RESUMEN
This research examined whether a government-initiated pilot project of mandatory polygraph testing would increase the disclosures made by community-supervised sexual offenders in the United Kingdom. The Offender Managers of 332 pilot polygraph sexual offenders and 303 sexual offenders who were receiving usual community supervision were telephoned quarterly, over a 21-month period, to collect information about numbers of clinically relevant disclosures, the seriousness of disclosures made, and actions taken as a result of disclosures. Perceptions of polygraph usefulness were also collected. Offender Managers in the pilot polygraph group-compared to comparison Offender Managers-reported (a) a higher proportion of offenders making at least one disclosure (i.e., 76.5% vs. 51.2% respectively), and (b) that their offenders made more total disclosures overall (Ms = 2.60 vs. 1.25 respectively). The majority of disclosures made by sexual offenders in the polygraph group were associated with the polygraph session itself. Polygraph Offender Managers reported being more likely to take an action that involved increasing supervision, informing a third party, informing Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA), changing supervision focus, or issuing a warning to the offender. However, the relative seriousness of disclosures did not appear to differ across groups. In terms of polygraph test results, one third of offenders (most notably those who were higher in risk) failed their first test with "Deception Indicated." This outcome-received on a first test-was most likely to elicit clinically relevant disclosures. Offender Managers described the polygraph as aiding supervision strategies. This research and its associated caveats are discussed.
Asunto(s)
Respuesta Galvánica de la Piel , Detección de Mentiras , Delitos Sexuales/prevención & control , Revelación de la Verdad , Adulto , Criminales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevención Secundaria , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether a group of firesetters (n = 68) could be distinguished, psychologically, from a matched group of non-firesetting offenders (n = 68). METHOD: Participants completed measures examining psychological variables relating to fire, emotional/self-regulation, social competency, self-concept, boredom proneness, and impression management. Official prison records were also examined to record offending history and other offense-related variables. A series of MANOVAs were conducted with conceptually related measures identified as the dependent variables. Follow-up discriminant function and clinical cut-off score analyses were also conducted to examine the best discriminating variables for firesetters. RESULTS: Firesetters were clearly distinguishable, statistically, from non-firesetters on three groups of conceptually related measures relating to: fire, emotional/self-regulation, and self-concept. The most successful variables for the discrimination of firesetters determined via statistical and clinical significance testing were higher levels of anger-related cognition, interest in serious fires, and identification with fire and lower levels of perceived fire safety awareness, general self-esteem, and external locus of control. CONCLUSIONS: Firesetters appear to be a specialist group of offenders who hold unique psychological characteristics. Firesetters are likely to require specialist treatment to target these psychological needs as opposed to generic offending behavior programs.