Protective Factors and Dynamic Risk factors: An Integrative Model. Tony Ward PhD, DipClinPsyc Victoria University of Wellington

Transcription

1 Protective Factors and Dynamic Risk factors: An Integrative Mode Tony Ward PhD, DipCinPsyc Victoria University of Weington

2 Key Papers Heffernan, R. & Ward, T. (2017). Towards a comprehensive theory of dynamic risk and protective factors in forensic and correctiona practice. Manuscript under review. Ward, T. (2017). Prediction and agency: The roe of protective factors in correctiona rehabiitation and desistance. Aggression and Vioent Behavior, 32, Ward, T & Fortune, C. (2016). The roe of dynamic risk factors in the expanation of offending. Aggression and Vioent Behavior, 29,

3 Argument Lack of theoretica anaysis of DRF & PF in forensic and correctiona domains. Protective factors are the interna and externa capacities and persona priorities that enhance individuas we-being and reduce the ikeihood that they wi harm others or themseves in the future (recidivism focus!). Support the exercise of agency: goa formuation, panning. and subsequent action in service of the pans.

4 Argument Dynamic risk factors are impairments in the capacities and conditions required for effective and ethicay acceptabe agency. Therefore, theoretica work shoud be centered around an account of protective factors rather than treating DRF as primary: We shoud adopt a positive approach. Interventions based on an agency mode of protective (and dynamic risk) factors) shoud be future oriented, contextua, mutieve, and hoistic. Focus is on action in context not interna structure.

5 Dynamic Risk Factors Variabe risk factors and causa risk markers: dynamic risk factors with atter being caed criminogenic needs. Distinction between static and dynamic risk factors refected in current assessment practices and in goa of risk reduction. The recruitment of dynamic risk factors to formuate cases and to inform treatment is now standard cinica practice.

6 Dynamic Risk Factors Mann et a (2010) argue that risk factors are pausibe partia causes of sexua offending and predict reoffending. Propose that most strongy supported variabes shoud be emphasized in both assessment and treatment of sexua offenders. Emotiona reguation probems, deviant sexua interest, offence supportive attitudes and beiefs, genera dysreguation probems, and socia intimacy deficits. Thus assumed to have expanatory roe in research and practice!

7 Dynamic Risk Factors: Probems Lack coherence: Cause, context or state/symptom Lack specificity: Which cause? Lack Precision: What eve? Lack factuaness: normative constructs Thus: Predictive NOT expanatory constructs

8 Recent Theories Mann, Hanson, Thornton (2010)- Psychoogicay meaningfu risk factors Beech& Ward (2004)- An etioogica mode of risk Thornton (2016)- Deveoping a theory of dynamic risk - GLM, Schema, TRA Ward & Fortune (2016)- From dynamic risk factors to causa processes: a methodoogica framework.

9 Dynamic Risk Factors A of the modes are usefu athough none succeed in fuy describing the nature of DRF, or cruciay, depict the way they cause/maintain offending ifestyes. Because of their origins in risk prediction accounts of DRF not aigned with current psychoogica research and theories on mutieve nature of human functioning. From neuroscience to subjectivity!

10 Protective factors Increasing interest in utiity of positive factors in forensic and correctiona practice coinciding with the growth of positive psychoogy in menta heath. Hope that if identify socia and psychoogica processes capabe of buffering effects of adversity and modifying risk eements, may be possibe to reduce chances of individuas hurting themseves or others. Aso, faciitate engagement and desistance.

11 Protective Factors We are sti unsure what they are, how they infuence behaviour, and how they reate to risk (conceptuay and functionay). Definitiona ambiguity: resiience, strengths, buffering, promotive, desistance and positive factors, reducing offending or mitigating factors etc? Practitioner uncertainty: risk predictors, potentia treatment targets & in guiding socia reentry and integration. Expanatory confusion: specificity, context, state, normative status. Dua nature: expertise versus risk.

12 Two Recent Theories De Vries thesis, etc. (2014) Protection Pathway Mode Four main mechanisms by which protective factors have an impact on risk eve: the risk reducing effect (impact directy on DRF), the moderator effect (buffer effect of DRF), the main effect (genera + effect), and the motivator effect (positive effect each other). Probems re ogic and aso its reay a ist theory.

13 Two Recent Theories Serin, Chadwick & Loyd (2017) Agency Fiter Mode Person interprets the meaning of the dynamic risk and positive events through psychoogica fiter (e.g., hope, sef- efficacy, causa attributions) and acts in ways that either increase or decrease the ikeihood of further offending. Probems: Agency underpayed, just another variabe.

14 Where To From Here? Impications of fact that dynamic risk factors & protective factors cover a the major domains of human functioning?: emotiona, cognitive, bioogica, contextua, and sef-reguatory. Protective factors & their roe in promoting agency shoud be major focus of theorizing. Protective factors operate through the actions of persons within socia contexts. In order to exercise agency individuas require a range of interocking abiities, opportunities, and resources.

15 Where from here? Theory of protective factors shoud be abe to account for the range of protective features (resiience, promotive, strengths, etc.) discussed in the iterature. It s crucia to have something sig to say about the reationship of PF to dynamic risk factors. Approach the study of maadaptive or deviant functioning via an understanding of norma functioning (anaogy with psychopathoogy fied) rather than vice versa.

16 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective Factors: Key Ideas. Recent evoutionary bioogy, cognitive, cognitive neuroscience, phiosophica, and psychoogica research suggests that a view of the mind as a predictive engine is a fruitfu one. Composed of capacities that enabe individuas to anticipate, pan, simuate and evauate possibe outcomes upon the basis of continuay evoving causa modes of the sef, other persons, the socia environment, and the future. Predictive or prospective abiity is evident in the whoe range of psychoogica capacities incuding perception, attention, memory, emotion, and cognition (Bar, 2011a; Cark, 2016;Seigman et a, 2016).

17 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Predictive capacities & reated structures and processes are in service of agency and refect a first person perspective (irreducibe eve of expanation). A first person perspective spes out what experience-is-ike-for-me, from an individua s unique viewpoint (Neisser, 2015). Critica roe of emotiona systems in the deveopment and operation of agency. Emotions are motivating (i.e., ready the organism for action), are generay adaptive, and have meaning; they are in effect, sense making.

18 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Comprehensive theory of PF shoud be a mutieve one abe to integrate causa processes from the bioogica through to the socia. First person perspective and its capacity for agency provides human beings with a unique set of predictive capacities which are assisted by affective processes in motivating action, setting priorities and vaues, and attuning person to threats and benefits. Error signas fue earning and provide individuas with the chance to boost the predictive power of their modes, to increase their eve of ski in managing data, and to utiize this information to achieve their goas (i.e., vaued outcomes).

19 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Thus: human beings are essentiay forward ooking animas who are by nature predisposed to construct pans and predictions to guide behavior. Adaptive functioning requires the acquisition of capacities and resources to achieve vaued outcomes and to avoid and/or escape from potentia harm. Propose that there are four sets of difficuties associated with agency impairments: those inked to subjectivity (first person perspective), prediction, causa modes, and socia contexts.

20 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Subjectivity (first person perspective) Emotiona processes pay important roe in estabishing background affective tone for agents based on an overa evauation of their current functiona situation: vaues & meaning. Disruptions in the bioogica systems partiay constituting emotions and/or the persistence of negative background moods wi coor an individua s word in a negativey vaenced way. DRF: poor emotiona reguation (aggression, oneiness etc.), grievance/hostiity, genera reguation probems, sexua preoccupation, emotiona congruence with chidren

21 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Prediction Individuas are ikey to make prediction errors when they consistenty experience unstabe and chaotic interna or socia environments. Poverty of knowedge & inadequate, unrepresentative causa modes resut in probematic predictions and subsequent actions. Lack of reevant information gathering and anaysis skis wi create difficuties in trying to resove any discrepancy between a prediction and experience. DRF: intimacy deficit, offense supportive beiefs and attitudes, dysfunctiona coping, and poor cognitive probem soving

22 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Causa modes Causa modes are constructed in a dynamic way to represent oca aspects of persons and environments in which peope are currenty situated (draw from more genera modes). They are utiized when individuas consider and evauate different pans of action, with their hierarchicay ordered sets of goas. Adverse deveopmenta experiences wi resut in formation of distorted causa modes, ones that were constructed within abusive and impoverished backgrounds. DRF: poor cognitive probem soving, offence supportive attitudes, grievance/hostiity, ack of concern for others, and caousness.

23 Predictive Agency Mode of Protective factors: Key Ideas. Socia contexts PAMPS is a reationa mode and assumes that individuas construct oca causa modes to navigate their way in socia and physica environments and to promote the successfu reaization of goas, Therefore, a major component of any specific mode wi be the socia and physica environment, whether it is the immediate situation or the projected future. In crime conducive situations the socia environment wi contain a number of possibe crime faciitative eements, a of which can shape the deveopment of crime supportive casua modes or ese strengthen preexisting ones. DRF: deviant peers, negative socia infuences, unstabe work patterns, and ack of emotionay intimate reationships with aduts.

24 PAMP: Protective factors How can we turn these concusions into an account of PF? Propose that protective factors are the interna and externa capacities and persona priorities that enhance individuas we-being and reduce the ikeihood that they wi harm others or themseves. In providing or strengthening the capacities for engaging in goa directed action anticipated that practitioners wi aso buid resiience in individuas. Conditions supporting agency invove bioogica processes as we as psychoogica capacities such as panning, scenario construction, conditiona thinking, emotiona sensitivity, and perspective taking.

25 PAMP: Protective factors Critica focus is on the eve of agency as this refects the unique viewpoint of persons and is aso the ocus of prediction and prospection, that is, the eve of meaning. Desistance or rehabiitation interventions based on this conception of protective factors wi aim to ensure that the conditions for engaging in adaptive agency are in pace. Utiity of sef-narratives.

26 PAMP: Practice Interventions shoud be: Future focused (predictive) Attend to abstract and proxima goas, and pans for iving (causa modes) Be sensitive to persons core vaues (emotions and needs) Be systemic in that they take into account a reevant bioogica, psychoogica and socia systems (socia contexts) and eves of anaysis. The estabishment of the interna and externa capacities needed to achieve an intervention ife pan in sociay acceptabe and personay fufiing ways, can repace risk factors.

27 PAMP: Practice Seek to construct a coherent, comprehensive understanding of what matters most to the person and how the various contexts in which he wi be iving, can promote its successfu impementation. It is not a ist approach and this is a distinct advantage; aim is to use PAMP as a guide to assessment, treatment and utimatey desistance from crime. Paces importance on the process or reationship aspects of intervention, incuding socia contexts. In order to identify persona priorities, affective processes and future pans it is necessary to deveop strong reationships with cients.

28 Concusions Asserts that attention to ensuring the conditions of predictive agency are in pace wi increase the chances that individuas wi desist from crime. DRF are impairments in conditions required for agency: subjectivity, prediction, oca causa modes & contextua variabes. Provides a framework for incorporating specific treatment and intervention methods. Focus is on action in context not interna structure. Forward rather than backward ooking.