 (drugs); Sandell & Bertling 1996 (drugs) NORTH AMERICA United States: Kosten et al. 1982 (drugs); Rounsaville et al. 1982 (drugs); Khantzian & Treece 1985 (drugs); Woody et al. 1985 (drugs); Jainchill et al. 1986; (drugs) Kosten, Rounsaville, & Kleber 1986 (drugs); Weiss et al. 1986 (drugs); Christie et al. 1988 (drugs); HE Ross et al. 1988 (drugs); Bukstein et al. 1989 (drugs); Regier et al. 1990 (drugs); Rounsaville et al. 1991 (drugs) OCEANIA Hawaii: Werner & Smith 1992:104 (drugs)

EUROPE Denmark: Ortmann 1981; Hodgins 1992*; Hodgins et al. 1996; Finland: Joukamaa 1991; Tiihonen et al. 1993; Tiihonen et al. 1997; Norway: Kjelsberg 1999 (especially life-coursepersistent criminality); Mordre et al. 2011 (convictions); Sweden: Engqvist & Rydelius 2007 (convictions); Ivert et al. 2017; Multiple European Countries: Penrose 1939 (psychiatric hospitalization & imprisonment) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hodgins & Cote 1990; Palermo et al. 1992; Bland et al. 1998:276; United States: Rappeport & Lassen 1965 (arrest); Rappeport & Lassen 1966; Giovannoni & Gurel 1967*; Yarvis 1972; Sosowsky 1974; Swank & Winer 1976; Zitrin et al. 1976; Durbin et al. 1977; Cocozza et al. 1978 (arrest); Sosowsky 1978*; Steadman et al. 1978* (arrest); Shore et al. 1980; Sosowsky 1980 (arrest); Shanok & Lewis 1981; Lamb & Grant 1982; Schuerman & Kobrin 1984; Washington & Diamond 1985; Valdiserri et al. 1986; Hyde & Seiter 1987; Neighbors et al. 1987; Daniel et al. 1988; Harry & Steadman 1988; Holcomb & Ahr 1988; McFarland et al. 1989 (arrest); Palermo et al. 1991; Hodgins 1993; Friedman et al. 1996:399; Teplin et al. 1996 OVERVIEW Literature Review: Crichton 1999; Meta-Analysis: Reising et al. 2018 (especially life-course-persistent criminality)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Andre et al. 1994; United States: Balla et al. 1974; Lewis et al. 1985

EUROPE Finland: Tiihonen & Hakola 1994 (violent); Germany: Remschmidt et al. 2014; Netherlands: Buikhuisen & Hoekstra 1974:65 NORTH AMERICA United States: Koenigsberg et al. 1977; R Moos et al. 1994

Not significant

EUROPE Britain: Modestin & Ammann 1995 (violent)

Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Giovannoni & Gurel 1967* (property)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Pollock 1938 (arrest); Cohen & Freeman 1945 (arrest); Guze et al. 1969

NORTH AMERICA United States: Lueger & Cadman 1982; Dembo et al. 1995:1444

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  287

TABLE 6.8.1b  Mental Illness in General and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: Steadman & Felson 1984; Swanson et al. 1990; Link et al. 1992 (SR plus official data); Corrigan & Watson 2005; Elbogen & Johnson 2009 (especially when combined with substance abuse) LATIN/CARIBBEAN AMERICA Brazil: Avanci et al. 2007 (adolescents)

EUROPE Britain: Johns 2001; Sweden: Andreasson et al. 1987 (among schizophrenics) NORTH AMERICA United States: Helzer 1988 OCEANIA Australia: W Hall & Solowij 1997; Degenhardt & Hall 2001; New Zealand: R McGee et al. 2000

Not significant

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior NORTH AMERICA United States: Biederman et al. 1997 (CD); Harper, Davidson & Hosek 2008 (gang membership among blacks); Elbogen & Johnson 2009 (violence); Van Dorn et al. 2012 (violence); Coid, Ullrich et al. 2013 (gang membership); Elkington et al. 2015 (violence) OCEANIA New Zealand: Mulder et al. 1994:283 (APD); Bardone et al. 1998 (♀s, CD)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Richek et al. 1975

Negative

TABLE 6.8.2  Autism Spectrum Disorders and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

Delinquency

Overall

EUROPE Netherlands: Geluk et al. 2012*

Positive

Not significant

Self-Reported Data

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Netherlands: Geluk et al. 2012* (CD); Schoorl et al. 2016 (ODD & CD, ♂s); Sweden: Lundström et al. 2011 (subclinical autism, CD); Soderstrom, Nilsson et al. 2005 (psychopathy, among convicts) NORTH AMERICA United States: Kanne & Mazurek 2011 (aggression)

EUROPE Sweden: Lundström et al. 2014 (violent)

Negative

EUROPE Britain: Woodbury-Smith et al. 2006:113 (high-functioning Aspergers individuals)

the correlations due to the fact that extremely autistic individuals are often under institutional care, which may limit their exposure to criminal opportunities.

6.8.3 Depression, Subclinical Depression refers to feelings of sadness and loneliness. Even though nearly everyone has these feelings over the loss of loved ones or after major setbacks in achieving lifetime goals, some people become depressed for weeks on end for no apparent reason. It is depression that is largely unexplained by specific life experiences that are normally considered genuine examples of depression. Most often, minor (or subclinical) forms of depression are assessed based on responses to questionnaires containing questions about prolonged depressed feelings.

Researchers recognize a distinction between relatively mild forms of depression and depression that is so severe that professional help is often sought. The latter is usually known as major or clinical depression and will be considered after first giving attention to subclinical forms of depression. Subclinical depression is usually detected through self-reports on survey questionnaires. Table 6.8.3a provides a summary of the evidence regarding whether a relationship exists between minor depression and official forms of criminal and delinquent behavior. One can see that without exception, persons who are arrested or convicted of criminal or delinquent acts are more often depressed than people in general. Table 6.8.3b pertains to evidence that minor forms of depression are correlated with unofficial offending behavior.

288  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.8.3a  Minor/Subclinical Depression and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE France: Benezech & Bourglois 1992 (violent)

General

Delinquency

EUROPE Switzerland: Modestin et al. 1996b NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bland et al. 1998:276

EUROPE Belgium: Vermeiren et al. 2002 (♂s); Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* (delinquency); Finland: Ritakallio et al. 2005 (adolescents) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Sas et al. 1985; Sas & Jaffe 1986; Reddon et al. 1996; M Kerr et al. 1997 (childhood depressive symptoms); United States: Kashani et al. 1980; Pliszka et al. 2000; Overbeek et al. 2001; Vermeiren et al. 2004:572*

Recidivism NORTH AMERICA United States: McManus et al. 1984

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.8.3b  Minor/Subclinical Depression and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

EUROPE Belgium: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* (delinquency); Iceland: Sigfusdottir et al. 2004 (delinquency preceded depression) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hagan 1997; Hagan & Foster 2003; United States: Weist et al. 1998; Loeber et al. 1999 (longitudinal); De Coster & Heimer 2001; SL Leech et al. 2003:90 (violent, property & status); Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* (delinquency); Willgerodt & Thompson 2006:317*; Siennick 2007:596 (delinquency usually precedes depression); Negriff et al. 2008:Table 2; CJ Ferguson 2011 (violent)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Paton et al. 1977; Hogan & Jones 1983:17; Johnston & O’Malley 1986; Deykin et al. 1987; Greenbaum et al. 1991; Van Hasselt et al. 1993; Barnet et al. 1995; Aseltine et al. 1998; Krueger 1999 (negative emotions); Curran et al. 2000; Costello et al. 2003; Diego et al. 2003; Silberg et al. 2003; Kashdan et al. 2005; Elkins et al. 2006; Willgerodt & Thompson 2006:317*; Li & Lerner 2011:239* (r = .18) OCEANIA Australia: Reynolds & Rob 1988; Degenhardt et al. 2007 (amphetamine use); New Zealand: Fergusson & Woodward 2000 (♀s); Fergusson et al. 2002 (marijuana use)

EUROPE Britain: Fombonne et al. 2001 (APD) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Fleming et al. 1989 (CD); Hagan 1997 (CD); United States: Kovacs et al. 1988 (CD); Loeber et al. 1991 (CD); Patterson & Stoolmiller 1991 (♂s, CD); Robins & Price 1991 (CD); Capaldi 1992 (♂s, CD); Lahey et al. 1992 (CD); Hinshaw et al. 1993 (CD); Myers et al. 1993 (CD); Bosworth et al. 1999 (bullying); JM Beyers & Loeber 2003 (♂s, CD); Goodwin & Hamilton 2003 (APD); Seals & Young 2003* (bullying); RR Swenson & Prelow 2005:471 (problem behavior); Siennick 2007 (CD); Beaver, Nedelec et al. 2014:403 (psychopathy, among college students); Coolidge, Den Boer & Segal 2014:1564 (bullying); Watkins & Melde 2016 (gang membership) OCEANIA Australia: Rigby & Slee 1991 (school age bullying); Slee & Rigby 1993 (bullying); Slee 1995 (bullying); New Zealand: Mulder et al. 1994:283* (♀s, APD); Bardone et al. 1998 (♀s, APD); Moffitt & Caspi 2001 (CD)

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Defoe et al. 2013 OCEANIA New Zealand: Bardone et al. 1996:820

EUROPE Spain: Calafat et al. 1994 MIDDLE EAST Israel: Teichmann et al. 1989 NORTH AMERICA United States: Yamaguchi & Kandel 1984; Garber et al. 1988; Harrington et al. 1990

NORTH AMERICA United States: Seals & Young 2003* (bullying, self-report) OCEANIA New Zealand: Mulder et al. 1994:283* (♂s, APD)

Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Li & Lerner 2011:239* (r = −.18)

Positive

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  289

One can see that the majority of relevant studies have found that a positive correlation exists. Most of the exceptions have to do with self-reported illegal drug use.

6.8.4 Depression, Clinical Directly above, the distinction was made between minor and major forms of depression. Typically, the latter usually involves contact with a mental health professional, while the former does not. Table 6.8.4 provides a summary of findings having to do with the relationship between major (or clinical) depression and offending behavior. The table reveals that all of the studies located have reported a positive relationship. It should be noted that there is a special type of depression, usually known as bipolar or manic depression, which is not considered in this or the preceding table. It will be considered separately in the following table.

6.8.5 Bipolar Depression One type of depression is typified by mood swings between feeling extreme sadness and lethargy to periods of exceptional exuberance. This type of depression is called manic

depression (or bipolar depression) (MacKinnon et al. 1997:356). Table 6.8.5 shows that most studies have found individuals afflicted with manic depression to be at increased risk of engaging in crime or that they and individuals without the disorder do not differ significantly in offending risks. Whatever increased risk may exist seems to be confined to the manic phase to the illness rather than the depression phase. Some studies were located that sought an association between bipolar depression and antisocial behavior. The table shows that all of these studies reported a positive relationship between bipolar depression and various forms of antisocial behavior.

6.8.6 Schizophrenia Schizophrenia refers to mental disorders that are most often associated with auditory hallucinations, delusions, and paranoia. Determining who is affected by schizophrenia is nearly always based on clinical interviews with patients and/or their relatives. The evidence for associations between schizophrenia and officially detected crime and delinquency is summarized in

TABLE 6.8.4  Clinical Depression and Offending Behavior. Official Data Nature of Relationship

Violent, Sex, or Property

Positive

EUROPE Finland: Eronen et al. 1996 (homicide)

Not significant Negative

Self-Reported Data

Victimless

Delinquency

Recidivism

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Kleinman et al. 1990 (drugs)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Chiles et al. 1980; McManus et al. 1984

EUROPE Finland: Vermeiren, SchwabStone et al. 2002

EUROPE Switzerland: Modestin et al. 1996b NORTH AMERICA United States: Burke, Loeber et al. 2005 (♂s); DM Anderson et al. 2015 (property); Ellis & Hoskin 2018:Table 3 (violent & property)

Illegal Drugs NORTH AMERICA United States: Kandel & Davies 1986; Regier et al. 1990; Swanson et al. 1992; Lin et al. 1996

Clinical/ Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior NORTH AMERICA United States: Puig-Antich 1982 (CD); Lahey et al. 1988 (♀s); Herkov & Myers 1996 (CD); Clark et al. 1997 (CD); Whitmore et al. 1997:93 (CD); Loeber, Burke, & Lahey 2002 (APD); Mueser et al. 2012 (APD) OCEANIA New Zealand: Bardone et al. 1996:820 (APD); Kasen et al. 2001 (APD)

290  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.8.5  Bipolar Depression and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data

Official Data Victimless

General

Delinquency

Overall

NORTH AMERICA United States: Estroff et al. 1985 (drugs)

EUROPE Sweden: Yao et al. 2014:484 (both sexes)

EUROPE Switzerland: Modestin et al. 1996b NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bland et al. 1998:276

NORTH AMERICA United States: Ellis & Hoskin 2018:Table 3 (violent & property)

Not significant

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior NORTH AMERICA United States: Thorneloe & Crews 1981 (APD); Robins et al. 1991:288 (APD); McElroy et al. 1992 (APD); Biederman et al. 1996a (CD); Wozniak et al. 1995 (CD); Biederman et al. 1997 (CD); Mueser et al. 2012 (APD)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Guze et al. 1969

Negative

Table 6.8.6a. Overall, research has revealed that offending rates are higher for schizophrenics than for persons in general. This conclusion has been especially well-­documented for violent offending. Oddly, however, three studies have reported recidivism to be lower for schizophrenics (or schizophrenia-spectrum disorder) than for released prisoners with no such conditions. Research findings for schizophrenia and self-reported offending or diagnosed antisocial traits are summarized in Table 6.8.6b. Nearly all evidence further confirms that schizophrenia and offending are positively correlated.

6.8.7 Self-Mutilation Some people intentionally inflict injury or serious disfigurements onto their own bodies, with wrist slashing being a common example. While the research is limited, Table 6.8.7 suggests that self-mutilating behavior and offending behavior are positively correlated.

6.8.8 Suicide It is reasonable to question whether suicide should be considered as a type of mental illness, especially all incidences of suicide. Nevertheless, we are doing so here for lack of a better category and because suicidal behavior is frequently linked to depression (Apter et al. 1988; Hoberman & Garfinkel 1988). Three fairly distinct indicators of suicidal behavior are recognized: The most obvious involves the actual completed suicide. Another is attempted suicide. And a third is known as suicide

ideation, referring to the act of giving serious thought to committing suicide. So much research has been reported on the relationship between these three aspects of suicidal behavior in relationship to offending behavior that they are divided into two tables, one for official offending and one for unofficial offending. Table 6.8.8a shows that all of the available studies on suicidal behavior and official offending have found significant positive relationships. The link between suicidal behavior and criminality appears to be especially strong in the case of persons with lengthy histories of alcohol and drug abuse (Woodruff et al. 1972). A large number of studies were located that have examined the relationship between suicide and self-reported offending and antisocial behavior. Table 6.8.8b indicates that positive relationships have been found without exception. One noteworthy difference between the studies summarized in Tables 6.8.8a and 6.8.8b is that nearly all of the studies in the first table involve completed suicide, whereas most of the studies in the second table pertain to suicide attempts and suicide ideation.

6.8.9 Suicide Rates (Ecological) Suicide and homicide can both be thought of as violent acts. It is therefore reasonable to suspect that they might have something in common. This possibility has been addressed by a number of ecological studies. So, would the correlation between suicide rates and homicide rates be positive or negative? As one can see in Table 6.8.9, the answers have not been consistent.

TABLE 6.8.6a  Schizophrenia and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Negative

Violent, Sex, or Property

Victimless

General

Delinquency

EUROPE Austria: Schanda et al. 2004 (homicide); Britain: Hafner & Boker 1982 (violent); PJ Taylor 1985 (violent); Wallace et al. 1998 (♂s, homicide); Mullen et al. 2000 (homicide, ♂s); EA Walsh et al. 2001 (♂s, homicide); Cannon et al. 2002; Denmark: Eronen et al. 1996* (homicide); Brennan et al. 2000 (violent); Gosden et al. 2005 (among male juvenile offenders); Finland: Eronen et al. 1996* (♂s, violent); Tiihonen et al. 1997* (violent); Rasanen et al. 1998:439 (violent); Germany: Haefner & Boeker 1973 (violent); Iceland: Petursson & Gudjonsson 1981 (homicide); Sweden: Lindqvist 1986 (homicide); Gottlieb et al. 1987 (homicide); Lindqvist 1989 (♂s, violent); Lindqvist & Allebeck 1990 (violent, especially for ♀s); Fazel & Grann 2006 (violent); Hodgins et al. 2007 (♂s); Eriksson et al. 2011 (♂s, among military conscripts); Fazel, Wolf et al. 2014:50; Switzerland: Modestin & Ammann 1996:74* (violent 5-times more; property 2.5-times more, ♂s) MIDDLE EAST Israel: Stueve & Link 1997 (violent, ♀s); Turkey: Erkiran et al. 2006 (violent) NORTH AMERICA United States: JW Swanson et al. 1990* (violent); Cirincione et al. 1992 (violent); Monahan 1992 (violent); Eronen 1995 (violent); Erb et al. 2001 (♂s, homicide) OCEANIA Australia: Mullen et al. 2000 (violent); C Wallace et al. 2004 (♂s); New Zealand: Arseneault et al. 2000 (violent) OVERVIEW Literature Review: E Walsh et al. 2002; Meta-Analysis: Fazel, Gulati et al. 2009; Fazel & Yu 2011

EUROPE Sweden: Lindqvist & Alleback 1989 (drugs); Switzerland: Modestin & Ammann 1996:74* (drugs 3-time more, ♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Panton 1958 (drugs); Mueser et al. 1990*; Regier et al. 1990 (drugs); Mueser et al. 1992 (drugs)

EUROPE Austria: Haller 2001 (especially violent); Britain: Coid et al. 1993; Denmark: Silverton 1985; Finland: Tiihonen et al. 1997 (especially when combined with alcoholism or substance abuse); Germany: Soyka et al. 2007; Sweden: Lindqvist & Allebeck 1990:346*; Yao et al. 2014:484 (both sexes) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bland et al. 1998:276; United States: Faris & Dunham 1939; Roth & Ervin 1971; Link et al. 1992; Wessely et al. 1994; Wallace, Mullen & Burgess 2004 (especially when combined with illegal drug use); Elbogen & Johnson 2009 (especially when combined with illegal drug use) OCEANIA New Zealand: Arseneault et al. 2000 (arrests) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Douglas, Guy & Hart 2009

EUROPE Germany: H Gross & Kaltenback 1975; DO Lewis & Shanok 1978

NORTH AMERICA United States: Kloek 1968; Guze et al. 1969; Teplin et al. 1996 (♀s)

EUROPE Switzerland: Laubacher et al. 2014:542

Recidivism NORTH AMERICA Canada: Rice & Harris 1992

EUROPE Finland: A Thomson, Tiihomen et al. 2018 (schizophrenia-spectrum disorder, among arsonists) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Rice & Harris 1995:339 (violent); United States: Lidz et al. 1993

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  291

Not significant

Official Data

292  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.8.6b  Schizophrenia and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: Breakey et al. 1974; Barbaree et al. 1989; Drake et al. 1989; Test et al. 1989; Mueser et al. 1990*; Swanson et al. 1990*; Dixon et al. 1990; Elbogen & Johnson 2009*

EUROPE Sweden: Giordano et al. 2015 (marijuana & cocaine use) NORTH AMERICA United States: Elbogen & Johnson 2009*

EUROPE Britain: Done et al. 1994 (childhood aggression); PM Miller et al. 2002 (childhood aggression); Sweden: Bland et al. 1987 (APD); Jackson et al. 1991 (APD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Morriss et al. 1956 (CD); O’Neil & Robins 1958 (CD); Swanson et al. 1990 (physical aggression); Robins & Price 1991 (CD); Robins et al. 1991:288 (psychopathy); Monahan 1992 (physical aggression); Link et al. 1994 (aggression); Ragsdale et al. 2013 (aggression)

Not significant

EUROPE Britain: P Jones et al. 1994 (childhood aggression)

Negative

TABLE 6.8.7  Self-Mutilation and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Sweden: Fazel, Wolf et al. 2014:49 (violent, among schizophrenics)

Self-Reported Data

Recidivism NORTH AMERICA United States: Chowanec et al. 1991

Overall

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Norway: Kvernmo & Rosenvinge 2009* (adolescent); Brunner et al. 2007 (adolescent)

MIDDLE EAST Turkey: (cocaine & marijuana use) EUROPE Norway: Kvernmo & Rosenvinge 2009* (adolescent, marijuana)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior MIDDLE EAST Turkey: Evrensel et al. 2016:122 (♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Evren et al. 2012

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.8.8a  Suicide and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Not significant Negative

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Denmark: Christoffersen et al. 2005 (convicted ­rapists, ♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: BrewerSmyth et al. 2004 (violent crime & attempt, among ♀ prisoners)

Victimless EUROPE Sweden: Allebeck & Allgulander 1990 (completed, drugs) NORTH AMERICA United States: McKenry et al. 1983 (attempt, drugs); RC Fowler et al. 1986 (completed, drugs); Rich et al. 1989 (completed, drugs); Rich et al. 1989 (completed, drugs); Deykin et al. 1994 (ideation, drugs)

General

Delinquency

EUROPE Sweden: Belfrage 1991 (completed); Lidberg 1993 (completed); Belfrage 1994 (completed) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Department of the Solicitor General 1976 (completed); Bland et al. 1998:276 (attempted) OCEANIA Australia: O’Toole & Stankov 1992:713 (attempt)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Alessi et al. 1984 (attempt)

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  293

TABLE 6.8.8b  Suicide and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data Overall NORTH AMERICA United States: Frances et al. 1987 (ideation); Juon & Ensminger 1997 (ideation & attempts)

Illegal Drugs EUROPE Britain: Morgan et al. 1976; Sweden: Casey 1989 (attempt); Bukstein et al. 1993 (attempts) NORTH AMERICA Canada: R Simons 1991 (ideation); De Man et al. 1993 (ideation); United States: Chabrol & Moron 1988 (ideation); Dukes & Lorch 1989 (ideation); Levy & Deykin 1989 (ideation); Berman & Schwartz 1990 (attempt); Ravinus 1990 (attempted); Kandel et al. 1991 (ideation); Kirkpatrick-Smith et al. 1992 (ideation); Felts et al. 1992 (ideation); DM Adams & Overholser 1992 (ideation); Kaminer 1992 (attempts & completed); AR Rich et al. 1992 (ideation); JW Swanson et al. 1992 (attempt); Garrison et al. 1993 (ideation & attempt); CA King et al. 1993 (attempt); DM Adams et al. 1994 (attempt); Kinnier et al. 1994 (attempt); Young et al. 1994 (attempt); V Burge et al. 1995; Juon & Ensminger 1997 (ideation & attempt); Mezzich et al. 1997 (ideation & attempt); Windle & Windle 1997:925 (attempt); Trammel et al. 1998 (attempt); R Garofalo et al. 1999 (high school students, attempt); Prinstein et al. 2000 (ideation); RA King, Schwab-Stone et al. 2001 (ideation, marijuana use); Rowan 2001; MD Resnick et al. 2004:Table 4 (attempt)

Not significant

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Shaffer 1974 (attempts, CD); Finland: Linnoila & Virkkunen 1992 (violent suicide); Iceland: Helgason 1964 (completed, APD) MIDDLE EAST Turkey: Evrensel et al. 2016:122 (APD, ♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Dorpat & Ripley 1960 (completed, APD); Shafii et al. 1985 (completed, CD); Rich et al. 1986 (completed, APD); Apter et al. 1988 (attempt, CD); RA King, Schwab-Stone et al. 2001* (ideation, physical aggression); Verona et al. 2001 (psychopathy, attempt); Goodwin & Hamilton 2003 (APD, ideation & attempt); SA Hill et al. 2005 (attempt, APD); CJ Patrick et al. 2005 (attempt, psychopathic ♂ inmates); Watkins & Melde 2016 (gang membership); PN Smith et al. 2014* (psychopathy Factor 2, among prisoners) OCEANIA New Zealand: Mulder et al. 1994:283 (attempt, APD) NORTH AMERICA United States: PN Smith et al. 2014* (psychopathy Factor 1, among prisoners)

Negative

TABLE 6.8.9  Suicide Rates and Offending Rates (Ecological). Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Ireland: McKenna et al. 1997 (homicide, time series 1950–1990) NORTH AMERICA United States: Boor 1981 (homicide, states); Holinger 1987* (homicide, time series 1933–1982, among 15–24 year olds); Boor & Bair 1990 (homicide, states); Leenaars & Lester 1994 (homicide, states); B Wu 2003:219 (homicide, counties, r = .24) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Palmer 1968 (homicide, countries); Holinger 1979 (homicide, countries)

Not significant

EUROPE Former Soviet Union: Brainerd 2001 (homicide, time series) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Leenaars & Lester 1994 (homicide, provinces)

Negative

ASIA Japan: Kura 2013:Table 2 (homicide, government administrative districts, r = −.32) NORTH AMERICA United States: R Lane 1979 (homicide, time series, Philadelphia); Holinger 1987* (homicide, time series 1933–1982, among 35–65 year olds) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Morselli 1879:243 (homicide)

294  Handbook of Crime Correlates

6.9 MENTAL/BEHAVIORAL DISORDER Mental disorders refer to cognitive processes that frequently result in inappropriate social behavior. In terms of distinguishing between mental disorder and mental illness, disorders are much less likely to result in seeking or receiving medical treatment, especially in an institutional setting. The mental disorders that have often been examined with respect to criminal/delinquent behavior are contained in this section with the exception of those covered in Chapter 1 such as antisocial personality disorder, CD, and psychopathy as specific clinical indicators of antisocial behavior.

6.9.1 Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder While every child occasionally fails to pay attention to their parents and teachers, those with chronic tendencies are said to have attention-deficit disorders (ADD). When poor attention span is combined with unusually high degrees of rambunctiousness and disruptive behavior in social settings (such as at family gatherings and in school), the condition is then termed attention deficit with hyperactivity disorder or ADHD. Until the 1980s, the names most commonly given to ADHD were hyperactivity or hyperkinesis. Even though the restless motor movements that are a key feature of ADHD usually lessen as affected children move into adolescence, their abilities to maintain a focus on long-term tasks assigned by others usually continues to be deficient even in adulthood (Gittelman et al. 1985, Klein & Mannuzza 1991; Mannuzza et al. 1991; Faigel et al. 1995). Partly for this reason, it is sometimes difficult to clearly distinguish between ADD and ADHD (Barkley et al. 1990). In the United States, ADHD (sometimes including ADD) is estimated to affect between 2% and 9% of the childhood population (JC Anderson et al. 1987; Safer & Krager 1988). Similar estimates have been reported for other countries (HR Bird et al. 1988). The estimates vary in part because ADHD symptoms range considerably in terms of degree of severity, and not everyone uses the same level of severity in making diagnoses. Many studies have examined the possible connection between ADHD and criminal and antisocial behavior, so much so that results are presented in two separate tables, one for official offending measures and the other for measures based on unofficial offending. Regarding official measures, Table 6.9.1a shows that nearly all of the available studies have concluded that ADHD and criminality/delinquency are positively correlated. This appears to be especially true for persistent criminality (Farrington et al. 1990:73). In addition to the many studies linking ADHD to official crime and delinquency, numerous studies of ADHD and unofficial offending have also been published. As shown in Table 6.9.1b, these studies have provided comparably strong indications that ADHD is positively correlated with

self-reported crime and delinquency as well as clinical and personality indicators of antisocial behavior.

6.9.2 Enuresis Enuresis, also known as bed wetting, refers to tendencies to involuntarily urinate while sleeping beyond early childhood. Studies conducted in the United States indicate that most children learn to stop wetting the bed by around age 4, with only about a third persisting through age 5, and 20% continuing to wet their beds at least occasionally after age 7 (Byrd et al. 1996). Children who are among the last to stop nighttime urination are diagnosed as being enuretic. Over the years, researchers have sought to determine if enuretics have an elevated probability of exhibiting criminal and antisocial tendencies. The findings are summarized in Table 6.9.2. As one can see, the majority of studies support the view that enuresis is significantly more common among offenders.

6.9.3 Gambling Addiction Most gamblers lose more money than they win. So why do people gamble, especially to the point of jeopardizing their (and their family’s) life savings? Apparently, some gamblers find the prospect of being among the winning minority sufficiently exciting and fun that it is almost impossible to stop. According to surveys conducted in the United States (Volberg 1994) and Great Britain (Blumel 1995), about 2% of adult gamblers are considered compulsive (or pathological) gamblers. Minor forms of compulsive gamblers are sometimes called problem gamblers. In the previous chapter, the research evidence on gambling behavior in general and criminality was summarized. Here, attention is given to the ∼2% of gamblers who are considered compulsive or addicted. As summarized in Table 6.9.3, all of the available research has concluded that a significant positive correlation exists between gambling addiction and offending behavior.

6.9.4 Language Impairment (Stuttering) A few studies have investigated possible associations between having unusual difficulties speaking (e.g., speech impediments) and offending behavior. As shown in Table 6.9.4, only a few relevant studies were located, all having to do with a phenomenon known as stuttering. The findings have either indicated that there is a positive correlation between stuttering and offending or a non-significant correlation.

6.9.5 Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by thoughts and actions that result in repeating certain

TABLE 6.9.1a  Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Negative

Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Sweden: B Klinteberg et al. 1993* (violent, longitudinal); Eklund & Klinteberg 2003 (violent, offending, hyperactivity, longitudinal); Lundström et al. 2014 (violent)

Victimless

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

EUROPE Sweden: B Klinteberg et al. 1993* (drugs, longitudinal); Sundquist, Ohlsson et al. 2015 (drugs) NORTH AMERICA United States: Blouin et al. 1978 (drugs); Barkley et al. 1990 (drugs); Crowley & Riggs 1995 (drugs); Wilens et al. 1998 (drugs); KR Murphy et al. 2002:154*

EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1990; Farrington 1993a; Farrington 2012:54 (hyperactivity & convictions); longitudinal); Germany: Retz, Retz-Junginger et al. 2004 (ADHD & imprisonment, ♂s); Rösler et al. 2004 (ADHD & imprisonment, ♂s); Rösler, Retz et al. 2009 (♀s); Norway: Mordre et al. 2011 (among former psychiatric patients, longitudinal); Sweden: Nylander 1979; T Andersson et al. 1997 (longitudinal, ♂s); Yao et al. 2014:484 (both sexes) NORTH AMERICA United States: Satterfield et al. 1982* (ADD); Weiss et al. 1985; Satterfield 1987; Mannuzza et al. 1989*; Lilienfeld & Waldman 1990; Mannuzza et al. 1991; Satterfield & Schell 1997; Babinski et al. 1999* (hyperactivity-impulsivity, ♂s); KR Murphy et al. 2002:154*; Unnever et al. 2003:488 (arrests); RA Barkley et al. 2004; Satterfield et al. 2007; Mannuzza et al. 2008 (white ♂s, arrests); Sibley et al. 2011 (especially when also diagnosed CD, ♂s) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Knecht et al. 2015; Meta-Analysis: Pratt, Cullen et al. 2002 (ADD r = .254; ADHD r = .081, hyperactivity r = .142, includes some data on official & self-reported delinquency)

EUROPE Finland: Sourander et al. 2006 (hyperactivity) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Offord et al. 1989; Tremblay et al. 2003; United States: Mendelson et al. 1971; Weiss et al. 1971; Huessy et al. 1974; Borland & Heckman 1976; Ackerman et al. 1977; Milman 1979; Weiss & Hechtman 1979*; Loney et al. 1981; Mattes et al. 1982:115; Loney et al. 1983; Roff & Wirt 1984:115; Gittelman et al. 1985; Mannuzza et al. 1989*; Zagar et al. 1989; Barkley et al. 1990; Barkley et al. 1991; Forehand et al. 1991 (arrests, especially when ADHD & CD are combined); Loeber 1990; Armistead et al. 1992; Biederman et al. 1996a; Herrenkohl et al. 2000 (longitudinal); J Taylor et al. 2000 OVERVIEW Literature Review: Wierson et al. 1992

EUROPE Britain: Knight & West 1975; Farrington et al. 1990:73 NORTH AMERICA United States: Satterfield et al. 1982*; Wierson & Forehand 1995:64

NORTH AMERICA United States: Babinski et al. 1999* (hyperactivity-impulsivity, ♀s); C Hansen et al. 1999 (albeit nearly significantly positive, ♂s)

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  295

Not significant

Official Data

296  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.9.1b  Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

Positive

EUROPE Britain: Farrington et al. 1990; Finland: Sourander et al. 2006 (violent & property, ♂s); Germany: Lösel & Bender 2014* (mom & self-reports); Iceland: Gudjonsson et al. 2014 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Nagin & Tremblay 1999:1190*; Latimer et al. 2003:15; United States: Stewart et al. 1973; Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 1993:690 (longitudinal); Peeples & Loeber 1994 (♂s, hyperactivity); Babinski et al. 1999 (hyperactivity-impulsivity); Herrenkohl et al. 2000 (violent, teens, teacher- & parent-rated); StouthamerLoeber et al. 2002:116 (♂s, r = .16); Farrington et al. 2003:232 (♂s); SS Lee & Hinshaw 2004:Table 2 (adolescent ♂s); Defoe et al. 2013 (hyperactivity) OCEANIA New Zealand: Fergusson & Horwood 1995:482*; BR Wright et al. 1999b (parent- & teacherrated, delinquency at age 15 & crime at age 21)

MIDDLE EAST Israel: Teichmann et al. 1989 NORTH AMERICA United States: Gittelman et al. 1985; Kellam et al. 1989; Friedman et al. 1991; Biederman et al. 1996a*; Wilens et al. 1997; Mannuzza et al. 1998* (♂s); HR White et al. 2001; RA Barkley et al. 2004 OCEANIA New Zealand: Moffitt & Silva 1988 (ADD); Moffitt 1990a (ADD); Fergusson & Horwood 1995:482*

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Nagin & Tremblay 1999:1190* (aggression & ODD statistically controlled)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Weiss & Hechtman 1979

Negative

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Sandberg et al. 1978 (CD); Sandberg et al. 1980 (CD); Schachar et al. 1981 (CD); August et al. 1983 (CD); RJ Blair et al. 2001 (psychopathy, adolescent ♂s); Schachar 1991 (CD); Taylor et al. 1996 (CD); Thapar et al. 2001 (CD); Germany: Retz & Rosler 2009 (aggression); Eisenbarth et al. 2008 (ADHD & psychopathy); Lösel & Bender 2014* (physical aggression); Norway: Backe-Hansen & Ogden 1996 (CD); Sweden: Freidenfelt & al Klinteberg 2007 (psychopathy); Diamantopoulou et al. 2010 (CD); Ukraine: Drabick et al. 2004 (ODD, mom-rated) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hare 1970:67 (psychopathy); Offord & Bennett 1994 (CD); WM Craig et al. 2002 (♂s, teacher-rated aggression & gang membership); Ziskind et al. 1977:256 (psychopathy); Satterfield 1978 (psychopathy); Loney et al. 1981 (APD); Prinz et al. 1981 (CD); Stewart et al. 1981 (CD); Hechtman et al. 1984 (APD); Johnston et al. 1985 (CD); Weiss et al. 1985 (antisocial personality); Munir et al. 1987 (CD); Walker et al. 1987 (CD); Wallander 1988 (CD); Mannuzza et al. 1989 (CD); Barkley, Fischer et al. 1990 (antisocial behavior); Loeber 1990 (APD); Biederman et al. 1991 (ODD); Faraone et al. 1991b (CD); Wender & Solanto 1991 (aggression); Abikoff & Klein 1992 (CD); Hinshaw 1992 (aggression); Mannuzza et al. 1993 (antisocial behavior); McDermott 1993:422 (CD); Mannuzza et al. 1993 (APD); Crowley & Riggs 1995; Loeber, Green et al. 1995 (CD early onset); Biederman et al. 1996a (CD); MacDonald & Achenbach 1996 (CD); Thompson et al. 1996 (CD); Vitelli 1996 (CD, ♂s); Greene et al. 1997:763 (CD); Jensen et al. 1997; Satterfield & Schell 1997 (CD); Whitmore et al. 1997:93 (CD); Wilens et al. 1997 (CD); Mannuzza et al. 1998* (antisocial behavior, ♂s); Disney et al. 1999* (CD); Hill et al. 1999:311 (gang membership); Lahey et al. 1999 (CD); Lahey, McBurnett & Loeber 2000 (ODD); Sanford et al. 1999 (CD); Lahey et al. 2000 (CD); Herpertz et al. 2001 (CD); HR White et al. 2001 (CD); Kosson et al. 2002 (psychopathy, adolescent ♂s); Sukhodolsky et al. 2003 (parent- & teacher-rated aggression); Bennett, Pitale et al. 2004 (reactive but not proactive aggression); Mannuzza et al. 2004 (antisocial behavior & ODD, whites); McCabe et al. 2004 (CD); Biederman et al. 2006 (APD); Connor & Doerfler 2008 (CD); Waschbusch & Willoughby 2008 (aggression); Sukhodolsky et al. 2003* (parent-rated aggression); Kolko & Pardini 2010:718 (CD); Pardini & Fite 2010 (ODD) OCEANIA Australia: Bor et al. 2004:Table 1 (adolescent antisocial behavior); New Zealand: McGee et al. 1985 (CD) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Biederman et al. 1991 (CD); Pliszka 2000 (CD); Storebø & Simonsen 2016 (ASP)

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  297

TABLE 6.9.2  Enuresis and Offending Behavior.

Nature of Relationship

Positive

Self-Reported Data

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE France: Bachet 1951 (property)

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Britain: Stevenson & Goodman 2001 (at age 3)

EUROPE Britain: Argyle 1964:63; Rutter et al. 1970; Sweden: Hartelius 1965:113; Jonsson 1967:197; Jonsson 1975:184; Switzerland: Laubacher et al. 2014:542 NORTH AMERICA United States: Michaels & Goodman 1934; Michaels 1938; S Glueck & Glueck 1950; Michaels 1955; Hader 1965

EUROPE Finland: Repo et al. 1997

EUROPE Spain: Calafat et al. 1997:17

Not significant

NORTH AMERICA United States: Rosenow 1920

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Rutter et al. 1973 (CD); Sweden: Hallgren 1957 (CD); Jarvelin et al. 1990 (CD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Ziskind et al. 1977:256 (psychopathy); Pillay et al. 1989 (CD); Freehan et al. 1990 (CD); Byrd et al. 1996 (CD) OCEANIA New Zealand: Fergusson & Horwood 1994 (CD) EUROPE Netherlands: Hirasing et al. 1997 (CD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Warzak 1993 (CD)

Negative

behaviors over and over again. Four studies were found regarding an association between OCD and offending behavior. Table 6.9.5 shows that three of these four studies reported a significant positive relationship.

6.9.6 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a psychological disorder that typically occurs in response to an unusually traumatic event. Soldiers engaged in combat, for example, are at risk for developing PTSD as are seriously abused children. Table 6.9.6 shows that the few pertinent studies have all concluded that there is a positive relationship between PTSD and offending behavior.

6.9.7 Somatic Disorder Somatization disorder is a psychiatric condition characterized by people persistently complaining of physical

ailments without any identifiable cause and usually that fail to respond to any type of treatment. Table 6.9.7 indicates that the research findings regarding an association between somatization disorder and offending behavior are somewhat mixed. However, they generally favor a positive relationship.

6.9.8 Tourette Syndrome/Tic Disorders Tourette syndrome is characterized by repetitive, stereotyped, and largely involuntary movements or vocalizations (although many affected individuals can at least temporarily restrain their vocal outbursts). This disorder is considered the most common form of a variety of other so-called tic disorders. Several studies were located concerning the possible association between Tourette syndrome and various forms of offending behavior. As shown in Table 6.9.8, they all reported significant positive relationships with offending.

298  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.9.3  Gambling Addiction and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Britain: ADL Roberts et al. 2016 (violent)

Victimless

General

NORTH AMERICA United States: Ramirez et al. 1983 (diagnosed gambling addiction, drugs); McCormick 1993 (diagnosed gambling addiction, drugs)

OVERVIEW Literature Review: Folino & Abait 2009

Delinquency EUROPE Britain: Farrington 1988:72 (diagnosed gambling addiction) NORTH AMERICA United States: Nagin & Land 1993:353 (diagnosed gambling addiction)

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.9.4  Language Impairment (Stuttering) and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Not significant

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Self-Reported Data NORTH AMERICA Canada: Brownie et al. 2004* (selfreported arrests & convictions)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Beaver, Nedelec et al. 2014:403 (stuttering, psychopathic traits, among college students)

MIDDLE EAST Iran: Mansourabadi et al. 2014 (stuttering) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Brownie et al. 2004* (selfreported law violations)

Negative

TABLE 6.9.5  Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

Positive

Not significant

Self-Report Data General

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Sweden: Aromaki et al. 1999:117 (imprisonment, ♂s)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Douglass et al. 1995 (marijuana)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Torres et al. 2006 (psychopathy)

EUROPE Sweden: Lundström et al. 2014 (violent)

Negative

TABLE 6.9.6  Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Positive

NORTH AMERICA United States: SP Becker et al. 2012

Not significant Negative

Recidivism

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior NORTH AMERICA United States: Mueser et al. 2002 (APD); Schnurr et al. 2003 (APD); Sareen et al. 2004 (APD); TB Harris et al. 2013 (gang membership, among juvenile detainees)

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  299

Self-Reported Data Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Overall

Illegal Drugs

NORTH AMERICA United States: Blanco et al. 2008 (shoplifting)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Pietrzak & Petry 2005* (use)

EUROPE Britain: ADL Roberts et al. 2016 (violence) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bland et al. 1993 (diagnosed gambling addiction, APD); Mishra et al. 2011 (antisocial behavior); Mishra et al. 2017 (antisocial behavior); United States: McCormick et al. 1987 (diagnosed gambling addiction, APD); CJ Patrick et al. 2005 (among ♂ inmates); Pietrzak & Petry 2005* (APD); Chamberlain et al. 2016 (APD) OCEANIA Australia: Blaszcyznski et al. 1989 (diagnosed gambling addiction, APD); Blaszczynski & McConaghy 1994 (diagnosed gambling addiction, APD)

TABLE 6.9.7  Somatic Disorders and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

Delinquency

Positive

Not significant

Overall

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Belgium: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* NORTH AMERICA United States: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* NORTH AMERICA United States: Willgerodt & Thompson 2006:316* (somatic symptoms)

NORTH AMERICA United States: Willgerodt & Thompson 2006:316* (somatic symptoms)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior NORTH AMERICA United States: Cloninger & Guze 1970a (APD); Swartz et al. 1991a (APD)

EUROPE Belgium: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572* NORTH AMERICA United States: Vermeiren et al. 2004:572*

Negative

TABLE 6.9.8  Tourette Syndrome/Tic Disorders and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Not significant Negative

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Sweden: Lundström et al. 2014 (violent)

Delinquency ASIA China: Zhu et al. 2006* EUROPE Sweden: Ståhlberg et al. 2010

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

ASIA China: Zhu et al. 2006* (externalizing behavior) EUROPE Germany: Dehning et al. 2015 (self-reported aggression) MIDDLE EAST Iran: Ghanizadeh & Mosallaei 2009 (tic disorders, CD & ODD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Stefl 1984 (CD); Stokes et al. 1991 (aggression); Budman et al. 2000 (ODD); Kadesjo & Gillberg 2000 (CD); King & Scahill 2001 (CD); BS Peterson et al. 2001 (CD); Kurlan et al. 2002 (CD & opposition-defiant disorder); Snider, Seligman et al. 2002 (CD); Sukhodolsky et al. 2003* (parent-rated aggression); Sukhodolsky et al. 2009 (disruptive behavior) INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: RD Freeman et al. 2000 (CD & ODD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Sukhodolsky et al. 2003* (ADHD symptoms controlled, parent-rated aggression)

300  Handbook of Crime Correlates

6.10 DRUG ADDICTION/DEPENDENCE While people will never agree on exactly where alcohol and drug use becomes alcoholism and drug dependency, few doubt that a distinction is worthwhile. Basically, individuals who feel compelled to consume several drinks every day are considered alcoholics, especially if their drinking adversely affects family and social relationship (Helzer et al. 1991:81; American Psychiatric Association 1994:195). Drug dependence refers to addiction to drugs other than alcohol, particularly cocaine, heroin, and amphetamines. Drug abuse, which will also be included in this particular set of tables, is usually considered a slightly less severe form of drug dependence.

6.10.1 Drug Dependence/Substance Abuse in General Apart from the illegality of using various addictive substances and drugs of abuse, studies have sought to determine if criminal and delinquent behavior is correlated with drug dependency and abuse. While there is no sharp dividing line between drug use and drug dependency (or drug addiction), it is widely agreed that making a distinction is warranted (Jurich & Polson 1984). Basically, drug dependency means

that drug use has become fairly habitual and accompanied by feelings of discomfort whenever use is stopped even for a few days. Social scientists usually assess drug dependency through clinical interviews or self-reports on anonymous questionnaires (Stacy et al. 1985; Midanik 1988). Many studies have been undertaken to determine if drug dependence is a correlate of official measures of crime and delinquency. As one can clearly see by examining Table 6.10.1a, the answer is unquestionably affirmative. As revealed in Table 6.10.1b, there is also a consistent positive relationship between drug dependence/substance abuse and self-reported criminality as well as various clinical and personality measures of antisocial behavior. All of the studies in the table reported a statistically significant and positive relationship except for one study which specifically separated out users of marijuana.

6.10.2 Alcohol Abuse Alcohol abuse refers to the consumption of alcohol in sufficient amounts to frequently produce drunkenness. Common forms would include binge drinking as well as drinking to the point of becoming high much of the time. Frequent alcohol abuse is an indicator of a propensity toward alcoholism (discussed below).

TABLE 6.10.1a  Drug Dependence/Substance Abuse in General and Official Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Not significant Negative

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Britain: H Scott et al. 1998 (violent); Soyka 2000 (violent); Denmark: Brennan et al. 2000 (violent); Finland: Tiihonen et al. 1997 (violent); Sweden: Grann & Fazel 2004 (violent) NORTH AMERICA United States: Felthous & Kellert 1986 (violent); Steadman et al. 1998 (violent) OCEANIA Australia: Dobinson & Ward 1986 (property)

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

EUROPE Britain: IP James 1969; Sweden: Hodgins 1992:480; Fazel et al. 2014:Table 3 (convictions, among schizophrenics); Yao et al. 2014:484 (both sexes) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Bland et al. 1998:276; United States: Rappeport & Lassen 1966; Giovannoni & Gurel 1967; Guze et al. 1969; Plair & Jackson 1970; Roth & Ervin 1971; McGlothlin 1979; Inciardi 1980; Ball et al. 1981; Ball et al. 1982; Leukfield 1985; Speckart & Anglin 1985

EUROPE Britain: Backhouse & Pierce James 1969; Sweden: Stattin et al. 1997:204 NORTH AMERICA United States: A Gordon 1973

EUROPE Germany: Stadtland and Nedopil 2003; Sweden: Stattin et al. 1997:204 MIDDLE EAST Turkey: Erkiran et al. 2006 (violent) NORTH AMERICA United States: Vold 1931; Cloninger & Guze 1970a; Babst et al. 1971; Cloninger & Guze 1973; Palmer & Carlson 1976; DM Gottfredson et al. 1978; Brown 1978; SD Gottfredson & Gottfredson 1979; Eisenberg 1985; Wish & Johnson 1986:80; RD Duncan et al. 1995; Harer 1995; Wierson & Forehand 1995:64; van der Put et al. 2012:309 OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Gendreau et al. 1996:583; Cottle et al. 2001:383

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  301

TABLE 6.10.1b  Drug Dependence/Substance Abuse in General and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data

Positive

EUROPE Britain: Hammersley & Morrison 1987; Otero-Lopez et al. 1994 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hundleby 1982; United States: Elliott et al. 1985; Watters et al. 1985; Anglin & Speckart 1988 (property); Swanson et al. 1990 (violent); Dembo et al. 1991; Horney et al. 1995; Uggen & Thompson 2003 (property); Blanco et al. 2008 (shoplifting)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Overall

Not significant

ASIA Taiwan: Cheng et al. 2006 (APD) EUROPE Fombonne et al. 2001; Norway: Storm-Mathisen & Vaglum 1994* (APD); Sweden: Storm-Mathisen & Vaglum 1994* (CD); Spak et al. 1997 (CD); Fridell et al. 2008* (opiate abusers) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Boyle et al. 1993 (CD); Reebye et al. 1995 (CD); Hopley & Brunelle 2012 (SUD & psychopathy); United States: Loney et al. 1981 (CD); Kosten et al. 1982 (APD); Rounsaville et al. 1982 (APD); Stabenau 1984 (APD); Hesselbrock et al. 1985 (APD); Cadoret et al. 1986 (CD); Kandel et al. 1986 (CD); JJ Collins et al. 1988 (substance abuse disorder, APD); Jaffe et al. 1988 (APD); HE Ross et al. 1988; KM Abram 1989 (antisocial behavior); Dimileo 1989 (CD); Grove et al. 1990 (APD); Kleinman et al. 1990 (APD); Regier et al. 1990 (APD); Robins & McEvoy 1990 (CD); Friedman et al. 1991 (CD); Greenbaum et al. 1991; LN Robins et al. 1991:288 (APD); Brooner et al. 1992 (APD); Keller et al. 1992 (CD); Stowell & Estroff 1992 (CD); Cohen et al. 1993a (CD); Mannuzza, Klein et al. 1993 (antisocial behavior, white ♂s); Martin et al. 1993 (CD); Crowley & Riggs 1995 (CD); Lynskey & Fergusson 1995 (CD); Steele et al. 1995 (CD); SE Young et al. 1995 (CD); Greenbaum et al. 1996 (CD); Grilo et al. 1996 (CD, ♂s); JB Rowe et al. 1996 (CD); Milberger et al. 1997:325 (CD); Mueser et al. 1997 (APD); Whitmore et al. 1997 (CD); Myers et al. 1998 (APD); Giancola et al. 2001 (antisocial behavior, ♀s); Krueger et al. 2002:418 (externalizing behavior); Goodwin & Hamilton 2003 (APD); Kosson et al. 2007:270 (psychopathy, among prisoners); Sargeant et al. 2012 (SUD & psychopathy) OCEANIA New Zealand: Henry et al. 1993b (CD); Lynskey & Fergusson 1994 (CD, especially when combined with attention-deficit disorder); Mulder et al. 1994:283 (APD, ♀s); Bardone et al. 1996 (CD) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Kazdin 1995 (CD, ♀s) EUROPE Sweden: Fridell et al. 2008* (marijuana use)

Negative

Given that a large proportion of crimes are committed when people are under the influence of alcohol, it is almost a foregone conclusion that alcohol abuse would be positively associated with criminal and delinquent behavior. This is exactly what the studies in Table 6.10.2 indicate, especially regarding violent crime. All of the studies located report a statistically significant and positive association between alcohol abuse and involvement in official crime as well as self-reported offenses. Psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder also appear to be positively correlated with alcohol abuse.

6.10.3 Alcoholism In recent decades, two types of alcoholics have come to be recognized, called Type I and Type II (von Knorring et al. 1987:307; Sigvardsson et al. 1996). Type I alcoholics rarely begin drinking excessively until their mid-20s or 30s, and

they do so predominantly in response to devastating social or family circumstances. In contrast, Type II alcoholics nearly always establish a pattern of heavy drinking by their teens or early 20s, a pattern not precipitated by any obvious personal tragedy (Anthenelli & Tabakoff 1995:178). Type II alcoholism has been found to run in families much more than Type I alcoholism, especially among males (Hallman et al. 1990; Mutzell 1993). The strong family transmission pattern for Type II alcoholism has implicated genetic factors as making a substantial contribution to this form of the disease (Cloninger et al. 1981; Manzardo et al. 2015). As shown in Table 6.10.3a, all relevant studies have found higher rates of alcoholism among persons who are criminal as well as delinquent. Studies that distinguished between Type I and Type II alcoholics have concluded that offending is much more closely associated with Type II than with Type I alcoholism (von Knorring et al. 1987:307; Sigvardsson et al. 1996).

302  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.10.2  Alcohol Abuse and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

General

Recidivism

Overall

EUROPE Austria: Schanda et al. 2004 (violent); Britain: Mullen et al. 2000 (violent); Denmark: Brennan et al. 2000 (violent); Finland: Eronen et al. 1996 (among schizophrenics, violence); Rasanen et al. 1998 (violent); Germany: Erb et al. 2001 (violent); Sweden: Gottlieb et al. 1987 (violent) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Cote & Hodgins 1992 (♂s, prisoners/murders); United States: Kantor & Strauss 1987 (partner/ domestic violence); Gelles & Cornell 1990 (partner/domestic violence); Swartz et al. 1998; DR White & Chen 2002 (partner/domestic violence)

EUROPE Sweden: Bohman 1996; Fazel et al. 2014:Table 3 (convictions, among schizophrenics)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Rice & Harris 1995:338 (violent); United States: van der Put et al. 2012:308 (adolescents)

EUROPE Britain: G Robertson 1990 (♀ prisoners)

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior MIDDLE EAST Turkey: Evrensel et al. 2016:122 (APD, ♂s) NORTH AMERICA United States: Goodwin & Hamilton 2003 (APD); Kosson et al. 2007:270 (psychopathy, among prisoners); Neumann & Hare 2008:Table 1 (psychopathy)

Not significant Negative

TABLE 6.10.3a  Alcoholism and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Not significant Negative

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property EUROPE Finland: Eronen et al. 1996 (homicide); Rasanen et al. 1998:439 (violent); Switzerland: Modestin et al. 1996* (violent & property) NORTH AMERICA United States: Cordilia 1985 (property); Eronen 1995 (violent)

General

Delinquency

Recidivism

EUROPE Britain: Glatt 1967; Czech Republic: Kubicka et al. 1992; Denmark: Baker 1986; Sweden: Amark 1951; Lindelius & Salum 1973 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Elliott-Harper & Harper 1981; Bland et al. 1998:276; United States: Banay 1942; W McCord & McCord 1962; Guze et al. 1968; Guze et al. 1969; Roth & Ervin 1971; Mayfield 1976; Frances et al. 1980; McCord 1981a; Martin et al. 1982a; Martin et al. 1982b; Swanson et al. 1990*; Greenfield & Weisner 1995* INTERNATIONAL Multiple Countries: Bridges 2005 (ecological: 21 countries, Alcoholics Anonymous chapters per capita & crime rate)

EUROPE Britain: Backhouse & Pierce James 1969; Sweden: Andreasson et al. 1993

EUROPE Britain: Mannheim & Wilkins 1955; Farrington & Hawkins 1991; Denmark: Schroder 1917; Finland: Repo et al. 1997 NORTH AMERICA Canada: Rice & Harris 1995; United States: Vold 1931; Hakeem 1948; Glaser 1954; Babst et al. 1972; Palmer & Carlson 1976; Brown 1978; SD Gottfredson & Gottfredson 1979; Schmidt & White 1979; Little & Robinson 1989 (among DUI offenders); Harer 1995

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  303

TABLE 6.10.3b  Alcoholism and Unofficial Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship Positive

Self-Reported Data Overall

Illegal Drugs

EUROPE Britain: Cookson 1992 NORTH AMERICA United States: BA Miller et al. 1989; Swanson et al. 1990 (violent); Windle 1990; Greenfield & Weisner 1995:99*

NORTH AMERICA United States: Helzer et al. 1991; S Wilsnack & Wilsnack 1991; Rhee et al. 2006

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior EUROPE Britain: Vaillant 1983b (APD); Czech Republic: Kubicka et al. 1992 (CD); Sweden: von Knorring et al. 1985:51 (drug abuse in general); Schulsinger et al. 1986 (APD); Spak et al. 1997 (CD) NORTH AMERICA United States: Schuckit 1973 (APD); Sher & Trull 1974 (APD); Gorenstein 1979 (APD); Lewis et al. 1982 (APD); Rounsaville et al. 1982 (APD); Lewis et al. 1983; Lewis et al. 1985 (APD); Schuckit et al. 1986 (APD); Cadoret et al. 1987 (APD); McCord 1988 (physical aggression); KM Abram 1989 (antisocial behavior); Bukstein et al. 1989 (CD); BuydensBranchey et al. 1989; Glenn & Parsons 1989 (CD); Helzer et al. 1991 (APD); Hesselbrock 1991 (APD); Robins et al. 1991:288 (APD); Stowell & Estroff 1992 (CD); Fergusson et al. 1994a (CD); Myers et al. 1995 (CD); Nixon et al. 1995 (CD) OCEANIA New Zealand: Mulder et al. 1994:283 (APD)

Not significant Negative

As shown in Table 6.10.3b, there is also substantial evidence linking alcoholism with self-reported offending and antisocial behavior and CD. In fact, all of the studies that were located have concluded that alcoholism is positively correlated with these variables.

TABLE 6.11.1  Attention Span and Offending Behavior. Nature of Relationship

Official Data

Self-Reported Data

General

Overall

Positive

6.11 OTHER COGNITIVE CONDITIONS Two final cognitive traits are given attention before bringing this chapter to a close. One is attention span and the other is known as executive functioning.

6.11.1 Attention Span Attention span was discussed earlier in this chapter in connection with mental disorders known as ADD and ADHD. A couple of studies, however, have specifically addressed the association between attention span and criminal/delinquent behavior. As shown in Table 6.11.1, both studies have concluded that offending is inversely correlated with the ability to maintain the focus of one’s attention on a given task.

6.11.2 Executive Functioning Executive functioning is a term that first came in to use in the 1980s. It basically refers to the ability to maintain one’s focus on a task and to prioritize subtasks to reach a specific goal and to make midcourse corrections in the process (Lezak 1983; Stuss & Benson 1986). To measure variations in executive functioning, several different operational tasks

Not significant Negative

NORTH AMERICA United States: Silverton 1988a

OCEANIA New Zealand: Wright et al. 1999b (delinquency at age 15 & crime at age 21, parent-rated)

have been developed (Morgan & Lilienfeld, 2000). One of the most widely used is called the Stroop Color-Word test or simply the Stroop test (Archibald & Kerns 1999; Nigg et al. 2002). In this test, research participants are instructed to watch a computer screen and press a button as soon as they see a word flashed that identifies some specific color (such as red). The Stroop test is made challenging by printing the word for red in some other color (such as green). After participants get used to discriminating on the basis of a word’s name rather than its actual color, they are told to change from pressing the button each time they see the word red no matter what color it is printed in to now focus only on the color that words are printed in (such as red) and ignore the name of the word itself. The basic objective of the Stroop

304  Handbook of Crime Correlates

TABLE 6.11.2  Executive Functioning and Offending Behavior.

Nature of Relationship

Self-Reported Data

Official Data Violent, Sex, or Property

General

Delinquency

Clinical/Personality Indicators of Antisocial Behavior

Overall

Positive Not significant

Negative

EUROPE Britain: Fairchild et al. 2009 (CD, IQ controlled) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Pennington & Ozonoff 1996 (CD) EUROPE Spain: RomeroMartinez et al. 2012:361 (Wisconsin CST, domestic violence, ♂s) OVERVIEW Literature Review: Adjorlolo & Egbenya 2016 (sex offenders)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Hoaken, Allaby & Earle 2007:Figure 1 (especially violent crime)

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Yeudall et al. 1982 (both violent & nonviolent)

test and other tests of executive functioning (such as the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test) is to gage how well individuals are able to quickly and appropriately change response strategies. Those with well-developed executive functioning perform faster and with fewer errors than those with poor executive functioning. Findings on how executive functioning is related to offending appear in Table 6.11.2. One can see that all of the located studies report that there is a negative correlation between executive functioning and criminal and antisocial behavior. However, a review of studies conducted up to the early 1990s concluded that there was no significant relationship between executive functioning and CD (Pennington & Ozonoff 1996). This assessment has not been confirmed by more recent meta-analyses indicating that all forms of antisocial behavior are associated with poor executive functioning.

NORTH AMERICA Canada: Barker et al. 2007 (both violent & property offenses) OCEANIA New Zealand: TE Moffitt & Henry 1989 (IQ controlled)

EUROPE Britain: Blair, Mitchell & Blair 2005 (psychopathy, ♂s); Kumari et al. 2006 (physical violence, among schizophrenics); Germany: Birbaumer et al. 2005 (♂s); Sweden: Thorell & Wåhlstedt 2006 (opposition-defiant disorder) NORTH AMERICA Canada: Seguin, Pihl et al. 1995 (physical aggression, adolescent ♂s, longitudinal); LeMarquand et al. 1998:339 (aggression); Dery et al. 1999 (CD, parental SES controlled); SR Ross, Benning & Adams 2007 (psychopathy); United States: Sutker et al. 1983 (psychopathy, among inmates); Deckel et al. 1996 (CD); Giancola et al. 1998 (antisocial behavior); Gillen & Hesselbrock 1992 (APD); Giancola et al. 1996 (aggression, ♂s); Speltz et al. 1999 (CD, ♂s); Coolidge, DenBoer & Segal 2004:1564 (bullying, adolescents); SR Ross et al. 2007 (psychopathy); Sprague et al. 2011 (aggression) OVERVIEW Meta-Analysis: Morgan & Lilienfeld 2000 (antisocial behavior); Ogilvie et al. 2011 (antisocial behavior); Joyal et al. 2014; Gil-Fenoy et al. 2018 (antisocial behavior)

6.12 HIGHLIGHTS The focus of this chapter was on how cognitive variables correlate with offending behavior. Three main categories of cognitive variables were considered: attitudinal, intellectual, and those relevant to mental health. Ambition-Related Attitudes: Few relevant studies were located on how educational and occupational aspirations are associated with offending, and they were not consistent. Regarding educational commitment as a related type of attitude, however, there were many studies, and the vast majority indicate that offending behavior is inversely associated with having such commitments. In the case of future orientation, nearly all of the available studies indicate that delinquents and criminals are less future orientated than their non-offending counterparts.

Cognitive and Mental Health Factors Chapter | 6  305

Regarding the studies on work orientation, few were located, and the evidence is inconsistent regarding any association with criminal or antisocial behavior. Authority-Related Attitudes: Only a couple of studies were found regarding authoritarianism and offending. They indicated that authoritarian individuals are less involved in crime than other persons, at least in the case of females. Several studies have examined how belief in the legitimacy of the legal system is related to offending, all of which suggest an inverse relationship. Regarding rebelliousness toward authority, many studies have concluded that it is positively correlated with offending. Moral/Political Attitudes: Several types of moralistic attitudes have been investigated regarding links to offending. The first to be considered involves what is known as BJW. Few studies were located, and they weakly point toward an inverse correlation with offending behavior. Many studies have sought to determine if individuals who develop most rapidly in their level of moral reasoning are less involved in crime and delinquency than those who do so slowly. By and large, findings support the conclusion that a high level of moral reasoning is associated with less offending, although a substantial minority of studies report no significant relationship. The tendency to excuse criminal conduct, at least that which hurts others, is known as neutralization. All of the available studies have shown that offenders neutralize criminal conduct more than do non-offenders. Little research was located regarding how holding rightwing versus left-wing political views might correlate with crime and delinquency. The findings that were located were inconsistent. Substantial research was found regarding tolerance or support for (1) deviance in general, (2) illegal drug use, and (3) illegal and antisocial behavior. In all three cases, those who hold more tolerant/supportive attitudes are more likely to engage in criminal and antisocial behavior. Negativity: Under this general category, four attitudinal traits were considered. In three cases—alienation, cynicism, and negative affect toward others—most of the evidence pointed toward a positive correlation with criminal and/or antisocial behavior. Regarding the fourth trait—that of having feeling or showing symptoms of guilt and shame—all of the studies pointed toward a negative correlation with offending. Self-Reflective Attitudes: These types of attitudes involve how people perceive themselves. The first pertained to individualism versus collectivism. Little research was found, but it all indicated that offending behavior is positively correlated with individualism. In the case of another self-reflective attitude—that of internal–external locus of control—most of the research points toward an external locus of control being associated with offending. Only a few studies of happiness and

offending were found, but they all agree that offenders are less happy than non-offenders. Research involving selfesteem and offending is substantial, and most of it suggests that offenders have lower self-esteem than do non-offenders. Social Preferences: The last category of attitudes and preferences to be considered involves four preferences of a social nature (broadly defined). First, nearly all studies of attachment to others have revealed that social attachments are unusually low among offenders. Second, numerous studies investigating the connection between enjoying school and offending behavior all agree that offenders dislike school. Third, familism, referring to the tendency to center life around an individual’s close family relationships, has also indicated that offenders are unusually low in this regard. Fourth, preferences for viewing television programs with violent content have been studied in connection with antisocial behavior. Consistent with studies reviewed in Chapter 5 on actual viewing habits, the studies on preferences for viewing violence all indicate that antisocial individuals express greater preference than persons in general. Learning Ability and Intelligence: Large numbers of studies have investigated the connection between learning ability, especially academic learning, and offending behavior. The first indicator of learning ability had to do with academic performance, typically measured in terms of grade point average (GPA). With just a few exceptions, studies have found that offending behavior is negatively correlated with GPA. Intelligence tests adjusted for age were developed for the purpose of predicting academic ability. Therefore, it is not surprising to find that studies correlating IQ with offending behavior have essentially reached the same conclusion as studies involving GPAs. Specifically, with only a handful of exceptions, well over a 100 studies of IQ and offending have concluded that offenders attain lower scores than do non-offenders. Several studies in recent years have studied intelligence and offending at an ecological level. They have all indicated that geographic areas (e.g., states and nations) with high average IQ scores tend to have lower crime rates than those with low average scores. Intelligence, of course, is not a unitary concept. Its most significant subdivisions involve separating verbal (or linguistic) IQ from forms of IQ having little to do with language (such as mathematical and spatial reasoning). Accordingly, many studies have looked for specific correlations between both VIQ scores and PIQ scores and offending behavior. Both aspects of these IQ scores appear to correlate inversely with offending. Intellectual imbalance refers to significant differences between VIQ and PIQ scores. In other words, individuals who score significantly higher in one of these two IQ subtests than in the other are said to be intellectually

306  Handbook of Crime Correlates

imbalanced. Such imbalances can either involve VIQ being significantly higher than PIQ or vice versa. Nearly all of the available research has shown that offenders with intellectual imbalances are lower in VIQ than in PIQ. This result comports with other studies of learning disabilities, which are usually language-related, and with other studies of deficits in language learning and reading ability among offenders. Mental Illness: Many studies have been reported on associations between mental illness and offending, nearly all of which have concluded that the correlation is positive. This is true for mental illness in general, for depression, for bipolar disorder, and for schizophrenia. As a mental illness–related phenomenon, attention was also given to self-injurious behavior. In this regard, both self-mutilation and suicidal behavior appear to be positively correlated with offending behavior. Concerning ecologically based suicide rates, however, the evidence is quite inconsistent regarding any relationship with violent criminality. Mental/Behavioral Disorders: While no sharp distinction can be made between mental illnesses and mental disorders, the latter usually pertain to conditions that are less

serious and life-debilitating. Studies have generally indicated that all of the following forms of mental disorders are more prevalent among criminal and antisocial individuals than their relatively law-abiding counterparts: attention-­ deficit hyperactivity disorder, enuresis, pathological gambling, somatization disorder, and Tourette syndrome. In the case of OCD and PTSD, the evidence is still fairly scarce but generally pointing to positive correlations as well. Drug Addiction/Dependence: Another type of mental/ behavioral disorder given separate attention involves drug addiction and dependency. Regarding drug dependency in general, there are many studies, and they all agree that this disorder is positively related to offending and antisocial behavior. The same is true for alcohol abuse and alcoholism. Other Cognitive Conditions: Two remaining traits of a cognitive nature are given attention at the end of this ­chapter: attention span and executive functioning. While little research was located on attention span, it appears to be low among offenders relative to persons in general. Regarding executive functioning, the evidence is essentially unanimous in indicating that it too is relatively low among offenders.