Emma R. Barrowcliffe, Nichola Tyler, Theresa A. Gannon
{"title":"Firesetting among 18-23 year old un-apprehended adults: a UK community study","authors":"Emma R. Barrowcliffe, Nichola Tyler, Theresa A. Gannon","doi":"10.1108/JCRPP-06-2021-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to assess the prevalence of firesetting in a sample of young UK adults aged 18 to 23 years and to compare their characteristics with non-firesetting individuals.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nTwo-hundred and forty male (n = 119, 49.6%) and female (n = 121, 50.4%) participants were recruited through Prolific Academic. Comparisons were made between self-reported firesetting and non-firesetting participants on a range of demographic, fire-related and personality measures. Factors predictive of firesetting status were examined using hierarchical logistic regression.\n\n\nFindings\nTwenty-five percent of participants (n = 60) reported igniting a deliberate fire. Logistic regression was used to examine the ability of parental supervision and behavioural issues (e.g., witnessing domestic violence, experimenting with fire before age 10 and family history of firesetting), antisocial behaviours (e.g., having criminal friends, impulsivity, teenage access to fire paraphernalia, skipping class more than once per week, taken any illegal drugs and participation in criminal behaviour) and fire-related interests, attitudes and propensities in predicting firesetting status. Factors found to distinguish firesetting and non-firesetting participants included the following: experimented with fire before 10 years of age, family history of firesetting, impulsivity, teenage access to fire paraphernalia, participation in criminal behaviour and the Fire Setting Scale.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe results provide key information about potential risk factors relating to un-apprehended firesetting in the general population.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis research adds to the small body of literature examining firesetting in the general population. It refines previously used methodologies, presents the first research study to examine the prevalence of firesetting behaviour in emerging adults and enhances our understanding of un-apprehended firesetting.\n","PeriodicalId":43553,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRPP-06-2021-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to assess the prevalence of firesetting in a sample of young UK adults aged 18 to 23 years and to compare their characteristics with non-firesetting individuals.
Design/methodology/approach
Two-hundred and forty male (n = 119, 49.6%) and female (n = 121, 50.4%) participants were recruited through Prolific Academic. Comparisons were made between self-reported firesetting and non-firesetting participants on a range of demographic, fire-related and personality measures. Factors predictive of firesetting status were examined using hierarchical logistic regression.
Findings
Twenty-five percent of participants (n = 60) reported igniting a deliberate fire. Logistic regression was used to examine the ability of parental supervision and behavioural issues (e.g., witnessing domestic violence, experimenting with fire before age 10 and family history of firesetting), antisocial behaviours (e.g., having criminal friends, impulsivity, teenage access to fire paraphernalia, skipping class more than once per week, taken any illegal drugs and participation in criminal behaviour) and fire-related interests, attitudes and propensities in predicting firesetting status. Factors found to distinguish firesetting and non-firesetting participants included the following: experimented with fire before 10 years of age, family history of firesetting, impulsivity, teenage access to fire paraphernalia, participation in criminal behaviour and the Fire Setting Scale.
Practical implications
The results provide key information about potential risk factors relating to un-apprehended firesetting in the general population.
Originality/value
This research adds to the small body of literature examining firesetting in the general population. It refines previously used methodologies, presents the first research study to examine the prevalence of firesetting behaviour in emerging adults and enhances our understanding of un-apprehended firesetting.