Criminal Justice and Behavior 2001 Harris 402 26

Criminal Justice and Behavior
http://cjb.sagepub.com/ Criminal Violence : The Roles of Psychopathy, Neurodevelopmental Insults, and Antisocial Parenting
Grant T. Harris, Marnie E. Rice and Martin Lalumire Criminal Justice and Behavior 2001 28: 402 DOI: 10.1177/009385480102800402 The online version of this article can be found at: http://cjb.sagepub.com/content/28/4/402
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
Additional services and information for Criminal Justice and Behavior can be found at: Email Alerts: http://cjb.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://cjb.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://cjb.sagepub.com/content/28/4/402.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Aug 1, 2001 What is This?
Downloaded from cjb.sagepub.com at University of New England on January 24, 2012
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE
CRIMINAL VIOLENCE The Roles of Psychopathy, Neurodevelopmental Insults, and Antisocial Parenting
GRANT T. HARRIS MARNIE E. RICE
Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre
MARTIN LALUMIRE
University of Toronto, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
The authors examined the interrelationships and the independent contributions of three major constructs associated with male criminal violence (neurodevelopmental insults, antisocial parenting, and psychopathy) using structural equation modeling. Subjects were 868 violent offenders assessed or treated at a maximum security psychiatric hospital. Results indicated that neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy are not interrelated but are both directly and independently related to criminal violence, and antisocial parenting is related to both neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy but has no direct relationship to criminal violence. These results are not consistent with a view of psychopathy as a disorder but are consistent with the view of psychopathy as an evolved life history strategy. Criminal violence has at least two separate developmental pathways originating very early in life, one involving neurodevelopmental damage and one involving psychopathy.
mpirical findings on the personal characteristics associated with violent behavior are accumulating at an impressive rate. There are so many factors empirically related to violence that it seems impossible to integrate all of them in a theoretically sensible manner. It almost seems that any disruption, perturbation, or individual difference, whether psychological or physical in nature, is related to vio-
AUTHORS NOTE: This study was supported in part by grants awarded to the first and second authors from the Ontario Mental Health Foundation and the Ontario MinCRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, Vol. 28 No. 4, August 2001 402-426 2001 American Association for Correctional Psychology
402
Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE 403
lence. There have been many comprehensive attempts to explain crime (e.g., Raine, 1993; Simons, Johnson, Conger, & Elder, 1998), but general models inevitably concentrate on nonviolent offending because only a small fraction of crime is violent. In this article we review three classes of variables that have been related to criminal violence and test a model of how these three major constructs contribute to criminal violence.
THREE CLASSES OF VARIABLES RELATED TO VIOLENCE
Neurodevelopmental insults. Damage to temporal lobe structures, especially the amygdala and other parts of the limbic system, has been related to violent behavior (e.g., Henry & Moffitt, 1997; Langevin, Ben-Aron, Wortzman, Dickey, & Handy, 1987). Similarly, diffuse brain damage associated with either acute or chronic trauma has also been related to violent behavior (Bowman, 1997). Neuropsychological tests applied to offenders have identified deficits commonly associated with prefrontal lobe dysfunction in executive and regulatory behavior (Henry & Moffitt, 1997; Raine, 1997). Recently, results from a neuroimaging study have shown that violent, antisocial men have smaller prefrontal gray matter volumes than other men, although without demonstrable brain lesions (Raine, Lencz, Bihrle, LaCasse, & Colletti, 2000). There is other evidence that neurological dysfunction is related to violence. Obstetrical complications have been associated with violence and aggression (Brennan & Mednick, 1997; Raine, Brennan, & Mednick, 1994; Szatmari, Reitsma-Street, & Offord, 1986). Candidates responsible for much of the nonshared environmental variance underlying aggression (and other problems) are variables associated with medical problems during gestation (e.g., high fever, toxemia, maternal substance abuse, malnutrition, or exposure to toxins), labor and delivery (e.g., prematurity, low birth weight, severe fetal distress),
istry of Health, and a contract with the Solicitor General of Canada. We thank Zoe Hilton, Vern Quinsey, Michael Seto, and Ayse Unsal for helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Correspondence should be addressed to Grant Harris, Research Department, Mental Health Centre, 500 Church St., Penetanguishene, Ontario, Canada L9M 1G3; e-mail: gharris@mhcp.on.ca.
404
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR
or infancy (e.g., malnutrition, head injury) (Brennan, Grekin, & Mednick, 1999; Brennan & Mednick, 1997). In addition, other variables indicative of disturbed prenatal development (Brennan & Mednick, 1997; Halverson & Victor, 1976; Mednick & Kandel, 1988; Moffitt, 1993; Nizamie, Nizamie, Sangma, & Sharma, 1989) have been associated with violenceespecially the presence of minor physical anomalies. For example, Waldrop, Bell, McLaughlin, and Halverson (1978) found that the number of minor physical anomalies observed at birth (e.g., adherent ear lobes, single palmar crease, curved fifth fingers) predicted aggression at age 3. Kandel, Brennan, Mednick, and Michelson (1989) found that the same physical anomalies assessed at ages 11 to 13 were related to violent offending at ages 20 to 22. Although not found in all studies, it has been reported that violence is related to low IQ (Heilbrun, 1990). Although mediating mechanisms are unknown, there is a clear relationship between aggression and certain neurotransmitters, serotonin in particular. Relatively low levels of serotonin or evidence of lowered serotonergic activity have been consistently related to impulsivity, antisociality, and aggression (Berman, Kavoussi, & Coccaro, 1997; Coccaro, 1989; Coscina, 1997; Henry & Moffitt, 1997; Linnoila, 1997; Plutchik & van Praag, 1997; Raine, 1997; see also Virkkunen & Linnoila, 1993). Parenthetically, the same lower serotonergic activity seems to be associated with other phenomena such as alcoholism, depression, and suicidal behavior. Unusual levels of other monoamine oxidase (MAO) neurotransmitters have also been associated with aggression and antisociality, but the relationship with serotonin is the clearest (Berman et al., 1997). As well, certain hormones have been empirically associated with violence, especially adrenaline, prolactin, cortisol, and testosterone (Brain & Susman, 1997; Virkkunen & Linnoila, 1993). In addition, neural electrophysiological differences have been reported between violent and nonviolent individuals (Raine, 1997). Also, such other psychophysiological variables as skin conductance and heart rate, typically associated with autonomic arousal, have been reported to be reliably lower in violent and antisocial individuals compared to nonoffenders (Raine, 1997). Differences between groups of violent and nonviolent persons in brain structure or brain function does not necessarily imply damage or disorder, a point to which we shall return shortly.
Antisocial parenting. Many studies have examined the role of family and parenting variables in the development of violence and aggression, often using longitudinal methods. These studies have, in general, demonstrated that most violent adults were also violent and aggressive children and that the earlier and more severe the onset of childhood violence, the more persistent and severe the adult aggression and antisociality (Loeber & Farrington, 1997; Shaw & Winslow, 1997; see also Caspi, Moffitt, Newman, & Silva, 1996). Early and severe childhood aggression is related to inconsistent, inept parenting and maternal rejection (Shaw & Winslow, 1997; Raine, Brennan, & Mednick, 1997). More generally, an array of parental variables has been associated with juvenile aggression, including spousal conflict, divorce, substance abuse, antisociality, crime, and psychiatric problems (Braungart-Rieker, Rende, Plomin, DeFries, & Fulker, 1995; Cadoret, Yates, Troughton, Woodworth, & Stewart, 1995; Shaw & Winslow, 1997). Juvenile violence has been related to the physical abuse and neglect of children and to their witnessing parental battering (Widom, 1997). Psychopathy. Arguably, the construct that has so far contributed most to understanding criminal violence is psychopathy. Psychopaths are prototypically selfish, glib, grandiose, superficial, manipulative, deceitful, remorseless, callous, and unempathic. They exhibit impulsiveness, poor behavior controls, irresponsibility, sexual promiscuity, and a high need for excitement. Of course, psychopaths also show childhood antisociality, juvenile delinquency, lifelong exploitation of others, and a versatile adult criminal lifestyle (Hare, 1991, 1993). Although not all criminal violence (no matter how defined) is committed by psychopaths and not all psychopaths commit violent crimes, psychopaths are very disproportionately represented among violent offenders (Hart & Hare, 1997). Their violent offenses are different qualitatively as well as quantitatively from those of other violent offenders (Williamson, Hare, & Wong, 1987). Among released offenders, those who are psychopaths are much more likely to commit subsequent violent offenses than those who are not (Hare & McPherson, 1984; Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1991a; Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1993; Rice & Harris, 1992, 1995, 1997a). Some evidence suggests that psychopaths response to treatment is drastically differ-
406
ent from that of other violent offenderstherapy that reduces violent recidivism in other offenders increases violence among psychopaths (Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1994; Rice, Harris, & Cormier, 1992). Psychopathy is currently best measured by the Hare Psychopathy ChecklistRevised (PCL-R) (Hare, 1991). However, psychopaths are the same individuals identified as having antisocial personality disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, (DSM-IV), (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) except that the DSM-IV criteria are too inclusive (Skilling, Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 2000). Evidence suggests that psychopaths make up a qualitatively distinct group of violent offendersa natural disjunction and not the end of a continuum (Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1994; Skilling et al., 2000). With respect to persistence, frequency, and severity, male psychopaths constitute the most violent population of human aggressors known (Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1998).
A TWO-PATH MODEL OF CRIMINAL VIOLENCE
How could one simultaneously account for the roles of psychopathy, antisocial parenting, and neurodevelopmental insults in causing criminal violence? A straightforward possibility is that psychopathy is a severe disorder, and violent psychopaths are those individuals who exhibit or have been exposed to the most risk factors (e.g., Hiday, 1997). By such an account, psychopaths might be those whose violence is the result of a combination of all or most of the factors discussed above: (a) brain damage as a result of obstetrical complications, perinatal health problems, or head injury, (b) lowered serotonergic activity and prefrontal deficits, perhaps as the more proximal expression of a genetic factor or as the result of other risk factors, and (c) abuse and neglect at the hands of antisocial and incompetent parents. In such a model, these causes of violence are cumulative influences on psychopathic violent criminality. We propose an alternate view, however. Mealey (1995; see also Buss & Shackelford, 1997; Harpending & Sobus, 1987; Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1994; Lalumire & Seto, 1999; Quinsey et al., 1998; Rice, 1997; Rice & Harris, 1997a) offered an account of psychopathy as an evolved life strategy. According to this view, psychopathy is a lifelong strategy in which risk taking, sensation seeking, insensitivity to pun-
ishment, promiscuity, deceptiveness, and violence led to successful reproduction in ancestral environments. Based on game theory, the size of the ecological niche for psychopaths depends on factors such as scarcity of resources, social instability (mobility and anonymity), and the costs borne by nonpsychopaths in detecting psychopaths. This view is diametrically opposite to the idea that psychopaths have a disorder. That is, from a biological point of view, a disorder may be defined as the failure of a mechanism to perform its evolved functions (Wakefield, 1992). The life strategy view suggests that, instead of being disordered, psychopaths physiological, neurological, and psychological characteristics perform as designed by nature. Thus, emotional characteristics (e.g., generally being unaffected by negative emotions, especially if it involves others), as well as behavioral (e.g., responding quickly in the presence of reward regardless of the risk of punishment), and interpersonal traits (generally unaffected by the feelings or interests of others) of psychopaths are related to a reproductively viable strategy in ancestral environments, and possibly in some contemporary human societies as well. Such a view predicts that psychopaths make up a qualitatively distinct subgroup even among serious offenders and may explain why they respond to therapy in a manner very different from offenders who actually have a disorder. A phenomenon such as psychopathy must be mediated by functional differences in the nervous system, but these differences are, by the definition provided by Wakefield (1992), not defects if they are part of an evolved life history strategy. Neurotransmitter and subtle neuroanatomical differences between psychopaths and nonpsychopaths are predicted by this view. Gross neuroanatomical damage is, however, incompatible with this selectionist view of psychopathy. As it turns out, attempts to identify such gross damage with neuroimaging techniques among psychopaths have failed (Hart & Hare, 1997; Intrator et al., 1997; but see Raine et al., 2000), as have attempts to discover clear differences between psychopaths and nonpsychopaths on neuropsychological tests already known to be associated with brain damage. So far, at least, the data indicate that if psychopaths have damaged brains, the damage is very subtlenot the kind observed among those who have experienced brain injuries due to accident, chronic trauma, or congenital problems. Again, if psychopathy is a
408
life history strategy, it cannot be directly due to biomedical events known to be related to poor health. Thus, despite the relationship between such medical problems and other mental disorders and violence, this life strategy account of psychopathy predicts no relationship between obstetrical and perinatal problems and psychopathy. What about parenting? The causal relationship among family dynamic variables and aggression is not straightforward for at least three reasons. First, behavioral analyses of family interaction have shown that aggression between parents and children can be bidirectional. That is, some parental aggression is a reaction to (rather than a cause of) aggressive and violent childhood behavior (Dishion & Patterson, 1997; Patterson, Debaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989). Second, behavior genetics research, as mentioned earlier, suggests that shared environment (e.g., children in the same family being exposed to similar levels of parenting skills and spousal conflict) accounts for very little variance in aggression and violent behavior (Carey & Goldman, 1997). Third, the relationship between family interaction and violence could be accounted for by genetic transmissionparents and children could share genes that cause violence. Thus, the two-path model of criminal violence could predict that antisocial parenting is associated with psychopathy due to common inheritance and bidirectional coercive processes initiated by aggressive child behavior. As well, a bidirectional association was predicted between antisocial parenting and neurodevelopmental insults. Antisocial parents might be more likely to injure their children and less likely to care for them. Conversely, children who fail to thrive and exhibit clear signs of dysfunction might elicit less parental investment and thus be more likely to suffer parental neglect and rejection. Finally, neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy might both be associated with increased likelihood of family breakdown, exposing children to increased risks of abuse associated with stepparenting (Daly & Wilson, 1988). Thus, this account predicts a correlation between antisocial and inadequate parenting and each of psychopathy and neurodevelopmental insults. We further hypothesize that these associations between antisocial parenting and each of psychopathy and neurodevelopmental insults are sufficient to account for the correlation between antisocial parenting and criminal violence. Thus, we hypothesize no direct link between them.
NeuroDevelopmental Insults
The Proposed Two-Path Causal Model
Antisocial Parents Criminal Violence
Psychopathy
Figure 1: The Proposed Two-Path Causal Model. NOTE: The proposed model of psychopathic violence implying a pathological path to criminal violence due to neurodevelopmental insults and a second, independent path to criminal violence due to psychopathy that is hypothesized to be a viable, nonpathological life strategy.
Of course, not all violent offenders are psychopaths. We argue that some violence is perpetrated by persons with damage to the nervous system, but not the violence of psychopaths. In sum, this two-path model states that psychopathy and neurodevelopmental insults are uncorrelated causes of criminal violence, even though each is associated with antisocial parenting. Furthermore, we hypothesize that the relationship between antisocial parenting and criminal violence is entirely indirect, acting through each of psychopathy and neurodevelopmental insults (see Figure 1). In this study, we examined the psychosocial, psychiatric, medical, criminal, and demographic histories of 868 violent offenders. First, we established that we could satisfactorily measure the major constructs of interestpsychopathy, developmental insults, and antisocial parenting. Next, we used a conservative structural equation modeling approach to test whether the explanation of psychopathy presented above could give an adequate account of the available data. And finally, we subjected the two-path model to other adequacy tests.
410
METHOD
PARTICIPANTS AND VARIABLES
The sample consisted of participants from studies previously published: an evaluation of a maximum security therapeutic community (Rice et al., 1992), a comparison of the outcomes of insanity acquittees versus convicted offenders (Rice, Harris, Lang, & Bell, 1990), and follow-up studies of sex offenders (Rice, Harris, & Quinsey, 1990; Rice, Quinsey, & Harris, 1991). The combined sample was also recently studied with regard to violent and sexual recidivism (Rice & Harris, 1995, 1997b). The characteristics of the combined sample of 868 men have been described in detail in the earlier reports. Almost all had previously committed a violent criminal offense (i.e., armed robbery, assault, sexual assault, attempted murder, and all homicide offenses). Many variables were coded for this data set. Details about the coding and interrater reliabilities can be found in the original reports (Quinsey, Rice, & Harris, 1995; Rice, Harris, Lang, & Bell, 1990; Rice et al., 1992). Briefly, interrater correlations exceeded .80, and kappas exceeded .70. The coding of background variables relied on participants very comprehensive clinical records, including reports from participants families, schools, and previous hospitalizations, which have formed the basis for many previous studies (e.g., Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1991a, 1991b; Lalumire, Harris, Quinsey, & Rice, 1998). For the purposes of the present report, the most important background variables were those that reflected reports (usually from family members) about very early health and developmental problems (Lalumire, Harris, & Rice, 1999, 2001); those that reflected childhood and adolescent instability, antisociality, and aggression; and those that reflected adult antisociality and psychopathy. Some coding details are explained in the note for Table 1. Summary statistics on the 17 variables that formed the basis for this study are also shown in Table 1. Finally, psychosis (schizophrenia or major affective disorder) was coded dichotomously from the clinical records using DSM-III criteria.
Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE 411 IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES AND SPECIFICATION OF A MODEL
The analytic strategy comprised several stages. First, we verified that the individual observed variables were reasonable indicators of the main hypothetical constructspsychopathy, neurodevelopmental insults, antisocial parenting, and criminal violence. At this first step, we used exploratory factor analysis (using mean substitution for missing values1) on a randomly selected half of the participants to develop the measurement model shown in Figure 2. We then tested the measurement model on that same first half of the participants using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Next, we tested the measurement model on the second random half of the participants using CFA. The next step of our approach was, using the first random half of the participants again, to fit the structural equation model shown in Figure 1 predicting no direct link between psychopathy and developmental insults. As well, we examined the possibility that we could dispense with a direct link between antisocial parents and criminal violence. The fourth step was to test the adequacy of the structural model on the second random half of the participants. Finally, after conducting further tests of our models adequacy, we used all 868 participants to obtain final parameter estimates.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The psychotic participants (M = .22, SD = .55) scored significantly higher on the neurodevelopmental insults construct than the nonpsychotic participants (M = .15, SD = .45), t(861) = 1.85, p < .05, onetailed. Scores on most of the study variables were significantly related to past violence or violent recidivism (shown in Table 1). Also shown in Table 1, the manifest variables indicating the constructs (selected through exploratory factor analysis on a randomly selected 434 participants) loaded on the factors expected. Table 2 shows the results of the application of CFA (using the two random halves of the participants) to the measurement model shown in Figure 2.2 Although at first glance the large chi-squares suggest poor fit, it is well known that with suffi-
412
TABLE 1: Summary Statistics for Individual Indicators, Principal Components Loadings (CL), and Correlations with Past and Recidivistic Violence
Indicator
Neurodevelopmental insults a Learning disorder total score Pregnancy difficulties and b perinatal problems Physical and medical problems c in infancy Highest grade achieved d Performance IQ Antisocial parenting Experienced parental neglect/ rejection Parental crime Parental alcoholism Witnessed abuse at home Experienced physical abuse Psychopathy e Childhood aggression score f Elevated MMPI Pd scale g Psychopathy Checklist score Childhood Adolescent Taxon h Scale Antisocial Personality Disorder i Scale Criminal violence History score for prior arrests j for violence k Violent recidivism
M or %
SD
CL
Past
Recidivistic
0.10 0.28 0.11 8.7 100
0.30 0.58 0.33 2.5 16
.34 .23 .56 .74 .79
.10 .10
.12
11 8 45 13 18 2.6 40 16.1 2.4 4.6
1.9 9.1 1.7 3.5
.59 .37 .57 .75 .84 .74 .31 .77 .83 .58
.11 .11 .19 .10 .32 .19 .31
.12 .10 .08 .26 .18 .27 .25 .17
4.4 46
10.4
.75 .75
.12
.12
NOTE: All correlations shown p < .05, one-tailed. MMPI = Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. a. A count of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd edition (DSM-III ) (American Psychiatric Assocation, 1980) symptoms of learning disorder judged to apply to the participant. b. A count of obstetrical and perinatal difficulties (toxemia, prematurity, low birth weight, delivery by forceps, caesarian section, prolonged labor, fetal distress, anoxia, perinatal infections, Rh problems, mother older than age 35) recorded in the participants clinical record. c. A count of problems in very early childhood (high fevers, neurological problems, colic, malnutrition, head injury). d. Participants score on the performance subscale of the WAIS or the Ravens Progressive Matrices. e. A rating pertaining to behavior before age 15 on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (no evidence of aggression) to 7 (occasional or frequent extreme aggression). f. T score at least 60. g. The 20-item Hare Psychopathy ChecklistRevised. h. Score on an eight-item (e.g., elementary school maladjustment, arrest under age 16, ever suspended or expelled, teenage alcohol abuse, DSM-III conduct disorder) scale
Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE 413 TABLE 1 Note Continued shown to reflect a discrete entity underlying psychopathy (see Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1994). i. A count of DSM-III (APA, 1980) antisocial personality disorder symptoms. j. A score (updated from Akman & Normandeau, 1967) reflecting the frequency and severity of prior violent criminal conduct (see Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1998). k. Recidivism data were obtained from the files of the Coroners Office, the Lieutenant Governors Board of Review (which maintains information about every insanity acquittee in Ontario), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (a national database of criminal arrests and convictions), the National Parole Service of Canada, and provincial correctional and parole systems. Participants were classified as violent failures if they incurred any new charge for a criminal offense against persons or were returned to a maximum security institution for violent behavior against persons that, in the judgment of the raters, would otherwise have resulted in a criminal charge for an offense against persons.
Obstetrical complications Low academic status Learning disorder Infancy problems Low IQ NeuroDevelopmental Insults
The Measurement Model
MMPI Pd Scale score Psychopathy Checklist score Childhood & Adolescence Taxon Scale score DSM APD score Childhood aggression score Psychopathy
Parental crime Physical abuse Parental alcoholism Witnessed family violence Antisocial Parents
Psychological abuse or neglect
Figure 2:
The Measurement Model.
cient power, discrepancies are essentially inevitable (Byrne, 1994; Hoyle & Panter, 1995). Consequently, a large number of fit indices have been developed to counteract the misleading effects of large samples. Following the recommendations of Arbuckle (1997), the most commonly reported fit indices are shown in Table 2. Overall, the fit indices (and the results in Table 1) suggest satisfactory measurement of the latent constructs, but it appeared that we instantiated psychopathy somewhat better than neurodevelopmental insults.
414
TABLE 2: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Measurement Model Shown in Figure 2 on Two Randomly Divided Halves of the Sample (n = 434 each)
Adequacy Statistic
Chi-square (df = 73) Incremental Fit Index Jreskog-Srbom GFI Jreskog-Srbom Adjusted GFI Tucker-Lewis Non-normed Fit Index Bollen Relative Fit Index Bentler Bonett Normed Fit Index Bentler Comparative Fit Index Parsimonious Comparative Fit Index NOTE: GFI = Goodness of Fit Index.
First Half
154 .94 .96 .93 .91 .83 .88 .93 .65
Second Half
185 .92 .95 .92 .88 .81 .87 .91 .64
The good fit achieved in the first random half was not especially impressive because we had first used exploratory factor analysis on those same participants to select our observable indicator variables. The good fit achieved in the second random half, however, supported our conclusion that the measurement model was a satisfactory instantiation of the constructs. We concluded that given our conservative approach (exploratory factor analysis followed by CFA on one random half of the participants followed by CFA on the other half), we had sufficient statistical grounds to proceed to the next step. We examined the ability of each construct to predict criminal violence, a factor that was indicated by two variables: past criminal violence (a numerical score reflecting the frequency and severity of prior violent criminal arrests) (see Quinsey et al., 1998) and violent recidivism. Violent recidivism was defined as any criminal charge for a subsequent violent offense (or, in a small number of cases, a violent act inside an institution for which criminal charges could have been laid but were not) (Harris et al., 1993). The violent recidivism rate was 43% in the average 10-year follow-up (Rice & Harris, 1995). For violent recidivism, this permitted true prediction because all the variables used as indicators of other constructs were based on clinical material gathered before recidivism was known, and violent recidivism was coded independently by a separate team of research assistants (Harris et al., 1991a; Rice, Harris, Lang, & Bell, 1990). Each of the three explanatory factors predicted violent recidivism but not equally. The
correlation between violent recidivism and neurodevelopmental insults was statistically significant but small (Cohen, 1992), r = .10, p < .05; the correlation for the antisocial parenting was larger but still modest, r = .18, p < .001; and the correlation for psychopathy was moderately large, r = .40, p < .001, all one-tailed. The structural model shown in Figure 1 was submitted to a maximum likelihood analysis of model fit (Arbuckle, 1997), again using the first randomly selected 434 of the 868 participants. As implied by the figure, the model entailed a total of 39 variables: 17 observed and 22 unobserved; 21 exogenous and 18 endogenous (error terms are not shown). The test of the recursive model comprised 107 degrees of freedom, and the final chi-square (df = 107) value was 200.3, p < .001. Table 3 shows an expanded set of fit statistics, and all imply that a good fit to the data was achieved. This analysis further indicated no relation between the neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy constructs ( = 0.0, n.s.) and that the path coefficient between antisocial parents and criminal violence was negligible ( = .03, n.s.). We then tested the models adequacy on the second random half of the participants. This analysis resulted in a chi-square (df = 107) value of 175.9, p < .001. We regarded this test,3 using completely different participants, to be conservative. Fit statistics for the two independent tests of the two-path model are shown in Table 3. A subsidiary question involved the role of developmental insults in the violence perpetrated by psychopaths alone. That is, if psychopathy and developmental perturbations are independent of each other, perhaps they are also independent causes of violence such that the most violent psychopaths are those who (in addition to being psychopaths) have experienced neurodevelopmental problems. We therefore examined the correlations between the indicators of neurodevelopmental insults and the criminal violence construct only for those 182 participants who were highly likely to be psychopaths (PCL-R score > 24). With one exception, none of the correlations exceeded .10, and the only statistically significant correlation was an unexpected positive association between IQ and criminal violence, r = .19, p < .05, suggesting that violence by psychopaths has quite different causes from the violence of other serious offenders. Because these conservative analyses all yielded a good parsimonious fit of our two-path model to the data, we subjected all 868 partici-
416
TABLE 3: Testing the Proposed Model (Figure 1) on Two Randomly Chosen Halves of the Participants
Fit Statistic
First Half
Ind/Sat a
Second Half Ind/Sat
Minimum discrepancy/degrees of freedom 1.64 11.03 1.87 10.82 Normed noncentrality parameter (90% CI) .16 (.08-.25) 3.2 (2.9-3.4) .22 (.13-.32) 3.1 (2.8-3.4) RMSEA (90% CI) .04 (.03-.05) .15 .05 (.04-.05) .15 Probability for RMSEA P Close .97 0 .91 0 Akaike Information Criterion 268 1,534/306 292 1,505/306 Browne-Cudek Criterion 275 1,536/319 296 1,506/319 Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index .88 0 .86 0 Parsimonious Normed Fit Index .69 0 .68 0 Bollen Relative Fit Index .85 0 .83 0 Jreskog-Srbom GFI .96 .65 .95 .63 Jreskog-Srbom Adjusted GFI .94 .6 .93 .59 Jreskog-Srbom Parsimony GFI .67 .58 .66 .56 Bentler Comparative Fit Index .95 0 .93 0 Parsimonious Comparative Fit Index .75 0 .73 0 Incremental Fit Index .95 0 .93 0 Tucker-Lewis Coefficient or Nonnormed Fit Index .92 0 .94 0 NOTE: RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; GFI = Goodness of Fit Index. a. For comparison, the same statistic for the independence model (Ind) is shown as is the statistic for the fully saturated model (Sat), if relevant, after the slash.
pants to a final estimate of parameters, the results of which are shown in Figure 3. It is not surprising that the fit statistics for this comprehensive test were again quite good, 2 (df = 107) = 264.5, p < .001 (e.g., Bentler Comparative Fit Index = .94; Tucker Lewis Criterion = .93; Incremental Fit Index = .94; Jreskog-Srbom Goodness and Adjusted Goodness of Fit Indices = .97 and .95, respectively). At the same time, we subjected the model to a random permutation test. In such a test, the positions of the observed variables (hypothetical relationships with the unobserved variables) are randomly varied. If a model fits well with the observed data, it is presumed that very few random permutations of the observed variables will have statistical results, suggesting an improvement in fit. On the other hand, a poorly fitting model is presumed to be improved relatively often by random permutations of the positions of observed variables. With 18 observed
Obstetrical complications Low academic status .15 .14 Learning disorder .73 Infancy problems Low IQ Parental crime .27 Physical abuse .84 .23
.68 NeuroDevelopmental Insults .12 D Violent criminal history .37 Antisocial Criminal Violence Parents
.10
Parental alcoholism
.38 .57
Witness family violence .44 Psychological abuse/neglect .32 .84 MMPI PD Scale PCL-R score CATS score DSM APD score .83 .59 .67 .75 Psychopathy .22
.40
Violent recidivism
Final Parameter Estimates (N=868)
Childhood aggression score
Figure 3:
Parameter Estimates for the Proposed Model Using All 868 Participants.
variables, there are approximately 6 1015 possible permutations; we tested a randomly selected 999 of thesenone resulted in an improved or unchanged fit, 55 resulted in a model that could not be fitted, and 944 resulted in poorer fit than achieved by the proposed model. Thus, we concluded that the models shown in Figures 1 and 3 are an excellent fit to the available data. As a final comment on model fit, we note that many conceptualizations imply that psychopathy is pathologicalpsychopathy is a disorder of neurophysiology, cognition, emotion, or personality (Harris, Skilling, & Rice, 2001). One pathological model of psychopathy could be achieved by making only two changes to Figure 1. The addition of a causal path between neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy and changing the correlational link between antisocial parenting and psychopathy to a directional causal path could be consistent with a pathological account. Fitting that modified model to all the participants in the present data yielded a model fit not significantly different (but less parsimonious due to the addition of one more parameter) from that achieved by the models in Figures 1 and 3. However, as stated earlier, this analysis estimated the causal link between
418
neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy to be zero. On grounds of both statistical adequacy and parsimony, then, we concluded that the nonpathological, two-path model of psychopathy is to be preferred over many pathological accounts.
CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
This study examined the interrelationships and the contributions of three major constructsneurodevelopmental insults, antisocial parenting, and psychopathyto the causation of criminal violence. Specifically, we hypothesized that although all three were related to violence, neurodevelopmental insults and psychopathy were unrelated to each other, but inadequate, antisocial parenting was correlated with each. The hypothetical model was subjected to conservative tests of adequacy, resulting in satisfactory fit. Although both psychopathy and neurodevelopmental insults were related to criminal violence, as suggested by the empirical literature, psychopathy appeared to be a much more important cause of violence (as well as a better measured construct, at least in this study). Although causation cannot be inferred from correlation, the absence of a correlation clearly implies the absence of causation. The lack of a relationship between psychopathy and neurodevelopmental insults suggests that psychopathy is not the result of the kinds of neurodevelopmental problems measured in this study and is consistent with the selectionist view of psychopathy as a viable life strategy. Moreover, subsidiary analyses suggested that the operationalization of these neurodevelopmental problems was consistent with that employed in other research in that they were generally related to violence and to other variables (i.e., psychosis) in the manner previously reported in the literature (CantorGraae et al., 1994). In general, these results suggest that some violence is the result of disorders, but not the violence of psychopaths. The present results support our hypothesis that there are at least two distinct general paths to criminal violence. In the first, a variety of neurological insults and dysfunctions produce impairment, causing the individual to act violently. As such, this pathological path might really be a collection of paths composed of functional illnesses (schizophrenia, mania), acquired defects (brain injury, damage due to
substance abuse, etc.), and mixtures of the two. The second path, psychopathy, represents a much more important cause of violence than the neurodevelopmental insults associated with disorders. The present results are consistent with the idea that psychopaths are qualitatively distinct from other violent persons and that psychopathy is not due to neurodevelopmental defects. Other measures also suggest that psychopathy is not due to early developmental perturbations (Lalumire et al., 2001). According to this view, psychopaths score differently on some tests of mental and emotional functioning, but these differences were not deficits during human evolution. Instead, such characteristics were part of an aggressive and exploitative reproductive strategy. A significant strength of this study compared with other studies examining aggression is that the present participants were all violent individuals and our criminal violence latent construct reflected the frequency and severity of violent crime. We also took steps to verify that constructs known to be associated with violence were operationalized well. On the other hand, we did not measure some factors that we would hypothesize to be related to these two paths to violence. Most obviously, we knew nothing about the genetic makeup of our participants. Second, our measures of neurodevelopmental insults were indirect; we did not have access to more direct measures such as fluctuating asymmetry, minor physical anomalies, or deviation from moderate right-handedness (Nizamie et al., 1989; Thornhill & Gangestad, 1994; Yeo, Gangestad, & Daniel, 1993). Third, we did not assay neurotransmitters or hormones reported to be related to violence. A bidirectional relationship between antisocial parenting and psychopathy was expected. Based on a hypothesis that psychopathy is a severe disorder, it has been assumed that brutality, abuse, and neglect produce the psychological damage that results in psychopathy. Just as plausibly, however, neglect and abuse do not necessarily cause any damage among psychopaths. Instead, according to the life history view of psychopathy, these childhood events might be the environmental signals that initiate a violent, condition-dependent psychopathic life strategy. It is also plausible, as detailed in the Introduction, that there is a reciprocal relationship between parental and offspring aggression. As well, if psychopathy is a genetically transmitted char-
420
acteristic, psychopaths should be especially likely to have psychopathic parents, who are by definition less solicitous. Similarly, the model specifies a bidirectional relationship between antisocial parenting and neurodevelopmental insults, because antisocial, negligent mothers would be less likely to seek good prenatal care and nutrition and more likely to experience certain perinatal difficulties (e.g., those associated with substance abuse). As well, abusive, negligent parents would be more likely to injure their children and less likely to provide good infant care. That is, antisocial parenting might be an important cause of neurodevelopmental insults. As well, abusive, negligent, and rejecting parenting might be a response to having an unhealthy child (or a response to circumstances that are unfavorable for an infant). As in many nonhuman species, some parents who have offspring that are unlikely to contribute to their Darwinian fitness might invest fewer emotional and physical resources in those offspring (cf. Raine et al., 1997; Wilson, Daly, & Daniele, 1995). This two-path model about criminal violence also makes something else apparentnot all violence, even in its most extreme form, is pathological (Daly & Wilson, 1988; Furlow, Gangestad, & ArmijoPrewitt, 1998). Violent intrasex status competition (Hilton, Harris, & Rice, 2000), some kinds of sexual coercion (Quinsey & Lalumire, 1995), and even mass rape and killing during warfare (Wrangham & Peterson, 1996) can be understood as the result of nonpathological influences. Such a view also helps explain why violence by psychopaths is predicted differently from that of nonpsychopaths. Although psychopathic offenders are more likely to abuse alcohol, alcohol abuse only predicts recidivism among nonpsychopaths (Rice & Harris, 1995). Nonpsychopaths appear to exhibit age-related declines in the risk of violence whereas psychopaths do not (Harris et al., 1991a). The two-path model explains why some findings about indicators of developmental insults and violence are inconsistent. According to the model, the likelihood of obtaining a particular relationship depends on the composition of the groups compared. For example, compared with normal (nondisordered, nonpsychopathic) persons, those with signs of developmental instability should be more violent. But compared with other violent persons (i.e., psychopaths), those with such signs would be no more and perhaps even less violent (Lalumire et al., 2001).
This two-path model might also explain why treatment effects seem easier to obtain in adolescent as opposed to adult offender populations. One could expect that treatment helps induce adolescentlimited offenders (i.e., nonpsychopaths) to desist. By definition, psychopaths are early and persistent offenders (Caspi et al., 1996). To the extent that an offender population is composed of psychopaths (as among a population of adult compared with adolescent offenders), a reduction in the likelihood of violence is much harder to obtain. Theoretically, the older a population of violent individuals, the higher the proportion of psychopaths, because many nonpsychopathic, nondisordered offenders can be induced to desist. Finally, indicators of neurodevelopmental instability (e.g., fluctuating asymmetry) should be related to nonpsychopathic violence but not to psychopathic violence (Lalumire et al., 2001). Similarly, if psychopathy reflects an adaptation, the crimes of psychopaths should be more likely to enhance inclusive fitness than the crimes of other violent offenders. For example, psychopaths have been reported to engage in more instrumental (goal directed) violence than do nonpsychopaths, who engage in more expressive (emotionally reactive) violence (Cornell et al., 1996; Williamson et al., 1987). As well, among sex offenders, those who are psychopathic more often select victims of reproductive age and the opposite sex than do nonpsychopathic sex offenders (e.g., Quinsey et al., 1995). We are conducting further tests of these predictions.
NOTES
1. Use of mean substitution might be expected to attenuate effect sizes, but such attenuation was likely to have been negligible in the present analyses because the proportion of missing values was generally small (median proportion = 3%). 2. Confirmatory factor analysis could not be performed on the criminal violence construct indicated by only two observed variables, but its adequacy is implied by the high intercorrelation of those two variables shown in Table 1. 3. Upon estimation at this stage, one parameter, the error associated with the measurement of the criminal violence construct, yielded an impossible negative value. Because the model had survived testing on the other half of the participants, because it was to be later tested on the entire sample, and because of our overall conservative approach, we treated this single anomalous result as nugatory.
422
REFERENCES
Akman, D. D., & Normandeau, A. (1967). The measurement of crime and delinquency in Canada: A replication study. British Journal of Criminology, 7, 129-149. American Psychiatric Assocation. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Assocation. (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Arbuckle, J. L. (1997). Amos users guide version 3.6. Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation. Berman, M. E., Kavoussi, R. J., & Coccaro, E. F. (1997). Neurotransmitter correlates of human aggression. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 305-313). New York: John Wiley. Bowman, M. L. (1997). Brain impairment in impulsive violence. In C. D. Webster & M. A. Jackson (Eds.), Impulsivity: Theory, assessment, and treatment (pp. 116-141). New York: Guilford Press. Brain, P. F., & Susman, E. J. (1997). Hormonal aspects of aggression and violence. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 314-323). New York: John Wiley. Braungart-Rieker, J., Rende, R. D., Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., & Fulker, D. W. (1995). Genetic mediation of longitudinal associations between family environment and childhood behavior problems. Development & Psychopathology, 7, 233-245. Brennan, P. A., Grekin, E. R., & Mednick, S. A. (1999). Maternal smoking during pregnancy and adult male criminal outcomes. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 215-219. Brennan, P. A., & Mednick, S. A. (1997). Medical histories of antisocial individuals. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 269-279). New York: John Wiley. Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Human aggression in evolutionary psychological perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 605-619. Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cadoret, R. J., Yates, W. R., Troughton, E., Woodworth, G., & Stewart, M. A. (1995). Geneticenvironmental interaction in the genesis of aggressivity and conduct disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 52, 916-924. Cantor-Graae, E., McNeil, T. F., Rickler, K. C., Sjostrom, K., Rawlings, R., Higgins, E. C., & Hyde, T. M. (1994). Are neurological abnormalities in well discordant monozygotic cotwins of schizophrenic participants the result of perinatal trauma? American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 1194-1199. Carey, G., & Goldman, D. (1997). The genetics of antisocial behavior. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 243-254). New York: John Wiley. Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Newman, D. L., & Silva, P. A. (1996). Behavioral observations at age 3 years predict adult psychiatric disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 53, 1033-1039. Coccaro, E. F. (1989). Central serotonin and impulsive aggression. British Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 52-62. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. Cornell, D. G., Warren, J., Hawk, G., Stafford, E., Oram, G., & Pine, D. (1996). Psychopathy in instrumental and reactive violent offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 783-790.
Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE 423 Coscina, D. V. (1997). The biopsychology of impulsivity: Focus on brain serotonin. In C. D. Webster & M. A. Jackson (Eds.), Impulsivity: Theory, assessment and treatment (pp. 95115). New York: Guilford Press. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Dishion, T. J., & Patterson, G. R. (1997). The timing and severity of antisocial behavior: Three hypotheses within an ecological framework. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 205-217). New York: John Wiley. Furlow, B., Gangestad, S. W., & Armijo-Prewitt, T. (1998). Developmental stability and human violence. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B, 265, 1-6. Halverson, C. F., & Victor, J. B. (1976). Minor physical anomalies and problem behavior in elementary school children. Child Development, 47, 281-285. Hare, R. D. (1991). The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Manual. Toronto, Canada: MultiHealth. Hare, R. D. (1993). Without conscience. New York: Pocket Books. Hare, R. D., & McPherson, L. M. (1984). Violent and aggressive behavior by criminal psychopaths. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 7, 35-50. Harpending, H. C., & Sobus, J. (1987). Sociopathy as an adaptation. Ethology and Sociobiology, 8, 63S-72S. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (1991a). Psychopathy and violent recidivism. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 625-632. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (1991b). Length of detention in matched groups of insanity acquittees and convicted offenders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 14, 223-236. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (1994). Psychopaths: Is a therapeutic community therapeutic? Therapeutic Communities, 15, 283-300. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1993). Violent recidivism of mentally disordered offenders: The development of a statistical prediction instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 315-335. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1994). Psychopathy as a taxon: Evidence that psychopaths are a discrete class. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 387-397. Harris, G. T., Skilling, T. A., & Rice, M. E. (in press). The construct of psychopathy. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hart, S. D., & Hare, R. D. (1997). Psychopathy: Assessment and association with criminal conduct. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 22-35). New York: John Wiley. Heilbrun, A. B. (1990). The measurement of criminal dangerousness as a personality construct: Further validation of a research index. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54, 141-148. Henry, B., & Moffitt, T. E. (1997). Neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies of juvenile delinquency and adult criminal behavior. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 280-288). New York: John Wiley. Hiday, V. A. (1997). Understanding the connection between mental illness and violence. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 20, 399-417. Hilton, N. Z., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2000). The functions of aggression by male teenagers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 988-994. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Intrator, J., Hare, R., Stritzke, P., Brichtswein, K., Dorfman, D., Harpur, T., Bernstein, D., Handelsman, L., Schaefer, C., Keilp, J., Rosen, J., & Machac, J. (1997). A brain imaging
424
(single photon emission computerized tomography) study of semantic and affective processing in psychopaths. Biological Psychiatry, 42, 96-103. Kandel, E., Brennan, P. A., Mednick, S. A., & Michelson, N. M. (1989). Minor physical anomalies and recidivistic adult violent criminal behavior. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 79, 103-107. Lalumire, M. L., Harris, G. T., Quinsey, V. L., & Rice, M. E. (1998). Sexual deviance and number of older brothers among sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 10, 5-15. Lalumire, M. L., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (1999). Birth order and fluctuating asymmetry. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 266, 2351-2354. Lalumire, M. L., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2001). Developmental instability and psychopathy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 75-92. Lalumire, M. L., & Seto, M. C. (1999). Whats wrong with psychopaths? Psychiatric Rounds, 2, 6. Langevin, R., Ben-Aron, M., Wortzman, G., Dickey, R., & Handy, L. (1987). Brain damage, diagnosis, and substance abuse among violent offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 77-94. Linnoila, M. (1997). On the psychobiology of antisocial behavior. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 336-342). New York: John Wiley. Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (1997). Strategies and yields of longitudinal studies on antisocial behavior. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 125-139). New York: John Wiley. Mealey, L. (1995). The sociobiology of sociopathy: An integrated evolutionary model. Brain and Behavioral Sciences, 18, 523-599. Mednick, S. A., & Kandel, E. S. (1988). Congenital determinants of violence. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 16, 101-109. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). The neuropsychology of conduct disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 135-151. Nizamie, S. H., Nizamie, A., Sangma, M. W., & Sharma, P. L. (1989). Soft neurological signs and minor physical anomalies in schizophrenia. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 31, 230-237. Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. American Psychologist, 44, 329-335. Plutchik, R., & van Praag, H. M. (1997). Suicide, impulsivity, and antisocial behavior. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 101-108). New York: John Wiley. Quinsey, V. L., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (1998). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Quinsey, V. L., & Lalumire, M. L. (1995). Evolutionary perspectives on sexual offending. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 7, 301-315. Quinsey, V. L., Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1995). Actuarial prediction of sexual recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10, 85-105. Raine, A. (1993). The psychopathology of crime: Criminal behavior as a clinical disorder. San Diego: Academic Press. Raine, A. (1997). Antisocial behavior and psychophysiology: A biosocial perspective and a prefrontal dysfunction hypothesis. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 289-304). New York: John Wiley. Raine, A., Brennan, P., & Mednick, S. A. (1994). Birth complication combined with early maternal rejection at age 1 predispose to violent crime at age 18 years. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51, 984-988.
Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE 425 Raine, A., Brennan, P., & Mednick, S. A. (1997). Interaction between birth complications and early maternal rejection in predisposing individuals to adult violence: Specificity to serious, early-onset violence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 1265-1271. Raine, A., Lencz, T., Bihrle, S., LaCasse, L., & Colletti, P. (2000). Reduced prefrontal gray matter volume and reduced autonomic activity in antisocial personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57, 119-127. Rice, M. E. (1997). Violent offender research and implications for the criminal justice system. American Psychologist, 52, 414-423. Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1992). A comparison of criminal recidivism among schizophrenic and nonschizophrenic offenders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 15, 397-408. Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1995). Psychopathy, schizophrenia, alcohol abuse, and violent recidivism. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 18, 333-342. Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1997a). The treatment of adult offenders. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 425-435). New York: John Wiley. Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1997b). Cross-validation and extension of the violence risk appraisal guide for child molesters and rapists. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 231-241. Rice, M. E., Harris, G. T., & Cormier, C. A. (1992). An evaluation of a maximum security therapeutic community for psychopaths and other mentally disordered offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 399-412. Rice, M. E., Harris, G. T., Lang, C., & Bell, V. (1990). Recidivism among male insanity acquittees. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 18, 379-403. Rice, M. E., Harris, G. T., & Quinsey, V. L. (1990). A follow-up of rapists assessed in a maximum security psychiatric facility. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 435-448. Rice, M. E., Quinsey, V. L., & Harris, G. T. (1991). Sexual recidivism among child molesters released from a maximum security psychiatric institution. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 381-386. Shaw, D. S., & Winslow, E. B. (1997). Precursors and correlates of antisocial behavior from infancy to preschool. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 148-158). New York: John Wiley. Simons, R. L., Johnson, C., Conger, R. D., & Elder, G. (1998). A test of latent trait versus lifecourse perspectives on the stability of adolescent antisocial behavior. Criminology, 36, 217243. Skilling, T., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (2001). Psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder reflect the same underlying discrete entity. Manuscript submitted for publication. Szatmari, P., Reitsma-Street, M., & Offord, D. R. (1986). Pregnancy and birth complications in antisocial adolescents and their siblings. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 31, 513-516. Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1994). Human fluctuating asymmetry and sexual behavior. Psychological Science, 5, 297-302. Virkkunen, M., & Linnoila, M. (1993). Serotonin in personality disorders with habitual violence and impulsivity. In S. Hodgins (Ed.), Mental disorder and crime (pp. 227-243). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Wakefield, J. C. (1992). Disorder as harmful dysfunction: A conceptual critique of DSM-III-Rs definition of mental disorder. Psychological Review, 99, 232-247. Waldrop, M. F., Bell, R. Q., McLaughlin, B., & Halverson, C. F. (1978). Newborn minor physical anomalies predict short attention span, peer aggression, and impulsivity at age 3. Science, 199, 563-564. Widom, C. S. (1997). Child abuse, neglect, and witnessing violence. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 159-170). New York: John Wiley.
426
Williamson, S., Hare, R. D., & Wong, S. (1987). Violence: Criminal psychopaths and their victims. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 19, 454-462. Wilson, M., Daly, M., & Daniele, A. (1995). Famillicide: The killing of spouse and children. Aggressive Behavior, 21, 275-291. Wrangham, R. W., & Peterson, D. (1996). Demonic males: Apes and the origins of human violence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Yeo, R. A., Gangestad, S. W., & Daniel, W. F. (1993). Hand preference and developmental instability. Psychobiology, 21, 161-168.

Criminal Justice and Behavior 2001 Harris 402 26

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Criminal Justice and Behavior 2001 Harris 402 26

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Criminal Justice and Behavior

International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

>> Version of Record - Aug 1, 2001 What is This?

Downloaded from cjb.sagepub.com at University of New England on January 24, 2012

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE

Downloaded from cjb.sagepub.com at University of New England on January 24, 2012

Harris et al. / EXPLAINING CRIMINAL VIOLENCE 403

Downloaded from cjb.sagepub.com at University of New England on January 24, 2012