Suchergebnisse

AbstractBackgroundThe present study examined the psychometric properties of the Dynamic Risk Outcome Scales (DROS), an instrument developed to measure dynamic risk factors in individuals with mild intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning (MID‐BIF) and externalizing (including offending‐like) behaviour problems.MethodThe sample consisted of 606 clients (86% male) from inpatient treatment wards at a facility for individuals with MID‐BIF and externalizing behaviour problems.ResultsThe DROS showed an acceptable factor structure, good internal consistency, significant test–retest reliability and fair to excellent inter‐rater reliabilities for most subscales and total score. Compared to the Adult Behavior Checklist (ABCL; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2003 Manual for the ASEBA adult forms and profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families), the DROS showed convergent and divergent validity, concurrent and longitudinal validity.ConclusionsThe DROS is a reliable and valid instrument to measure dynamic risk factors in clients with MID‐BIF. Future research on the DROS will focus on the assessment of recidivism and the inclusion of internalizing problems.

AbstractBackgroundThis study examines associations between group climate, aggressive incidents and coercive measures in adults with mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning (MID‐BIF) of a secure forensic setting.MethodParticipants (N = 248) were interviewed about their perception of group climate utilizing the Group Climate Instrument. Data on aggressive incidents and coercive measures were retrieved from the facilities' electronic database. A multilevel structural equation model was fitted in which variability in perception of group climate within and between living groups was examined.ResultsAn open and therapeutic group climate was associated with lower levels of aggression within and between groups. A higher number of aggressive incidents were significantly associated with a higher number of coercive measures.ConclusionsThe findings have implications for the understanding of how group climate may play a role in reducing aggressive incidents at the living group in treatment of individuals with MID‐BIF in secure forensic settings.

PurposeWhile there is a significant proportion of people with a mild intellectual disability (MID) or borderline intellectual functioning (BIF) who commit sexual offenses, little research has focused on the risk factors for sexual recidivism in people with MID-BIF. The purpose of this paper is to compare the scores on the STATIC-99R and STABLE-2007 between persons with sexual offense histories with and without MID-BIF.Design/methodology/approachData using the STATIC-99R and STABLE-2007 were collected in 85 male patients divided into an MID-BIF group (IQ 50–85,n=50) and comparison group (IQ>95,n=35).FindingsThe MID-BIF group and comparison group did not differ significantly on the static risk factors and total score of the STATIC-99R. However, of the 13 dynamic risk factors of the STABLE-2007, the MID-BIF group scored significantly higher on the items Impulsive acts, Poor problem solving skills and Lack of concern for others, while the comparison group scored significantly higher on the item Deviant sexual preference.Originality/valueThe higher score on a number of dynamic risk factors for patients with MID-BIF could partly be explained by the characteristics associated with MID-BIF. Although dynamic criminogenic risk factors which are usually identified as targets for treatment appear the same for people with and without MID-BIF who commit sexual offenses, adaptations to the modality of treatment will still need to be made for people with MID-BIF.

AbstractBackgroundThe Group Climate Inventory (GCI) was tested for measurement invariance across 332 adults with and 225 adults without mild intellectual disabilities in Dutch forensic treatment, and for latent mean differences on its Support, Growth, Repression, and Atmosphere subscales.MethodMultigroup confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the configural, threshold, and loading and threshold invariance of the GCI across both groups, and to compare group latent means on each subscale.ResultsMeasurement invariance was found across groups. Latent mean group comparisons showed small but significant differences reflected in lower scores on Support and Atmosphere in the group with mild intellectual disabilities.ConclusionThe GCI allows meaningful comparisons between clients with and without mild intellectual disabilities in secure facilities. Results from the between‐group comparisons suggest that consideration should be given as to whether, and why, the support and atmosphere perceptions of clients with mild intellectual disabilities might be less good.