• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

比较性犯罪者治疗效果:主流性犯罪者与有特殊需求的性犯罪者

Comparing sexual offender treatment efficacy: mainstream sexual offenders and sexual offenders with special needs.

作者信息

Keeling Jenny A, Rose John L, Beech Anthony R

机构信息

University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.

出版信息

J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2007 Jun;32(2):117-24. doi: 10.1080/13668250701402767.

DOI:10.1080/13668250701402767
PMID:17613682
Abstract

BACKGROUND

This paper investigates the efficacy of a treatment program for sexual offenders with special needs in comparison to treatment outcomes for mainstream sexual offenders. Follow-up data is also presented for the group of offenders with special needs.

METHOD

Participants from the two groups were matched on four variables (risk category, sex of victim, type of offence and age). All participants completed an assessment battery pre- and post-treatment and the scores on these tests were analysed for each group. Change on these measures was also compared between the two groups. Follow-up data for the special needs cohort were collected from an offender database.

RESULTS

Overall, both groups made few significant changes on the tests post-treatment, however individual results demonstrated that some offenders in both groups had achieved reliable change. In comparing treatment results between the two groups, the sexual offenders with special needs differed only on progress relating to "avoidant" relationship styles. The results also indicated that social desirability bias played a significant role in self-report assessment for both groups. Follow-up data for the group with special needs identified that none of the offenders had committed further sexual offences, after an average release time of 16 months.

CONCLUSIONS

There are a number of limitations to this study, particularly as a result of the experimental design and the small number of participants, and these should be considered as a major limitation on the conclusions drawn from the results. However, it is suggested that the program had some positive effects for some offenders, with little difference in progress detected between the two groups. Possible explanations for the varied outcomes are discussed.

摘要

背景

本文研究了针对有特殊需求的性犯罪者的治疗方案的疗效,并与主流性犯罪者的治疗结果进行了比较。还提供了有特殊需求的犯罪者群体的随访数据。

方法

两组参与者在四个变量(风险类别、受害者性别、犯罪类型和年龄)上进行了匹配。所有参与者在治疗前和治疗后都完成了一组评估,并且对每组在这些测试中的得分进行了分析。还比较了两组在这些指标上的变化。有特殊需求队列的随访数据是从一个犯罪者数据库中收集的。

结果

总体而言,两组在治疗后的测试中几乎没有显著变化,然而个体结果表明两组中的一些犯罪者都实现了可靠的改变。在比较两组的治疗结果时,有特殊需求的性犯罪者仅在与“回避型”关系模式相关的进展方面有所不同。结果还表明,社会期望偏差在两组的自我报告评估中都起到了重要作用。有特殊需求组的随访数据显示,在平均释放16个月后,没有一名犯罪者再次实施性犯罪。

结论

本研究存在一些局限性,特别是由于实验设计和参与者数量较少,这些应被视为对从结果中得出的结论的主要限制。然而,有人认为该方案对一些犯罪者有一些积极影响,两组在进展方面几乎没有差异。文中讨论了结果差异的可能解释。

相似文献

1
Comparing sexual offender treatment efficacy: mainstream sexual offenders and sexual offenders with special needs.比较性犯罪者治疗效果:主流性犯罪者与有特殊需求的性犯罪者
J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2007 Jun;32(2):117-24. doi: 10.1080/13668250701402767.
2
The Ward and Hudson pathways model of the sexual offense process applied to offenders with intellectual disability.沃德和哈德森性犯罪过程路径模型应用于智力残疾罪犯。
Sex Abuse. 2008 Dec;20(4):379-92. doi: 10.1177/1079063208323369. Epub 2008 Oct 21.
3
Outcome evaluation of a high-intensity inpatient sex offender treatment program.一项高强度住院性犯罪者治疗项目的结果评估。
J Interpers Violence. 2009 Mar;24(3):522-36. doi: 10.1177/0886260508317196. Epub 2008 May 5.
4
A preliminary evaluation of the adaptation of four assessments for offenders with special needs.对四项针对有特殊需求罪犯的评估工具适用性的初步评估。
J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2007 Jun;32(2):62-73. doi: 10.1080/13668250701378538.
5
Assessment of sex offenders: lessons learned from the assessment of non-sex offenders.性犯罪者评估:从非性犯罪者评估中汲取的经验教训。
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2003 Jun;989:185-97; discussion 236-46.
6
Sexual knowledge and attitudes of men with intellectual disability who sexually offend.有性犯罪行为的智障男性的性知识与态度。
J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2007 Jun;32(2):74-81. doi: 10.1080/13668250701408004.
7
Differences in personality and risk characteristics in sex, violent and general offenders.性犯罪者、暴力犯罪者和一般犯罪者在人格及风险特征方面的差异。
Crim Behav Ment Health. 2006;16(3):183-94. doi: 10.1002/cbm.618.
8
General and victim-specific empathy: associations with actuarial risk, treatment outcome, and sexual recidivism.一般共情和受害者共情:与法定风险、治疗效果和性再犯的关系。
Sex Abuse. 2012 Oct;24(5):411-30. doi: 10.1177/1079063211423944. Epub 2011 Dec 16.
9
[Assessment of a new law for sex offenders implemented in France in 1998].[对1998年在法国实施的一项针对性犯罪者的新法律的评估]
Encephale. 2012 Apr;38(2):133-40. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2011.06.003. Epub 2011 Aug 31.
10
Perceptions of sex offenders about treatment: satisfaction and engagement in group therapy.性犯罪者对治疗的看法:团体治疗中的满意度与参与度
Sex Abuse. 2009 Mar;21(1):35-56. doi: 10.1177/1079063208326072. Epub 2008 Oct 23.

引用本文的文献

1
The effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy group-based interventions for men with intellectual disabilities and sexual offending histories: a meta-analysis.基于认知行为疗法的团体干预对有智力障碍和性犯罪史男性的有效性:一项荟萃分析。
Int J Dev Disabil. 2020 Nov 30;68(4):416-429. doi: 10.1080/20473869.2020.1845933. eCollection 2022.
2
A Systematic Review of Behavioral Health Interventions for Sex Offenders With Intellectual Disabilities.对智力残疾性犯罪者行为健康干预措施的系统评价
Sex Abuse. 2017 Mar;29(2):148-185. doi: 10.1177/1079063215569546. Epub 2016 Aug 2.