308 Presentation

685 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
685
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 308 Presentation

    1. 1. Female sexual-offenders: Personality pathology as a mediator of the relationship between childhood sexual abuse history and sexual abuse perpetration against others Kelly Christopher, Catherine J.Lutz-Zois, Amanda R. Reinhardt Reviewed by: Amy Offenbach, Caitlyn Shuy, and Tiera Bell November 11, 2008 Psyc 308 UMBC
    2. 2. Doris Ellen Moore <ul><li>Registered sex offender found on www.familywatchdog.us/Default.asp </li></ul><ul><li>Sex offense 3 rd degree </li></ul><ul><li>Lives 1.42 miles from UMBC </li></ul>
    3. 3. Introduction <ul><li>Designed to explore reasons for the possible link between childhood victimization and sexual abuse of children perpetrated by women. </li></ul><ul><li>Also to examine whether the nature of women’s own history of CSA (duration and relationship to the abuser) is associated with perpetration of sexual abuse of children </li></ul>
    4. 4. Intro and Background <ul><li>Previous studies have been small and participants have been psychiatric patients or prisoners </li></ul><ul><li>Previous studies found most female sex offenders were victims of CSA. </li></ul><ul><li>Some common expressed motivation given in previous studies for the sexual offenses have been revenge, anger or jealously. </li></ul>
    5. 5. Intro and Background (cont.) <ul><li>Previous studies have found subjects demonstrated PTSD, alcohol and substance abuse, self-injurious behaviors, border line personality disorders, Dissociative disorders and high rates of conduct disorder, ADD, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder </li></ul><ul><li>No studies to the researchers knowledge have examined psychopathy in female sex-offenders </li></ul>
    6. 6. Intro and Background (cont.) <ul><li>Few studies have explored whether sexual-offenders suffered longer periods of sexual abuse than non-offenders with abuse histories, especially in an all-female sample. </li></ul><ul><li>The duration of abuse has only previously been hypothesized as an important factor in predicting later perpetration of sexual abuse </li></ul>
    7. 7. Intro and Background (cont.) <ul><li>It has been found that duration of CSA is linked to a wide variety of other impairments in adult women such as physical health problems and more psychiatric symptoms. </li></ul><ul><li>“ Scholars have proposed this as a mechanism for the abused-abuser cycle of some women and adolescent girls, this hypothesis has yet to be tested directly.” </li></ul>
    8. 8. Maidah Lorraine Amatullah <ul><li>Registered sex offender found on www.familywatchdog.us/Default.asp </li></ul><ul><li>Rape 2 nd degree </li></ul><ul><li>Lives 2.6 miles from UMBC </li></ul>
    9. 9. About the Study <ul><li>Examine CSA personality traits and sexual abuse perpetration simultaneously instead of the relationship. </li></ul><ul><li>Examine a large sample of females </li></ul><ul><li>Investigate whether the nature of the abuse endured by female sex-offenders as children is an important predictor of sexual abuse perpetration in adulthood. </li></ul>
    10. 10. About the Study (cont.) <ul><li>Compare 2 groups </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Female prisoners convicted of sexual offenses against children </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Female prisoners convicted of other crimes </li></ul></ul>
    11. 11. Hypotheses H1 Women in the sexual offense group would be more likely to report a history of CSA than those in the non-sex offender group H2 Antisocial and Borderline Personality tendencies would be positively correlated with a history of CSA H3 After statistical control, Antisocial and Borderline tendencies would predict sexual offender v. non-sex offender H4 After statistical control, Antisocial and Borderline tendencies CSA would not predict sexual offender v. non-sex offender H5 Women in the sexual offender group would report having suffered longer periods of CSA than those in non-sex offender H6 Women in sexual offender group would be more likely to report having been sexually victimized as a child by a family member than the women in the non-sex offender group H7 Women in sexual offender group would be more likely to have experiences a combination of sexual abuse and either physical or emotional abuse than those in the non-sex offender group
    12. 12. Methods <ul><li>Eligible participants were all inmates residing in a women’s correctional facility in the Midwest at the time of study </li></ul><ul><li>There were 142 participants </li></ul><ul><ul><li>61 who had sexually victimized or aided in the sexual victimization of another person </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>81 who had committed crimes other than sexual victimization (theft, drug offenses, or murder) </li></ul></ul>
    13. 13. Methods Demographics
    14. 14. Methods Measures <ul><li>History of childhood sexual abuse was measured by the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>28-item scale </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>5 point Likert scale </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Responses “never true” to “very often true” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CTQ was modified by adding two follow up questions that were fill in the blank </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>If yes then who? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>How long did this occur? </li></ul></ul></ul>
    15. 15. Methods Measures <ul><li>Antisocial personality traits were measured by the Levenson’s Self-Report Psychopathy Scale. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>26 items </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4 point Likert scale </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Responses “disagree strongly” to “agree strongly” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2 subscales </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Primary psychopathy subscale largely assesses selfishness and lack of concern for the well-being of others </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Secondary psychopathy subscale was designed to assess impulsivity and a self-defeating lifestyle </li></ul></ul></ul>
    16. 16. Methods Measures <ul><li>Borderline personality traits were measured by the Borderline subscale of the Schizotypal Traits Questionnaire. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>18 items </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Yes/No format </li></ul></ul>
    17. 17. Methods Measures <ul><li>Social desirability is measured in order to assess the tendency of a person to present a favorable impression of themselves. </li></ul><ul><li>It is measured by The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR). </li></ul><ul><li>The BIDR measures two contructs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-deceptive enhancement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Impression management </li></ul></ul>
    18. 18. Methods Data Analyses <ul><li>Women in the sexual offender group had: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Less education </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fewer prior convictions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Longer prison sentences </li></ul></ul><ul><li>H1 ANCOVA was calculated </li></ul><ul><li>H2 evaluated by using partial correlations </li></ul><ul><li>H3 & H4 calculated a discriminant function analysis </li></ul><ul><li>H5 ANCOVA was calculated </li></ul><ul><li>H6 calculated chi-square </li></ul><ul><li>H7 two ANCOVA’s were calculated </li></ul>
    19. 19. Susan Ann Dezenzo <ul><li>Registered sex offender found on www.familywatchdog.us/Default.asp </li></ul><ul><li>Aggravated indecent assault/ child endangerment </li></ul><ul><li>Lives 2.66 miles from UMBC </li></ul>
    20. 20. Result <ul><li>Consistent with Hypotheses 1: sexual offenders group reported more frequent instances of CSA than non-sex offenders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>F (1,123)=4.7, p <.05 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Consistent with Hypotheses 2: CSA was significantly positively associated with Borderline Personality tendencies ( r =.36, p <.01) ; but not with primary ( r = -.06, p>.05)or secondary psychopathy ( r = .14, p >.05) </li></ul>
    21. 21. Results Cont. <ul><li>There was no support for Hypotheses 3: there was no significant difference in the hypothesized mediators (Borderline Personality tendencies and primary and secondary psychopathy </li></ul><ul><li>Hypotheses 4 showed no support, because even with hypothesized mediators statically controlled, CSA still predicted sexual-offenders vs. non-sex offenders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>F (1,116)=9.9, p<.01 </li></ul></ul>
    22. 22. Results Cont. <ul><li>Hypotheses 5: significant difference found between women of sexual-offenders and non-sex offenders, where sexual-offenders suffered from longer periods of CSA. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>F =(1,32)=4.6, p <.05 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Hypotheses 6: no significant relationship between being in the sexual-offender or non-sex offender group and the type of relationship between the participant and their sexual abuser as a child. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>X ² =.002, p<.05 </li></ul></ul>
    23. 23. Results Cont. <ul><li>Hypotheses 7: of those who were sexually abused as a child there was no significant group difference in physical or emotional abuse </li></ul><ul><ul><li>F (1,63)=3.1, p >.05 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>F (1.63)=.4, p >.05 </li></ul></ul>
    24. 24. Discussion <ul><li>In one of the first studies of its kind we found: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>That female prisoners convicted of sexual offenses against children reported more frequent instances of CSA than those not convicted </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>And in terms of nature of the CSA history women in the sexual-offender group experienced CSA for a greater duration of time than those in the non-sex offender group </li></ul></ul>
    25. 25. Discussion <ul><li>It has been assumed previously that CSA histories and sexual abuse perpetration in women are linked because the research has linked the two variables in men. </li></ul><ul><li>Personality disorder tendencies did not seem to distinguish between sexual and non-sexual offenders. </li></ul><ul><li>This may be in part because of a ceiling effect of female criminal behavior in general. </li></ul>
    26. 26. Discussion <ul><li>Consistent with past research the results indicated that the experience of CSA was related to personality disorders </li></ul><ul><li>Duration of abuse appeared to be a much stronger predictor of sex-offending than the experience of abuse alone </li></ul><ul><li>Great exposure as a child to CSA the more likely they are to view sexual relationships with children as “normal” and later model these actions </li></ul>
    27. 27. Discussion Limits <ul><li>Only used prison population </li></ul><ul><li>Reading comprehension </li></ul><ul><li>Not generalizeable results </li></ul><ul><li>Because of criminal history one might expect more severe problems with personality pathology and history of sexual abuse </li></ul>
    28. 28. Disscussion In the future <ul><li>Research should also examine moderators of the relationship such as social support, coping skills, and involvement in early-intervention programs. </li></ul><ul><li>More attention should be paid to duration of CSA </li></ul>
    29. 29. Reference <ul><li>Christopher, K., Lutz-Zois, C. J., & Reinhardt, A. R. (2007). Female sexual-offenders: Personality pathology as a mediator of the relationship between childhood sexual abuse history and sexual abuse perpetration against others. Child Abuse & Neglect , 31 , 871-883 </li></ul>
    30. 30. Questions <ul><li>What are some likely predictors of a female sex-offender? </li></ul><ul><li>What could be done to reduce/eliminate these predictors? </li></ul><ul><li>Any other questions or thoughts? </li></ul>
    31. 31. Individual, family, and neighborhood factors distinguish resilient from non-resilient maltreated children: A cumulative stressor model Sara R. Jaffee, Avshalom Caspi, Terrie E. Moffitt, Monica Polo-Tom ás, Alan Taylor Reviewed by: Amy Offenbach, Caitlyn Shuy, and Tiera Bell November 11, 2008 Psyc 308 UMBC
    32. 32. Introduction <ul><li>An estimated 906,000 children in the U.S were victims of abuse or neglect in 2003 </li></ul><ul><li>Number of well-designed, prospective longitudinal studies have shown that children who are maltreated are at risk of a range of problems in childhood, adolescence and adulthood. </li></ul>
    33. 33. Introduction cont. <ul><li>Even though a lot of literature has identified multiple characteristics that are associated with resilience to maltreatment, this study contributes two things </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify individual, family, and neighborhood characteristics that predict stable, positive adaptation over a 2-year period </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify the interplay among risk and protective factors </li></ul></ul>
    34. 34. Goals of Study and Hypotheses <ul><li>Goal 1: to test whether children who were defined as resilient according to these criteria were also functioning successfully in other domains </li></ul><ul><li>Goal 2: to test whether individual, family and neighborhood characteristics would distinguish resilient from non-resilient maltreated children and whether the characteristics that were associated with resilience differed for girls and boys </li></ul>
    35. 35. Goals of Study and Hypotheses cont. <ul><li>Goals 2, hypotheses: children who have the attribute and who were maltreated will be behaviorally indistinguishable from children who have the attribute and were not maltreated. </li></ul><ul><li>Also tested sex difference in the association since its not known whether resilience process differs between maltreated boys and girls </li></ul>
    36. 36. Goals of Study and Hypotheses cont. <ul><li>Goal 3: to test the hypothesis that children’s strength would predict resilience to maltreatment only when children were exposed to relatively few family and neighborhood stressors </li></ul><ul><li>Comparing resilient to non-resilient allows them to test whether individual, family or neighborhood factors distinguished these two groups </li></ul><ul><li>Comparing resilient to maltreated children allowed them to test whether maltreated children were doing as well and non-maltreated children simply </li></ul>
    37. 37. Methods
    38. 38. Methods <ul><li>Individual Characteristics: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IQ scores were used and those who were at least half a SD above the mean IQ were considered above-average IQ . </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>They also looked at temperament and children who were sociable and self controlled were said to have a well-adjusted temperament. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>They used the under-controlled temperament scale and the shy temperament scale </li></ul></ul></ul>
    39. 39. Methods <ul><li>Family Characteristics: </li></ul><ul><li>Maternal Warmth </li></ul><ul><li>Social Deprivation </li></ul><ul><li>Mothers’ Major Depressive Disorder </li></ul><ul><li>Father’s and Mother’s History of Antisocial Behavior </li></ul><ul><li>Drug and Alcohol Problems </li></ul><ul><li>Adult Domestic Violence </li></ul><ul><li>Sibling Warmth </li></ul><ul><li>Sibling Conflict </li></ul>
    40. 40. Methods <ul><li>Neighborhood Characteristics: </li></ul><ul><li>Crime </li></ul><ul><li>Informal Social Control </li></ul><ul><li>Social Cohesion </li></ul>
    41. 41. Methods <ul><li>Child Behavior: </li></ul><ul><li>At ages 5 and 7 parents were asked for permission to have their children’s teachers complete the Teacher Report Form. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>This assessed: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Antisocial behaviors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Emotional problems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Prosocial behavior </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Reading ability was also assessed to test if children were reading at or above the median for the sample. </li></ul>
    42. 42. Methods <ul><li>Maltreatment: </li></ul><ul><li>At the age 5 assessment, mothers were interviewed to assess if either child had ever been physically maltreated. </li></ul><ul><li>Interviewers probed the mothers and were careful to word questions so they did not seem to implicate the mother as the perpetrator. </li></ul><ul><li>The likelihood that the children were physically maltreated were categorized as: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not having been </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Possibly been </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Definitely been </li></ul></ul>
    43. 43. Methods <ul><li>86% of children experienced no physical maltreatment </li></ul><ul><li>They combined those who possibly experienced physical maltreatment and those who definitely experienced physical maltreatment so that 14% experienced some physical maltreatment. </li></ul><ul><li>They used a Multinomial logistic regression analyses estimated the relative risk of being in one category (e.g., non-resilient) relative to a reference category (e.g., resilient) as a function of individual, family, and neighborhood covariates. </li></ul>
    44. 44. Results
    45. 45. Results cont.
    46. 46. Results cont.
    47. 47. Results cont.
    48. 48. Discussion <ul><li>Maltreated before 5yrs, individual, family and neighborhood characteristics were associated with behavioral resilience. </li></ul><ul><li>Boys with above average intelligence and whose parents had few symptoms of antisocial personality were more likely to be resilient. </li></ul><ul><li>Exposure to multiple family and neighborhood stressors severely compromised children’s resilience. </li></ul>
    49. 49. Discussion <ul><li>¼ physically maltreated children were defined as resilient from teacher reports </li></ul><ul><li>Those resilient at 5 years old were much more likely to be resilient at 7 years old. </li></ul><ul><li>Persistent resilience, at least over 2 years can now be added to the literature. </li></ul><ul><li>Individual strengths distinguished resilient from non-resilient children under conditions of low, but not high stress. </li></ul>
    50. 50. Discussion <ul><li>“ Our findings suggest that children who possess individual strengths and who can be protected from significant ongoing family and neighborhood stressors stand a good chance of maintaining positive functioning in the long-term. This, however, is an empirical proposition that must be put to the test with longitudinal data.” </li></ul>
    51. 51. Discussion Limits <ul><li>Those children defined as resilient may have functioned well because of experiencing relatively less severe or chronic episodes of maltreatment </li></ul><ul><li>The proportion of children who were defined as resilient and the factors that distinguished resilient from non-resilient children might have varied depending on what type of abuse children experienced </li></ul><ul><li>Children were all twins </li></ul><ul><li>Advantages/disadvantages of the researchers creating an index of family and neighborhood factors. </li></ul>
    52. 52. Questions <ul><li>Do individual, family, and neighborhood factors distinguish resilient children from non-resilient and non-maltreated children? </li></ul><ul><li>What increases you chances of being: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Resilient? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Non-resilient? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Other thoughts or questions? </li></ul>
    53. 53. Reference <ul><li>Jaffee, S. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Polo- Tomás, M., & Taylor, A.(2007). Individual, family, and neighborhood factors distinguish resilient from non-resilient maltreated children: A cumulative stressor model. Child Abuse & Neglect , 31 , 231-253 </li></ul><ul><li>Christopher, Kelly; Lutz-Zois, Catherine J.; Reinhardt, Amanda R.; (2007) Female sexual-offenders: personality pathology as a mediator of the relationship between childhood sexual abuse history and sexual abuse perpetration against others.; Child Abuse & Neglect 31 , 871-883 </li></ul>

    ×