An Empirical Taxonomy of Incarcerated Male Sexual Offenders – Report Example

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "An Empirical Taxonomy of Incarcerated Male Sexual Offenders" is a great example of a report on sociology. This paper reviews the article “ An Empirical Taxonomy of Incarcerated Male Sexual Offenders” by Fargo (2008). This article describes the adult sexual offence as endemic public health, criminal and social problem. Fargo maintains that, in order to come up with satisfactory`and more effective policies, research has been perpetually conducted to establish protective and risk factors; in relation to sexual oppression of humans by adult offenders. These efforts have in particular intended to pave way for better and informed intervention strategies.

He adds that modern studies related to criminology have categorised criminal behavors in accordance with varied characteristics, such as offence, etiology, offender and several other victim-related characteristics. Contrary to reliance on aggregate statistics from criminal investigations, such an investigative analysis yields wealthier information in relation to the character of the crime (Hazelwood & Burgess, 2001). The categorization system has been drawn from theory and has been done in accordance with criminological and etiological variables. The categorization has father been discriminated into valid and reliable categories.

This has been achieved through the utilization of obtainable and concrete offence, offender, and victim-based descriptive indices. Definition of keywords: Aetiology: the study of causes of sexual offences Criminology: the study of crime, the way the society responds to it, and how it can be prevented.     Methods Participants This study involves secondary analysis of data. The data is gathered from the “ Bureau of the Census in their study entitled Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 1997 ” (Groth, Burgess, & Holstrom, 1977, p. 66). Personal interviews were conducted among federal prison inmates who represented the national population.

The study was conducted in two clusters; namely, the prison and then the inmates. 280 prisons were selected, among which only 275 participated. The total number of inmates who accepted the interview totalled to 14,285, of which 79% were male inmates. Among those who were excluded from the study sample were those inmates who were implicated with multiple cases, because their information in regard to victim characteristics could have been ambiguous. Lack of sufficient data had led to a reduction of the final sample from 235 to 207. Measures Those who participated in the interview we're required to give information that could have led to more understanding about their offence characteristics.

In addition, the interview was positioned to derive data about the participants’ childhood experiences and family dynamics, socio-demographic and economic characteristics as well as substance use/abuse and criminal behaviors.

References

Amir, M. (1971). Patterns in forcible rape. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Davis, G. E., & Leitenberg, H. (1987). Adolescent sex offenders. Psychological

Bulletin, 101, 417–427.

Fargo, D. (2008). An empirical taxonomy of incarcerated male sexual offenders using finite mixture modeling: Adult victims. Utah: Psychology Faculty Publications.

Groth, A. N., Burgess, A. W., & Holstrom, L. L. (1977). Rape: Power, anger, and sexuality. American Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 1239-1243.

Hazelwood, R. R., & Burgess, A. W. (2001). Practical aspects of rape investigation: A multidisciplinary approach (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Knight, R. A. (1999). Validation of a typology for rapists. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 303-330.

Marshall, W. L. (1997). Pedophilia: Psychopathology and theory. In D. R. Laws & W. T. O’Donahue (Eds.), Sexual deviance: Theory, assessment, and treatment (pp. 23-45). New York: Guilford Press.

McCabe, M., & Wauchope, M. (2005). Behavioral characteristics of men accused of rape: Evidence for different types of rapists. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34, 241-253.

Prentky, R. A., & Knight, R. A. (1991). Identifying critical dimensions for discriminating among rapists. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 39, 643-661.

Rosenberg, R., & Knight, R. A. (1988). Determining male sexual offender subtypes using cluster analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 4, 383-410.

Seto, M. C. (2008). Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: Theory, assessment, and intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2005). Latent Gold® 4.0 user’s guide. Boston: Statistical Innovations.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us