On intelligence and crime: A comparison of incarcerated sex offenders and serious non-sexual violent criminals
Section snippets
Intelligence and crime
Over the last few decades, much evidence has suggested that intellectual functioning is associated with crime (Hirschi & Hindelang, 1977, Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985). While many researchers consider sociological factors, such as ethnicity or poverty, to be largely responsible for crime, others have attempted to demonstrate the importance of intellectual functioning in the understanding of criminal behavior. There have been two main explanations of the role of intellectual performance in crime.
Intelligence and violent crimes
In an attempt to understand the relationship between IQ and delinquency, Spellacy, 1977, Spellacy, 1978 studied Wechsler IQ scores for incarcerated offenders. Non-violent subjects, comparable in terms of age, race, and laterality, were compared with violent offenders. Violent offenders showed lower scores, with differences ranging from 10.3 points to 13.8 points, compared with non-violent offenders. Similar results were observed by Holland and his colleagues (Holland et al., 1981, Holland &
Intelligence and crime in sex offenders
Among studies of intellectual performance, a wide range of studies have discussed the impact of intellectual functioning on either the criminal career or the modus operandi of sex offenders. Only a few studies have attempted to empirically investigate the question (Okami & Goldberg, 1992). Much of the research on sex offenders has addressed the question of the specificity of sex offenders by comparing sex offenders with traditional criminals. Most studies did not find significant differences
Subjects
The subjects in this study consisted of a sample of 411 offenders incarcerated at the Regional Reception Centre (RRC), a maximum-security facility of Correctional Services of Canada. The sample was comprised of offenders from the Province of Québec sentenced to two or more years of incarceration, who are all channeled through the RRC. The subjects' treatment needs and correctional risk levels were evaluated during a 4- to 6-week procedure. Of the 411 offenders, 261 were sex offenders and 150
Results
The aim of this study was to compare sex offenders with NSV offenders on IQ results, namely, on all eleven scales, as well as on three composite indexes. To test for significant differences between the eleven intelligence subscales and the independent fixed factor of criminal subtype, a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was performed. In order to control for the possible confounding effects of other relevant variables, covariates were used to statistically control for the subjects'
Discussion
The results from the current study indicate that sex offenders differ from non-sexual violent criminals in terms of IQ. Differences between sex offenders and NSV criminals are particularly significant on total and performance IQ scores. When compared with NSV criminals, sex offenders showed significantly lower results on performance scales. While research on NSV criminals tends to show mental imbalance (higher performance on non-verbal than on verbal IQ), sex offenders tend to perform poorly on
Limitations of the study
The current study is clearly not without its limitations. First, while the sample chosen was adequate to allow us to compare NSV criminals with sex offenders, it was not representative of all sexual criminals. The sex offenders and NSV criminals were selected from a population of serious offenders sentenced to two or more years of incarceration. The two main factors affecting decision making throughout the criminal justice system (from the arrest decision to the release decision) are the
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a doctoral grant provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). The authors wish to thank Serge Larivée for his substantive and stylistic editing. Special thanks are also due to Michel St-Yves and Tony Brien for their meticulous data collection.
References (73)
Social statistics
(1972)- et al.
Pedophiles: Mental retardation, maternal age, and sexual orientation
Archives of Sexual Behavior
(1999) - et al.
The crown files research project: A study of dangerous offenders
(1996) - Boutin, S. (1999). La carrière criminelle des agresseurs sexuels. Unpublished master's thesis, Université de Montréal:...
Cultural myths and supports for rape
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1980)- et al.
Adult intellectually disabled sexual offenders: Program considerations
- et al.
The criminality of noninstitutionalized mentally retarded persons: Evidence from a birth cohort followed to age 30
Criminal Justice and Behavior
(1997) Criminologie actuelle
(1998)- et al.
Achievement level, institutional adjustment and recidivism among juvenile delinquents
Journal of Community Psychology
(1975) Male mentally handicapped sex offenders
British Journal of Psychiatry
(1994)
Diagrammatic assessment of ecological integration of sex offenders with mental retardation in community residential facilities
Mental Retardation
Comparative analysis of juvenile sexual offenders, violent nonsexual offenders, and status offenders
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Sinistrality and delinquency
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
Social and intellectual handicaps as precursors of early delinquency
British Journal of Criminology
Mentally retarded adolescent sex offenders. A survey and pilot study
Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
Decision making in criminal justice: Toward the rational exercise of discretion
Men who rape: The psychology of the offender
Rape: Power, anger, and sexuality
American Journal of Psychiatry
Intelligence scores of MTC: R3 Rapist subtypes
Paper presented at the 20th meeting of the Association for Treatment of Sexual Abuser (ATSA), San Antonio, Texas
Criminal justice institutional referrals and selections: A comparative portrait of sexual aggressions and aggressors
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
Victim-choice polymorphia among serious sex offenders
Archives of Sexual Behavior
Treating intellectually disabled sex offenders: A model residential program
Criminal behavior as a function of clinical and actuarial variables in a sexual offender population
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
A comparison of child molesters and nonsexual criminals: Risk predictors and long-term recidivism
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency
The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life
Intelligence and delinquency: A revisionnist review
American Sociological Review
Intellectual ability and achievement in psychiatrically hospitalized children with conduct, anxiety, and affective disorders
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Intelligence, personality, and criminal violence: A multivariate analysis
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Prisoner intellectual and personality correlates of offense severity and recidivism
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Cerebral damage and dysfunction in sexually aggressive men
Annals of Sex Research
IQ as a protective factor for subjects at high risk for antisocial behavior
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Nocturnal penile tumescence and sleep of convicted rapists and other prisoners
Archives of Sexual Behavior
The revision of MTC:R3: Incorporating dimensional disconfirmation
Paper presented at the 20th meeting of the Association for Treatment of Sexual Abuser (ATSA), San Antonio, Texas
Classifying sexual offenders: The development and corroboration of taxonomic models
Classification of sexual offenders: Perspectives, methods and validation
A typology of offenders: A test of Moffitt's theory among males and females from childhood to age 30
Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health
Cited by (40)
High tech crime, high intellectual crime? Comparing the intellectual capabilities of cybercriminals, traditional criminals and non-criminals
2022, Computers in Human BehaviorCitation Excerpt :Less is known, however, about the mechanisms behind this relationship. A possible explanation for an effect of intellectual capabilities on criminal behavior is that individuals with lower intellectual capabilities are less likely to anticipate the consequences of their actions and to understand the suffering of others (Moffitt et al., 1993; McGloin et al., 2004; Guay et al., 2005). Others often proposed an indirect effect by suggesting that IQ affects the likelihood of delinquent behavior through its effect on school-related factors such as school performance and school adjustment problems (Hirschi & Hindelang, 1977; Ward & Tittle, 1994; Mõttus, Guljajev, Allik, Laidra, & Pullmann, 2012).
Neurodevelopmental disorders in young violent offenders: Overlap and background characteristics
2017, Psychiatry ResearchCitation Excerpt :Intellectual disability is also a neurodevelopmental disability reflecting underlying central nervous system dysfunction. The impact of intellectual function, particularly IQ, on crime has been debated over the last decades (Guay et al., 2005) and the prevalence of individuals with intellectual disability has been of particular interest. In a systematic review, Fazel et al. (2008b) found a prevalence of 0.5–1.5% of prisoners with intellectual disability, which is close to the prevalence rate expected in the general population (Maulik et al., 2011).
Psychopathy, intelligence, and impulsivity in German violent offenders
2014, International Journal of Law and PsychiatryThe protective role of higher intellectual functioning on violence in the household population of Great Britain
2014, Personality and Individual DifferencesIntelligence is associated with criminal justice processing: Arrest through incarceration
2013, IntelligenceCitation Excerpt :Below, we identify and briefly discuss five of the more pressing shortcomings with the existing literature examining the IQ–crime nexus. First, most of the samples that have been analyzed to test for the association between IQ and crime consist of prison inmates, psychiatric patients, sex offenders, or other non-nationally representative groups of people (Diamond et al., 2012; Guay, Ouimet, & Proulx, 2005; Hanson, Scott, & Steffy, 1995; Holland, Beckett, & Levi, 1981; Holland & Holt, 1975). The main exception to this rule, however, is the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) which consists of a nationally representative sample of males and females (McNulty et al., 2013).