Textbooks by our Members - Gender & Crime Lab

The Psychology Of Criminal Behaviour: A Canadian Perspective

By: Ralph Serin, Adelle Forth, Shelley Brown, Kevin Nunes, Craig Bennell, Joanna Pozzulo

Over the past several years, likely spawned by interest in our second year Forensic Psychology course and popular television shows on criminal behaviour, enrolment in our Criminal Behaviour course has been consistently high. As we prepared each year for teaching, the same question arose among the faculty – which text to use? It seemed we have all used different texts, for different reasons, but with similar results. Student response was modest at best. Complaints were that the texts were too dense, too American, too expensive, too British, etc. We even tried a course pack of some of our favourite selected readings, believing this compromise would be successful. Perhaps we were simply delaying the inevitable because students’ comments were equally critical of the course pack. They rightly noted it wasn’t a textbook and lacked all the requisite bells and whistles such as a glossary and sample quizzes, and it certainly wasn’t inexpensive. This collective experience led to the realization that a new textbook was needed, and that this textbook should highlight the many contributions made by Canadian researchers.

Read More

We owe a significant debt of gratitude to numerous Canadian researchers whom we have highlighted in this text. Based on their collective contributions, Canadian corrections research and practice continues to be at the forefront in the United States and abroad. Canadian theory and research is prominently represented in risk and needs assessment, correctional rehabilitation programs, and evaluation strategies throughout the world. We feel it is important that students understand this legacy and that they appreciate the contribution Canadian researchers have made. This textbook also highlights subgroups of offenders, such as Aboriginal and women offenders, for whom specific research is emerging. Also, the importance of a more integrated model of criminal behaviour that considers biology, as well as the person and situation interaction is emphasized. It is our hope that this textbook intrigues and engages a new generation of corrections researchers and practitioners. Certainly, relentless media coverage, political and ideological debates, fiscal challenges in corrections, and continued public concern regarding safety make this an exciting time in corrections research.
As a group we mused and reflected on the needs of our students and what a new textbook might look like. For instance, of the 1500 or so students that take our Criminal Behaviour course at Carleton each year, very few continue their studies at the graduate level. Also, our students are an interdisciplinary mix of psychology, criminology, sociology, and law students, many of whom aspire to a job is the areas of policing, corrections, probation and parole, and nongovernment organizations such as the John Howard Society and Elizabeth Fry Society. Many of us recruit guest lectures and often the most popular class is one by senior corrections officials describing work in corrections and how to get a summer job (usually there is a mob scene at the end of class as students clamour for a business card). These experiences meant that our textbook needed to meet a range of needs and interests of our students. It had to highlight Canadian research, both influential and contemporary; it had to link research to practice; and it had to be accessible. We hope that we have achieved these goals with this textbook.

The Assessment and Treatment of Women Offenders: An Integrated Perspective

By: Kelley Blanchette and Shelley Lynn Brown

We can now unabashedly proclaim that women and girls no longer constitute ‘correctional afterthoughts’. Female-centred theory, research and correctional practice are proliferating. Although encouraging, correctional knowledge specific to girls and women is infinitesimal in comparison to the male-dominated What Works literature. In brief, the ‘What Works’ repository of knowledge has conclusively demonstrated that correctional intervention can reduce criminal recidivism (Andrews, Bonta & Hoge, 1990; Andrews, Dowden & Gendreau, 1999; Izzo & Ross, 1990; Lipsey, 1995; Lipton, Pearson, Cleland & Yee, 2002). Indeed, the ‘average’ correctional treatment results in a 10% reduction in recidivism (Andrews et al., 1990b; Lo¨ sel, 1995). Moreover, treatment approaches that follow empirically validated principles of effective intervention (Andrews et al., 1990b) yield substantially higher reductions in criminal recidivism, ranging from 26% to 40% (Andrews et al., 1999; Andrews et al., 1990b; Lo¨ sel, 1996).

More

Current correctional practice is decidedly evidence-based; and this is apparent in the post-Martinson proliferation of the ‘What Works’ literature. Regrettably, the majority of both primary studies and meta-evaluations has either focused exclusively on male offenders, or failed to disaggregate the data by gender. As such, the question remains: Do effective female-specific correctional services differ from effective correctional services in general? If so, how?
These questions are central to this book. Chapter 1 contextualizes the discussion by reviewing the nature and scope of adult female offending. Next, an overview of contemporary theories of female offending is provided in Chapter 2. Specifically, gender-neutral, female-centred, and hybrid theoretical paradigms are described, followed by a review of the corresponding empirical evidence. Chapter 3 provides a description of general issues germane to female offender classification including a discussion of static and dynamic risk, actuarial versus clinical assessment, an introduction to the Risk–Need–Responsivity (RNR) model of offender rehabilitation along with contemporary critiques and competing rehabilitation frameworks – the Good Lives Model. Throughout, gender assumes a preeminent role in the discussion. Chapters 4, 5 and 6 form the nexus of the book. Each chapter is devoted exclusively to one of three principles of effective offender classification: risk (Chapter 4), need (Chapter 5) and responsivity (Chapter 6). A critical examination of the applicability of each principle to adult femaleoffenders is provided. In doing so, current knowledge gaps as well as promising research and practices pertaining to women offender classification and rehabilitation are highlighted. Concluding remarks are provided in Chapter 7.
It is important to underscore that our primary focus is women, rather than girls. However, issues pertaining to both girls and women are noted when relevant. Moreover, in the relative absence of research specific to adult females, we rely on the extant literature pertaining to girls. This will become particularly apparent in Chapter 2, Theories of Female Offending.
While we have chosen to focus on three specific areas – risk, need and responsivity – we acknowledge that the principles of effective correctional treatment are manifold. For example, Andrews (2001) has outlined 18 specific principles that should be adhered to in order to yield the greatest reductions in criminal recidivism. Similarly, Gendreau, French and Gionet (2004) have identified many of the same principles but have organized them somewhat differently, generating eight, as opposed to 18, specific principles. While we incorporate other principles of effective rehabilitation throughout the discussion, our selected focus is one of both convenience (more research evidence for review) and practical utility – most correctional researchers and practitioners are familiar with the tenets of the risk, need and responsivity principles, and guidelines for their application are straightforward.
We recognize that gender is but one component of diversity. Many of the issues and problems concerning the lack of research (and therefore appropriate practice) pertaining to girls and women could equally be applied to various other groups outside the white male normative standard. We emphatically concur that one size does not fit all and that studies must be devoted to various specific offender subpopulations. Considerations include, although are not limited to, culture, ethnicity and disability. Nonetheless, we highlight that the focus of this book is gender and the development of best practices for women within the criminal justice system. While we recognize the heterogeneity within the female offender population, we cannot purport to address all diversity considerations simultaneously. This publication is not a panacea; rather, it aims to provide a starting point for prospective research endeavours and for the provision of correctional intervention for girls and women in a manner that is informed by gender.
Writing this book presented us with, what seemed at times, an insurmountable challenge. As self-identified feminist authors, it seems prudent to disclose at the outset our potential biases. We have both completed our doctoral degrees in experimental forensic psychology. We have each spent over a decade working as researchers in the public sector at the Correctional Service of Canada. Although our day-to-day work is, to some extent, governed by political influences, public policies and the demands of working in an applied setting, this was not the case for the writing of this book. In that sense, this authorship was a truly liberating experience. We could explore several novel areas of interest typically not available to us during our daily work lives. While the book is consistent with our applied research efforts to date, it is nonetheless important to emphasize that the opinions expressed in this publication are our own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Correctional Service of Canada or Canada’s National Parole Board.While our predilection is the scientific method, we acknowledge that there are biases in science and so-called ‘objective’ methods. We concur that traditional criminology and forensic psychology are best described as sciences conducted by men and about men. Thankfully, this is now changing, in large part due to vocal feminist advocates who tirelessly challenge the status quo.
We believe in the self-correcting nature of science. We believe that the most effective way to improve the lives of all humans, including girls and women entangled within the criminal justice system, is through the thoughtful consideration and application of empirical evidence. By definition, ‘empirical’ means ‘to be amenable to our senses in some way’ (Champion, 2006, p. 23). Thus, empiricism incorporates both quantitative and qualitative research methods.
Consequently, this book incorporates both quantitative and qualitative research results. Notwithstanding that, we acknowledge that our academic training and research experience is primarily quantitative; it is therefore natural that we will inherently favour such approaches. Notably, quantitative research strategies are also the preferred method of most policy decision-makers. More and more, particularly in times of scarce resources, decision-makers continually demand that researchers demonstrate how the results of project ‘x’ impact the bottom line: How many lives saved? How many dollars spent?
Despite our acknowledged potential biases, we underscore the tremendous benefits of using a multi-method approach; particularly when studying small, diverse, marginalized populations. Each methodology carries with it unique strengths and weaknesses, but the combination of methods yields the greatest dividends in terms of practical research results. Indeed, some of our most rewarding research efforts have been those that have adopted a combined approach (e.g. Blanchette & Taylor, 2005; Brown & Motiuk, 2005).
Although our academic training and professional backgrounds are firmly entrenched in psychology, we similarly concur that there is tremendous value in the integration of diverse theories and practical offender management strategies. Moreover, a comprehensive review of the literature suggests that there are several commonalities among supposedly opposing paradigms. The writing of this book has provided us with an opportunity to integrate and reconcile alternative approaches against the backdrop of traditional psychological thought. In the process, there were certainly some epiphanic moments.
It merits reiteration that we self-identify as feminist researchers. Some may perceive this as an oxymoron, given that we align ourselves with the ‘Psy-Sciences’ (Kendall, 2000). As others before us have argued (e.g. Naffine, 1987), we believe feminism and empiricism can (and should) be integrated. What is perhaps a greater challenge is the consideration of feminist theories and implementation of feminist remedies within the paradox of an inherently oppressive (prison) environment. Despite this challenge, we maintain that it is the integration of various schools of thought that will facilitate the provision of the best gender informed correctional interventions for girls and women. Accordingly, we believe that we have made a significant contribution to feminism, as well as criminological and psychological science, through the reconciliation of various paradigms in this book.