基于经验的性侵犯动态风险和保护因素

IF 13.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Michael C. Seto , Carissa Augustyn , Kailey M. Roche , Gabriella Hilkes
{"title":"基于经验的性侵犯动态风险和保护因素","authors":"Michael C. Seto ,&nbsp;Carissa Augustyn ,&nbsp;Kailey M. Roche ,&nbsp;Gabriella Hilkes","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This review provides an overview and update of empirical evidence for psychologically meaningful dynamic risk factors and protective factors for sexual offending. Using the review by Mann et al. (2010) as a starting point, we reviewed relevant literature that has appeared since this publication, focusing on meta-analyses, systematic and scoping reviews of dynamic risk factors, recent evaluations of commonly used dynamic assessment tools, and studies of dynamic risk and protective factors in community samples in addition to clinical or forensic samples. Two risk factors previously deemed promising by Mann et al. (2010), hostility towards women and dysfunctional coping (conceptualized as hostile masculinity and emotional regulation deficits, respectively, in this review), could now be considered supported using this review's criteria of three or more studies demonstrating an effect size of 0.15 or greater. No new risk factors were identified. We conducted a broader search of protective factors in recognition of the relative newness of this literature: Positive social support was the only protective factor identified as empirically supported. We also discuss situational risk and protective factors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirically-based dynamic risk and protective factors for sexual offending\",\"authors\":\"Michael C. Seto ,&nbsp;Carissa Augustyn ,&nbsp;Kailey M. Roche ,&nbsp;Gabriella Hilkes\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102355\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This review provides an overview and update of empirical evidence for psychologically meaningful dynamic risk factors and protective factors for sexual offending. Using the review by Mann et al. (2010) as a starting point, we reviewed relevant literature that has appeared since this publication, focusing on meta-analyses, systematic and scoping reviews of dynamic risk factors, recent evaluations of commonly used dynamic assessment tools, and studies of dynamic risk and protective factors in community samples in addition to clinical or forensic samples. Two risk factors previously deemed promising by Mann et al. (2010), hostility towards women and dysfunctional coping (conceptualized as hostile masculinity and emotional regulation deficits, respectively, in this review), could now be considered supported using this review's criteria of three or more studies demonstrating an effect size of 0.15 or greater. No new risk factors were identified. We conducted a broader search of protective factors in recognition of the relative newness of this literature: Positive social support was the only protective factor identified as empirically supported. We also discuss situational risk and protective factors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001137\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001137","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇综述概述并更新了性犯罪的心理意义动态风险因素和保护因素的经验证据。以Mann等人(2010)的综述为起点,我们回顾了自本出版物发表以来出现的相关文献,重点是荟萃分析、动态风险因素的系统和范围综述、常用动态评估工具的最新评估,以及除临床或法医学样本外的社区样本中动态和保护因素的研究。Mann等人(2010)先前认为有希望的两个风险因素,对女性的敌意和应对功能障碍(在本综述中分别被概念化为敌意男性气质和情绪调节缺陷),现在可以使用本综述的三项或更多研究的标准来支持,这些研究证明了0.15或更大的影响。没有发现新的风险因素。我们对保护因素进行了更广泛的搜索,以认识到这篇文献的相对新颖性:积极的社会支持是唯一被确定为经验支持的保护因素。我们还讨论了情境风险和保护因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Empirically-based dynamic risk and protective factors for sexual offending

This review provides an overview and update of empirical evidence for psychologically meaningful dynamic risk factors and protective factors for sexual offending. Using the review by Mann et al. (2010) as a starting point, we reviewed relevant literature that has appeared since this publication, focusing on meta-analyses, systematic and scoping reviews of dynamic risk factors, recent evaluations of commonly used dynamic assessment tools, and studies of dynamic risk and protective factors in community samples in addition to clinical or forensic samples. Two risk factors previously deemed promising by Mann et al. (2010), hostility towards women and dysfunctional coping (conceptualized as hostile masculinity and emotional regulation deficits, respectively, in this review), could now be considered supported using this review's criteria of three or more studies demonstrating an effect size of 0.15 or greater. No new risk factors were identified. We conducted a broader search of protective factors in recognition of the relative newness of this literature: Positive social support was the only protective factor identified as empirically supported. We also discuss situational risk and protective factors.

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
Clinical Psychology Review
Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
23.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.
×
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