Strengths and weaknesses of the psychology of criminal conduct: Implications for the conceptualisation, assessment and treatment of antisocial personality pattern.

The Psychology of Criminal Conduct and its associated components (e.g. the Risk Need Responsivity model, the Central Eight risk factors) has been hugely influential in the criminal justice sector. However, like any theory it has relative strengths and weakness, one weakness being that assumptions have been made about the causal nature and conceptual coherence of its foundational constructs, dynamic risk factors. The numerous issues with the conceptualisation of dynamic risk factors have implications for the widespread practice of using them as explanations of offending and to inform intervention planning. Recently some attention has been given to exploring the conceptualisation and definitions, scope and use of dynamic risk factors. Some key advancements in this area are considered and we illustrate how the weaknesses encountered by dynamic risk factors may impact our understanding and application of these concepts, using the example of Antisocial Personality Pattern.

Reorienting Locus of Control in Individuals Who Have Offended Through Strengths-Based Interventions: Personal Agency and the Good Lives Model.

Having an external locus of control has been associated with a range of well-supported risk correlates of offending behavior. Further, individuals with an internal locus of control orientation are suggested to be more open to engaging in treatment and are also considered more likely to have successful treatment outcomes. In forensic settings, where individuals are subject to external controls and have little personal autonomy, it is important to consider what treatment approaches might be most successful in reorienting individuals' locus of control. The Good Lives Model (GLM) proposes a strengths-based approach to the rehabilitation of individuals who have offended. Within the GLM, an external locus of control is suggested to be associated with a deficit in the primary good of agency. In this article, we will provide a brief overview of the literature on locus of control and its hypothesized role in offending behavior. We will discuss how an external locus of control orientation is related to personal agency and how strengths-based models, such as the GLM, may assist with reorienting locus of control in individuals who have offended through promoting personal agency.

A cultural-ecological perspective on agency and offending behaviour.

This article aims to outline briefly the important role of culture in the development of the human mind and behaviour, and therefore argues that cultural information is a key part of forensic explanation. We suggest that differing cultural experiences, such as marginalisation, contribute to the differential representation of individuals and groups in criminal justice systems. This occurs through several means, but we focus specifically on individual operation of agency in particular cultural contexts. Building on previous theoretical work, we present a preliminary model, the cultural-ecological predictive agency model. Through an exemplar, we show how this model might assist in understanding better the role of dynamic risk factors in individual behaviour, by locating and incorporating cultural-historical contexts and information.

Dynamic Risk Factors, Protective Factors and Value-Laden Practices.

Dynamic risk (and to a lesser extent protective) factors are the foundation of correctional practice; the assumption that they exist, can be measured and are able to change is at the heart of what forensic practitioners do. However, there has recently been a surge in interest and debate around what these constructs are and how they relate to offending. In progressing this debate, we shift the focus from risky characteristics, behaviours and contexts (e.g. antisocial attitudes, associates, drug abuse), to the practices (i.e. goal-directed actions) to which these descriptions refer. Embedded within practices are values (i.e. priorities, motivators, norms), and underpinning them human capacities. Identification of these capacities and relevant contexts (i.e. norms, opportunities) can inform rehabilitation, which strengthens them to support healthier and less harmful functioning. We offer examples of risk and protective factors for sexual offending, although the ideas are not limited to this type of behaviour.