Understanding criminal behaviour: identifying psychological differences between domestically violent offenders and non-offenders
Argyrides, Maria, Bartholomew, Terence and Carvalho, Tatiana 2004, Understanding criminal behaviour: identifying psychological differences between domestically violent offenders and non-offenders, in Policing in Central and Eastern Europe: dilemmas of contemporary criminal justice, University of Maribor, Ljubljana, Slovenia, pp.551-564.
Policing in Central and Eastern Europe: dilemmas of contemporary criminal justice
Editor(s)
Meško, Gorazd Pagon, Milan Dobovšek, Bojan
Publication date
2004
Total chapters
70
Start page
551
End page
564
Total pages
14
Publisher
University of Maribor
Place of Publication
Ljubljana, Slovenia
Summary
Numerous theories have been formulated in an attempt to explain the psychological differences between violent offenders and non-offenders. Constructs that have emerged as salient in such scholarship include anger expression, social problem solving, locus of control, attitudes toward women, impulsivity and temper. Although a considerable amount of sound research has been conducted into 'violent offending' per se, in general terms, research into family and domestic violence is yet to be as methodologically and theoretically rigorous. In an attempt to link these areas of work, and to identify the risk factors (or 'criminogenic needs') of specific sub-groups of male offenders, this research compared: (I) property offenders, (2) those who had been· 'violent against strangers', (3) those who had been 'violent against intimates' and (4) non-offenders. In an effort to address one of the shortcomings of prior research, potentially confounding variables such as age, education level cultural identity, and socio-economic status were controlled for in an effort to arrive at more meaningful representations of each offender group's specific psychological deficits and abundances. A number of differences were highlighted between the groups, but few of these remained after demographic covariates were controlled for. This paper details the nature of these differences, while also proposing that future studies adopt a similar methodology.