检验法医样本中暴力风险的认知因素:系统综述和荟萃分析

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Sarah Janes , Lindsey Gilling McIntosh , Suzanne O'Rourke , Matthias Schwannauer
{"title":"检验法医样本中暴力风险的认知因素:系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Sarah Janes ,&nbsp;Lindsey Gilling McIntosh ,&nbsp;Suzanne O'Rourke ,&nbsp;Matthias Schwannauer","doi":"10.1016/j.avb.2023.101887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to quantitatively summarise the association between measures of cognitive abilities (e.g., neuropsychological and clinical measures, and risk assessments with a cognitive component) and violent outcomes. After acknowledging that existing reviews in this area have largely focused on executive functions and specific diagnostic groups only, the review adopted a broader approach, first examining factors which differentiate violent from non-violent offenders (part one), followed by separately analysing the neuropsychological correlates of violence (part two). Forty-two studies were included in the analyses, and 12 individual neuropsychological domains were examined in part one, and five in part two. The findings from this study revealed a large range of effect sizes with wide confidence intervals, highlighting significant heterogeneity due to methodological differences between studies, calling for a consensus to be reached on the neuropsychological risk factors which are most relevant to violence risk, to bring more focus and specificity to the literature. Measures of impulsivity, inattention, and lack of insight boasted significant correlations with prospectively measured violent outcomes, revealing their potential to add a small amount of incremental validity to existing risk assessments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51360,"journal":{"name":"Aggression and Violent Behavior","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101887"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the cognitive contributors to violence risk in forensic samples: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Janes ,&nbsp;Lindsey Gilling McIntosh ,&nbsp;Suzanne O'Rourke ,&nbsp;Matthias Schwannauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.avb.2023.101887\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to quantitatively summarise the association between measures of cognitive abilities (e.g., neuropsychological and clinical measures, and risk assessments with a cognitive component) and violent outcomes. After acknowledging that existing reviews in this area have largely focused on executive functions and specific diagnostic groups only, the review adopted a broader approach, first examining factors which differentiate violent from non-violent offenders (part one), followed by separately analysing the neuropsychological correlates of violence (part two). Forty-two studies were included in the analyses, and 12 individual neuropsychological domains were examined in part one, and five in part two. The findings from this study revealed a large range of effect sizes with wide confidence intervals, highlighting significant heterogeneity due to methodological differences between studies, calling for a consensus to be reached on the neuropsychological risk factors which are most relevant to violence risk, to bring more focus and specificity to the literature. Measures of impulsivity, inattention, and lack of insight boasted significant correlations with prospectively measured violent outcomes, revealing their potential to add a small amount of incremental validity to existing risk assessments.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51360,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aggression and Violent Behavior\",\"volume\":\"74 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101887\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aggression and Violent Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359178923000745\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aggression and Violent Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359178923000745","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

进行了一项系统综述和荟萃分析,以定量总结认知能力测量(如神经心理学和临床测量,以及带有认知成分的风险评估)与暴力结果之间的关系。在承认这一领域的现有审查主要侧重于执行职能和特定诊断群体之后,审查采取了更广泛的方法,首先审查区分暴力罪犯和非暴力罪犯的因素(第一部分),然后分别分析暴力的神经心理学相关性(第二部分)。分析中包括42项研究,第一部分检查了12个个体神经心理学领域,第二部分检查了5个。这项研究的发现揭示了具有宽置信区间的大范围效应大小,突显了由于研究之间的方法差异而产生的显著异质性,呼吁就与暴力风险最相关的神经心理风险因素达成共识,以使文献更加关注和特异性。冲动、注意力不集中和缺乏洞察力的测量与前瞻性测量的暴力结果具有显著相关性,揭示了它们为现有风险评估增加少量增量有效性的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining the cognitive contributors to violence risk in forensic samples: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to quantitatively summarise the association between measures of cognitive abilities (e.g., neuropsychological and clinical measures, and risk assessments with a cognitive component) and violent outcomes. After acknowledging that existing reviews in this area have largely focused on executive functions and specific diagnostic groups only, the review adopted a broader approach, first examining factors which differentiate violent from non-violent offenders (part one), followed by separately analysing the neuropsychological correlates of violence (part two). Forty-two studies were included in the analyses, and 12 individual neuropsychological domains were examined in part one, and five in part two. The findings from this study revealed a large range of effect sizes with wide confidence intervals, highlighting significant heterogeneity due to methodological differences between studies, calling for a consensus to be reached on the neuropsychological risk factors which are most relevant to violence risk, to bring more focus and specificity to the literature. Measures of impulsivity, inattention, and lack of insight boasted significant correlations with prospectively measured violent outcomes, revealing their potential to add a small amount of incremental validity to existing risk assessments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Aggression and Violent Behavior, A Review Journal is a multidisciplinary journal that publishes substantive and integrative reviews, as well as summary reports of innovative ongoing clinical research programs on a wide range of topics germane to the field of aggression and violent behavior. Papers encompass a large variety of issues, populations, and domains, including homicide (serial, spree, and mass murder: sexual homicide), sexual deviance and assault (rape, serial rape, child molestation, paraphilias), child and youth violence (firesetting, gang violence, juvenile sexual offending), family violence (child physical and sexual abuse, child neglect, incest, spouse and elder abuse), genetic predispositions, and the physiological basis of aggression.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信