NOMS HQ, Interventions and Substance Misuse Group, London, UK. First published on: 10 February 2010 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Transcription

1 This article was downloaded by: [Swets Content Distribution] On: 21 June 2011 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number ] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: Registered office: Mortimer House, Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Psychology, Crime & Law Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: Assessing socially desirable responding and its impact on self-report measures among sexual offenders Nicola L. Mathie a ; Helen C. Wakeling a a NOMS HQ, Interventions and Substance Misuse Group, London, UK First published on: 10 February 2010 To cite this Article Mathie, Nicola L. and Wakeling, Helen C.(2011) 'Assessing socially desirable responding and its impact on self-report measures among sexual offenders', Psychology, Crime & Law, 17: 3, , First published on: 10 February 2010 (ifirst) To link to this Article: DOI: / URL: PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

2 Psychology, Crime & Law Vol. 17, No. 3, March 2011, Assessing socially desirable responding and its impact on self-report measures among sexual offenders Nicola L. Mathie and Helen C. Wakeling* NOMS HQ, Interventions and Substance Misuse Group, Room 108 Cleland House, Page Street, London SW1P 4LN, UK (Received 26 November 2008; final version received 12 June 2009) It is often assumed that offenders employ socially desirable responding when completing self-report questionnaires, thereby invalidating such measures. The aim of this study is to examine the extent that sexual offenders employ socially desirable responding and the impact that socially desirable responding, as measured by the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding-6 (BIDR: 6, Paulhus, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, , 1984), has on self-report measures. The sample comprised 1730 adult males, all convicted and serving a sentence for a sexual offence. The entire sample had completed a set of self-report measures used to identify treatment needs, and examine progress in treatment. The results indicate that the extent of socially desirable responding is smaller than assumed, and its impact on a number of self-report measures is lower than expected. Furthermore, lower levels of risk of sexual re-offending were significantly associated with higher scores on the impression management subscale. We suggest that impression management should be viewed as more of a trait-like tendency rather than a validity check, and the use of this scale in determining whether or not to interpret other self-report instruments should be questioned. The present study also indicates that self-report questionnaires used with forensic populations may be accurate and valid. Implications for research and practice are discussed. Keywords: sexual offenders; socially desirable responding; psychometric assessment Introduction Offenders, including sexual offenders, are assumed by many to employ socially desirable responding when completing self-report measures (Mills & Kroner, 2006). Possible motives for socially desirable responding with sexual offenders include personal embarrassment at disclosing criminality; the need to present macho attributes of self-sufficiency and personal strength; rejecting any personal characteristics that could make them appear capable of committing crimes that they deny; and hope for parole or early release (Kroner & Weekes, 1996). The incentive for parole or early release could result in an increase in socially desirable responding following treatment. When conducting risk assessments on sexual offenders, the individual factors known to be related to recidivism are examined. These factors include both static, *Corresponding author. helen.wakeling@hmps.gsi.gov.uk ISSN X print/issn # 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: /

3 216 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling historic factors, such as age, and dynamic, changeable factors, such as an offender s problem solving abilities (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2005). There is a wealth of research concerning the ability of actuarial static risk assessment tools in predicting recidivism amongst sexual offenders (e.g. Lusignaan & Marleau, 2007). These actuarial tools combine static risk factors into an overall risk score for an offender. One of the most commonly used actuarial tools used with sexual offenders, Static-99, has consistently been shown to perform moderately well in predicting sexual recidivism. Similarly, the RM2000, the actuarial risk assessment tool predominantly used in the UK, has also been shown to have good predictive power (Barnett, Wakeling, & Howard, 2009; Grubin, 2008; Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2007). Research also indicates that dynamic risk factors can be predictive of recidivism (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2005), and can add incremental value over static actuarial risk assessment tools (e.g. Allan, Grace, Rutherford, & Hudson, 2007). Dynamic risk factors can be measured using a variety of methods. Most frequently, dynamic risk factors are assessed using self-report psychometric measures, and/or clinical judgement. Self report measures are routinely collected before and after treatment programmes for sexual offenders in order to contribute to the identification of dynamic risk factors or treatment need areas, to plan treatment, and to examine the short term impact of treatment delivered to offenders. Given that self report measures are used in this way, usual practice is to incorporate socially desirable responding scales as a validity check, and to take into account the scores on these measures when interpreting the results from other self-report assessments (e.g. Paulhus, 1998). Within Her Majesty s Sex Offender Treatment Programme, when there is indication of an offender responding in a socially desirable manner clinicians are advised to be cautious in interpreting other self-report measures too. It is therefore an important concern for those who are tasked with assessing offenders to understand the extent to which socially desirable responding can be a barrier to gathering accurate information. Many are sceptical over the prospect of using self-report measures to examine dynamic risk factors. Such cynicism stems from the argument that sexual offenders are not motivated to self-disclose their motivation for offending or even admit to their offences and that there is a poor link between psychometric measures and recidivism (Hanson, Cox, & Woszczyna, 1991). Confident in the belief that offender self-report is inherently flawed, many have simply assumed that self-report measures are inferior to the examination of static risk factors in predicting recidivism (Walters, 2006). Contrary to this, however, there is ample evidence that self-report psychometric measures can be reliable indicators in correctional settings and can be used to predict sexual recidivism (Allam, 2000; Beech, Friendship, Erikson, & Hanson, 2002; Craig, Thornton, Beech, & Browne, 2007), general recidivism (Mills, Loza, & Kroner, 2003; Kroner & Loza, 2001), and can be used as a useful measure of past criminal behaviour in sexual offenders (Freeman-Longo, 1985; Weinrott & Saylor, 1991). For example, Beech et al. (2002) grouped child abusers into low or high deviancy based on their results from a number of self-report scales administered pretreatment. The authors reported that 30% of offenders classified as high deviancy were reconvicted for a sexual offence compared to 3% of low deviancy men and concluded that psychometrically assessed deviancy made independent contributions to the prediction of sexual recidivism. Mills and Kroner (2006) argued that this identifies an apparent contradiction: offenders cannot be trusted to tell the truth,

4 Psychology, Crime & Law 217 particularly through self-report, yet offender self-report can yield significant relationships with outcome. It seems therefore that a social desirability bias may not undermine the relationship between self-report measures and their predictive criteria. Consequently it is important that we better understand the degree and influence of socially desirable responding among offenders, rather than assume that such a bias invalidates self-report measures completed by offenders. A number of different socially desirable responding measures have been published, including the MarlowCrowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) and the Self and Other-Deception Questionnaires (Sackeim & Gur, 1978). In response to psychometric problems associated with these existing measures, Paulhus developed the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; currently known as the Paulhus Deception Scale: PDS, Paulhus, 1998) which is a descendant of the Self-and Other-Deception Questionnaires (Sackeim & Gur, 1978). Paulhus (1984) found that there are two relatively distinct biases within social desirable responding, self deception and impression management, which form the two subscales of the BIDR. The original self-deception items from this scale were developed on the assumption that individuals with a propensity for self-deception tend to deny having psychologically threatening thoughts or feeling. In contrast, the more recent version of the scale (Paulhus, 1988) emphasizes exaggerated claims of positive cognitive attributes such as overconfidence in one s judgements and rationality. The impression management items were developed on the assumption that some respondents systematically over report their performance of a wide variety of desirable behaviours and underreport undesirable behaviours. Because the claims involve overt behaviours, any distortions are presumed to be a conscious lie. The theoretical rationale for the application of the BIDR is grounded in the assumption that individuals with high scores in self-deceptive enhancement actually believe in their overly positive self-reports, whereas individuals with high scores in impression management consciously dissemble, especially under public conditions (Pauls & Crost, 2004). Furthermore, Paulhus (1998) suggested that the impression management subscale should be used as a validity check, since previous research has shown that this subscale is sensitive to changes in self-presentation strategies and is successful in differentiating extreme self-promoters and malingerers (Paulhus, Bruce, & Trapnell, 1995). Contrary to this, it has been found that both impression management and self-deceptive enhancement can be faked if participants are appropriately instructed to do so (Pauls & Crost, 2004). A number of studies have examined the effect of socially desirable responding among offenders using the BIDR. The relationship between socially desirable responding and risk of reconviction has been examined. Mills and Kroner (2006) found that the more criminally oriented offenders were, the less likely they were to employ impression management as a response style, a finding also supported by Mills et al. (2003). However these differences were not found for self-deceptive enhancement. The authors suggested that this was due to a number of the impression management items relating to criminal or antisocial behaviour (items referring to stealing in youth and obeying laws); there would be no apparent advantage to dissimulating by answering these items in the socially desirable direction for a correctional client serving a sentence of 2 years of more for a serious violent offence. Hence it could be that the higher risk offenders are answering these and similar questions truthfully, lowering their score on impression management, and thereby

5 218 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling accounting for the inverse relationship between impression management and criminal risk. Whilst this study is concerned with violent offenders it is possible that similar findings would be found among sexual offenders. However this is a question that requires further investigation. Differences have also been reported on socially desirable responding according to offence type amongst sexual offenders. Nugent and Kroner (1996) found a child molester group had greater scores on impression management than rapists (but no differences were found for self-deceptive enhancement). Elevated impression management scores suggest that child molesters are more concerned with what others think about them than rapists are, perhaps due to having less concern about self-presentation. The authors suggest that this is because compared to child molesters, rapists participate in more antisocial activities. Rapists may therefore be perceived as more generalist offenders who exhibit a wide versatility in offending compared to child molesters who may be perceived as more specialist sexual offenders (Soothill, Francis, Sanderson, & Ackerley, 2000). This may in turn suggest that rapists are less embarrassed about admitting criminal charges. This normalizing of antisocial behaviour may negate their need to use impression management tactics (Nugent & Kroner, 1996). Kroner and Weekes (1996) examined socially desirable responding amongst a sample of sexual and non-sexual violent offenders. They found age of offenders was not related to impression management. However, there was a significant negative correlation between the Over Confident Rigidity scale (a subscale of the selfdeceptive enhancement scale) and age. They argued that this appeared to be primarily due to the sexual offender sample since none of the BIDR scales were related to age for the nonsexual violent offenders. Study aims and hypothesis Given the use of self-report measures to determine treatment needs and to plan treatment in many forensic settings, it is important to examine the relationship between socially desirable responding and other psychometric assessments. If offenders consistently dissimulate when completing self-report instruments, it is essential that we are aware of which assessments are more susceptible so that not all individuals data are dismissed when a high score on a socially desirable responding measure is detected. The aim of this study was therefore to examine the extent and impact of socially desirable responding in a population of incarcerated sexual offenders, so that those tasked with assessing risk and need of sexual offenders can be aware of the extent to which socially desirable responding limits (or not) the validity of psychometric assessment. Specifically, the study investigated the relationship between socially desirable responding as measured by the BIDR: 6 (Paulhus, 1984, 1988), and responses to a battery of psychometric measures used within a selfreport risk/needs assessment for sexual offenders. The study also examines the relationship between socially desirable responding and offence types, risk level and age using a UK sample of sexual offenders. Based on previous research and observations about socially desirable responding, this study was designed to test the following hypotheses: The measures which are more related to offence-specific attitudes and deviant sexual interests (defined by the authors as offence-specific measures) will be affected

6 Psychology, Crime & Law 219 more by socially desirable responding than measures which deal with more general functioning constructs (e.g. self-esteem and relationship difficulties, which have been defined by the authors as social-functioning measures). It is anticipated that sexual offenders may realize that offence-specific attitudes are undesirable, and thus may be more likely to employ socially desirable responding techniques when answering questions related to these attributes. Similar findings were observed by Mills et al. (2003). It could reasonably be expected that following a treatment programme, sexual offenders may be more likely to be accurately self-revealing than they were before they embarked on treatment. This might especially be expected if treatment programmes aim to increase awareness of self and others. However previous research has suggested that offenders may be motivated to appear more publicly acceptable post-treatment, especially in a prison setting (i.e. hope for parole or early release; Kroner & Weekes, 1996). Given that impression management is more likely than selfdeceptive enhancement to be situation-bound (Gudjonsson, 1990) and that selfdeceptive enhancement is a stable style (Paulhus, 1988), it is hypothesized that sexual offenders impression management scores will increase post-treatment. However because self-deceptive enhancement is regarded more of a stable trait, we expect that there will be no significant change from pre- to post-treatment on this subscale. Based on previous research (Nugent & Kroner, 1996), it is hypothesized that child molesters will be more affected by socially desirable responding than rapists and will have both higher impression management and self-deceptive enhancement scores. Based on the finding by Mills and Kroner (2006), which were discussed previously, it is hypothesized that lower risk offenders will adopt greater impression management tactics than higher risk offenders, but there will be no differences between risk groups for self-deceptive enhancement. Finally, based on the research by Kroner and Weekes (1996), it is hypothesized that there will be an effect of age on self-deceptive enhancement but not for impression management, such that an increase in age will result in a decrease in selfdeceptive enhancement. Method Participants The sample comprised 1730 sexual offenders (mean age years, SD 12.6). All were convicted, imprisoned, adult (aged over 18) male offenders undergoing assessment for a cognitivebehavioural Sexual Offender Treatment Programme ( the SOTP, Mann & Thornton, 1998) in Her Majesty s Prison Service between 1 April 2003 and 31 July The sample included 746 child molesters, 198 adult rapists and 21 offenders who had offended against both adult and child victims. Unfortunately, there was extensive missing data regarding current offence (n 765). This meant that for the analyses examining offence type only 965 offenders were used. For all other analyses, all 1730 offenders were used. Although this represents a significant amount of missing data, 965 was still a large enough sample to perform the appropriate analyses. The classification by victim type was based on the offender s current conviction since this was the most accurate and in most cases the

7 220 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling only form of information available. Whilst it would have been beneficial to have information of previous offences since there is a possibility that there were unknown cross-over offenders from previous offences in either group, this information was not available. Victims were classified as adults if they were 16 years of age or older at the time of the offence. Although the sample sizes in the groups were quite different, the proportion of offence types in the current sample is similar to the proportion of offence types seen in the sexual offender population who embark on treatment in prison in the UK (e.g. Webster, Mann, Thornton, & Wakeling, 2006). Table 1 displays pre-treatment demographic information about both groups. Cell size discrepancies within the tables are the result of missing data. A series of t-tests were conducted on the data in Table 1. Results of these analyses revealed a significant difference in age, t(965) 12.06, p B0.001, with child molesters being older than rapists; number of previous convictions for sexual and violent offences, t(756) 3.35, p B0.005, with rapists having more previous convictions that child molesters; and finally number of victims, t(794) 3.94, p B0.001, with child molesters having more victims than rapists. Furthermore, a significant difference was found for the two groups in terms of risk, x 2 (3, N899)39.22, p B The child molester group contained a greater percentage of lower risk offenders than the rapist group. Measures The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding 6 (BIDR: 6, Paulhus, 1984, 1988) The BIDR is a 40-item self-report questionnaire, which contains two subscales, Self- Deceptive Enhancement and Impression Management. The self-deceptive enhancement subscale contains items measuring an unconscious favourability bias closely related to narcissism (Paulhus & John, 1998). In other words, the items intend to assess defensiveness to personal threats, and positively biased responding that the respondent believes to be true. High scores on this subscale reflect a trait-like tendency toward overly self-favourable presentation rather than situational demands. Table 1. Pre-treatment demographics of the sample. Child molesters Adult rapists n M SD n M SD Significance Age B0.001 N victims sex/violent B0.005 offences N previous convictions B0.001 n % n % Significance RM2000 risk Very high High pb0.001 Medium Low NB. Please note that there are differing Ns for the demographics due to missing data.

8 Psychology, Crime & Law 221 It is a stable style, which is enduring and more closely related to one s personality. The impression management subscale is designed to measure responding that is guided by a desire to create a favourable impression on others and thus intends to measure the extent to which the respondent is faking or lying. High scores indicate that the respondent may be exaggerating and purposely trying to impress the assumed audience (Paulhus, 1998). Respondents rate items on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not true), through 4 (somewhat true) to 7(very true). Some of the items are reverse scored with each item scored dichotomously (0 or 1) as shown below: Positive score items: a response of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 gets a score of 0 and a response of 6 or 7 gets a score of 1; Reverse score items: a response of 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 gets a score of 0 and a response of 1 or 2 gets a score of 1. Impression management and self-deceptive enhancement subscales are adjusted for each missing item up to a maximum (from total subscale) of five as follows: If one item is missing: Sum impression management=self-deceptive enhancement items If five items are missing: Sum impression management=self-deceptive enhancement items If more than five items were missing, subscale scores were not computed. Overall impression management and self-deceptive enhancement scores were not derived for 43 cases pre-treatment and 119 cases post-treatment from the initial sample of 1730 due to missing items. The Cronbach alpha coefficient for the BIDR subscales was 0.72 for selfdeceptive enhancement and 0.82 for impression management. Internal consistency reliabilities should never drop below 0.70 (Kline, 2000) indicating an acceptable internal consistency reliability for self-deceptive enhancement and impression management subscales. Deleting specific items did not increase the scale alpha. Paulhus (1988) reported testretest correlations over a 5-week period of r0.69 and r0.65 for the self-deceptive enhancement and impression management scales, respectively. Applying the minimum testretest reliability as suggested by Kline (2000) of r 0.80, this would indicate an inadequate testretest reliability, suggesting that this scale might not be stable over time. However, it has been suggested that the constructs or traits being measured by the BIDR are not stable, and may change over time or in different situations (e.g. Paulhus, 1988). Thus although it is important to mention the test retest reliability of the BIDR here, the authors feel it may be less relevant for the BIDR to meet minimum testretest reliability criteria (Kline, 2000) due to the nature of the measure. Other self-report measures The remaining self-report measures are all used to assess the dynamic risk factors known to be related to sexual recidivism (Thornton, 2002), and which are targeted on sex offender treatment. As shown below, a couple of the measures have poor psychometric properties, either in terms of internal reliability or testretest reliability.

9 222 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling However, each of the self-report measures used intend to assess a different dynamic risk factor of sexual offending, and thus they are all deemed important to include as part of the full pre- and post-treatment assessment battery on the Sex Offender Treatment Programme. Since these measures are all routinely used on the treatment programme, the authors felt it was imperative within the present study to examine the relationship between all of these measures and the BIDR, regardless of their psychometric properties (although the limitations of this are mentioned in the Discussion section). Social-functioning measures Self-Esteem Questionnaire (Webster, Mann, Thornton, & Wakeling, 2006). This is an eight-item measure of general self-esteem. The higher the score, the higher the offender s self-esteem (maximum score16). Items are rated either yes or no. Webster et al. (2006) report excellent psychometric properties for this scale: the internal consistency is a 0.84 and the testretest reliability of the scale is r Impulsivity (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1978). A tendency to act without thinking about long-term consequences is indicated by higher scores on this 13-item scale. Item responses are yes or no. Scale scores range from 0 to 26. The scale has been shown to have adequate internal consistency (a 0.84) and testretest reliability (r 0.79; Rallings & Webster, 2001). DissipationRumination (Capara, 1986). A tendency to ruminate angrily and bear grudges is assessed by this 15-item, yes/no response questionnaire. Scale scores range from 0 to 30. Higher scores reflect greater rumination. The scale has been shown to have satisfactory internal consistency (a 0.79), and testretest reliability (r0.67; Rallings & Webster, 2001). Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; Davis, 1980). The IRI is a 28-item measure of the cognitive and emotional components of empathy. Respondents rate items on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (does not describe me well) to4(describes me very well). The instrument has four subscales each consisting of seven items. Each scale is scored separately and scores range from 0 to 28. The four subscales have shown to have satisfactory internal consistency (fantasy, a 0.77; empathic concern, a 0.72; perspective taking, a 0.72; and personal distress, a 0.74), and testretest reliability (fantasy, r 0.77; empathic concern, r0.79; perspective taking, r 0.81; and personal distress, r0.74) (Rallings & Webster, 2001). Locus of Control (Levenson, 1972; 1974). This 18-item questionnaire assesses the extent to which a participant believes his experiences are determined by internal or external factors. Items are scored on a five-point Likert scale. Higher scores ( 40) indicate someone who attributes his experience to internal factors whereas lower scores indicate a tendency to blame external factors. Scores range from 0 to 72. The scale is shown to have adequate internal consistency and testretest reliability (a 0.79 and r 0.87, respectively, Rallings & Webster, 2001). Emotional Control Questionnaire (ECQ; Roger & Najarian, 1989). This is a 56-item scale, which measures emotional response style. Respondents are asked to indicate on a dichotomous true/false scale how they feel about the 56 statements. Items are scored true 1 and false 2. The ECQ comprises four subscales, Rehearsal, Emotional

10 Psychology, Crime & Law 223 Inhibition, Aggression Control and Benign Control. Subscales range from 0 to 28. The internal consistency of the subscales are adequate at a0.86, a0.77, a0.81 and a 0.79, respectively. Subscales Rehearsal and Aggression Control demonstrate adequate testretest reliability (r0.80 and r 0.92, respectively) whilst the remaining subscales Emotional Inhibition and Benign control demonstrate poorer test retest reliability (r0.79 and r0.73, respectively, Rallings & Webster, 2001). Relationship Style Questionnaire (RSQ; Dutton, Saunders, Starzomski, & Bartholomew, 1994). This is a 30-item self-report questionnaire measuring four attachment patterns, Secure, Fearful, Pre-occupied, and Dismissing. Respondents rate on a five-point Likert scale how well each item fits their style in close relationships. Scale anchors are: 1not at all like me,3somewhat like me,5very much like me. Summing the items representing each subscale derives RSQ scores for the four attachment styles. Respondents receive a rating for each attachment pattern. Internal consistency is only available for the Secure and Dismissing attachment patterns (a 0.41 for both) suggesting inadequate internal consistency (Dutton et al., 1994). Testretest reliability statistics were not available for this questionnaire. Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised (SPSI-R; D Zurilla, Nezu, & Maydeu- Olivares, 2002). This is a 52-item self-report measure that assesses people s impression of their ability to resolve problems in everyday living. The SPSI-R consists of five subscales, Positive Problem Orientation (PPO), Negative Problem Orientation (NPO), Rational Problem Solving (RPS), Impulsivity/Carelessness Style (ICS) and Avoidance style (AS). Respondents rate each item on a five-point Likert scale, with the following scale anchors: 0not at all true of me, 1slightly true of me, 2 moderately true of me, 3very true of me, 4extremely true of me. If less than 10% of items are missing, these missing items are given a score of 2 (scale mean). Subscales are scored by summing corresponding items and a total SPSI-R score is produced from the subscale scores. The total SPSI-R score provides a global indicator of the level of a person s social problem-solving ability. Higher scores indicate more effective problem-solving. Wakeling (2007) reported adequate internal consistency of the subscales PPO 0.73, NPO 0.92, RPS 0.95, ICS 0.91 and AS 0.82, and good testretest reliability at r0.94 for the total scale. The revised UCLA Emotional Loneliness (Russell, Peplan, & Cutrona, 1980). This scale was originally a 20-item questionnaire however one item was removed when the HMPS assessment battery was rolled out following a factor analysis of the original items. This 19-item questionnaire indicates the extent to which respondents believe they have meaningful relationships, have people close to them or are lonely. Item responses are on a four-point Likert scale. Greater scores indicate greater loneliness and fewer close and meaningful relationships. The internal consistency of the scale is good (a 0.95) and the testretest reliability is also adequate (r0.79, Rallings & Webster, 2001). Offence-specific measures Sex with Children is Acceptable (Marshall, 1995). This 18-item scale assesses the degree to which a participant endorses a range of statements that purport children as enjoying sexual contact with adults. High scores on this scale

11 224 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling indicate an endorsement of such attitudes. Items are scored on a five-point Likert scale. The scale is shown to have good internal consistency (a 0.94) and test retest reliability (r0.93, Mann, Webster, Wakeling, & Marshall, 2007). Deceitful Women (ISMG, 1995). This five-item scale measures offenders beliefs that women are devious and manipulative. Items are scored on a five-point Likert scale. High scores indicate the endorsement of the aforementioned beliefs. The scale is shown to have adequate internal consistency (a0.79) and testretest reliability (r 0.81, Rallings & Webster, 2001). Entitlement to Sex (Hanson, Gizzarelli, & Scott, 1994). This nine-item scale assesses whether a participant believes in an absolute entitlement to sex. Items are scored on a five-point Likert scale. Higher scores on this scale indicate greater endorsement of such attitudes. The internal consistency of the scale is a 0.65, and the testretest reliability of the scale is r 0.67 (Rallings & Webster, 2001) indicative of relatively poor reliability. The low internal consistency could possibility be due to the small number of items in this scale or could suggest that this scale is measuring more than one characteristic. Furthermore the low testretest reliability suggests that this scale might not be stable over time. Openness to Men and Women (Underhill, Wakeling, Mann, & Webster, 2008). Higher scores on these nine-item scales indicate that participants are able to and prefer to establish emotionally intimate relationships with men and women. Item responses are on a five-point Likert scale, with response anchors of 0 strongly disagree to 4 strongly agree. Internal consistency has been found to be a0.85 (Openness to Men) and a0.86 (Openness to Women). Testretest reliability is also satisfactory for both subscales (r0.86 and 0.81, respectively; Underhill et al., 2008). Children and Sex Questionnaire (Beckett, 1987). This is an 87-item questionnaire that measures respondents attitudes, feelings and thoughts about children and sex. Higher scores reflect a greater degree of attitudes supporting the sexual abuse of children. Respondents rate each item on a five-point Likert scale. The response anchors are 0 very true, 1somewhat true, 2 somewhat untrue, 3very untrue, 4don t know. Only 30 of the 87 items are scored. These 30 items are clustered into two subscales, Cognitive Distortions and Emotional Congruence with Children. Items are summed to produce a total scale score. High scores reflect a higher congruence and identification with children. Beech, Fisher and Beckett (1998) report testretest reliability for these subscales (r 0.77 Cognitive Distortions and r0.63 Emotional Congruence). Hypermasculinity Inventory (Mosher & Sirken, 1984). This is a 30-item forced choice questionnaire developed to measure a macho personality constellation consisting of three components; Calloused sex attitudes towards women, Violence as manly, and Danger as exciting. These three components reflect a male s desire to appear powerful and to be dominant in interactions with others. For each item there are two possible responses, and respondents are required to choose one statement for each question. Respondents score two points for every adversarial attitude they endorse. The internal consistency of the subscales are adequate at a0.79, a0.79 and a 0.71 for Calloused sex, Violence and Danger subscales, respectively (Rallings & Webster, 2001). The testretest reliability of the Hypermasculinity subscales is not currently available.

12 Psychology, Crime & Law 225 Multiphasic Sex Inventory (MSI; Nichols & Molinder, 1984). The MSI is a 300-item true/false self-report inventory specifically designed to be used with sexual offenders. The MSI has 20 scales, six of which are validity scales assessing the respondent s attitudes at the time of testing. The remaining 14 scales include a variety of sexual deviance measures, a sex knowledge and belief measure, a measure of sexual dysfunction, and an assessment of motivation for treatment. Nichols and Molinder (1984) report good internal consistency: a0.89, a0.90, a0.85, a0.80, a94, and a 0.87 for Sexual Obsessions, Lie, Cognitive Distortions and Immaturity, Justifications, Child Molest and Rape scales, respectively. Nichols and Molinder (1984) reported good testretest correlations of r 0.88, r 0.92, r0.85, r0.92, r0.92 and r 0.96 for Sexual Obsessions, Lie, Cognitive Distortions and Immaturity, Justifications, Child Molest and Rape scales, respectively. For the purpose of this study only the MSI scales which are considered to be affected by treatment, and therefore clinically meaningful, will be utilized. These are the Sex Obsessions Scale, the Lie Scales, Cognitive Distortion and Immaturity Scale, Justifications Scale, Child Molest Scale, Rape Scale, and Paraphilias Scale. Risk Matrix 2000/s (Thornton et al., 2003). RM2000/s is a seven-item instrument that assesses past demographic and criminal history in order to predict sexual recidivism, including age at commencement of risk, number of court appearances for sentencing for a sexual offence, stranger victim and male victim. The seven items of RM2000/s are scored in two steps (Risk and Aggravating factors). RM2000 divides sexual offenders into four categories: Low; Medium; High; Very High. Thornton et al. (2003) report good predictive validity of the RM2000/s in two samples of sexual offenders (AUC0.77 and AUC0.75). Craig, Beech, and Browne (2006) examined the predictive validity of RM2000/s using a sample of sexual offenders and it was found to demonstrate numerically higher AUC estimates than the Static-99. More recent research also supports the predictive power of RM2000/s (Barnett, Wakeling, & Howard, 2009; Grubin, 2008; Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2007). Procedure All participants completed the above measures as part of a psychometric test battery designed to assess treatment need and progress in sexual offenders. Questionnaires were administered in 28 prisons, as part of the pre- and post-treatment assessment procedure for the Sex Offender Treatment Programme, a cognitive behavioural programme for sexual offenders. The psychometric test battery is completed 6 weeks prior to a treatment programme commencing. Following completion of the treatment programme all participants were retested with the test battery except for the UCLA which is only administered at the pre-treatment stage. Retesting took place at least 6 weeks after completion of treatment and conformed to pre-treatment test conditions. Psychometric tests are administered in group testing sessions and are completed by individuals in the presence of an administrator. All administration conforms to usual good practice guidelines for psychological test administration. Completed questionnaires were collated by prisons and forwarded to the National Offender Management Services Interventions and Substance Misuse Group (ISMG) and were entered into a centralized database to be used for future research. Staff within each prison completed

13 226 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling the RM2000 at the pre-treatment stage, with results also forwarded to ISMG and were entered into a centralized database to be used for future research. Cohen s (1988) convention for small, medium and large correlation coefficients suggests that a correlation of greater than 0.5 is large, is moderate and is small. Cohen s convention will be used to explain the magnitude of the correlations between socially desirable responding and the measures as described below. Results The extent of socially desirable responding among sexual offenders The pre- and post-treatment descriptive statistics for the total sample, the different offence types and risk levels are shown in Table 2. (Please refer to the sections titled Examining the difference in impression management and self-deception enhancement scores for offence type, and Examining the difference in impression management and self-deception enhancement for risk levels, respectively.) Examining the relationship between social desirability and social-functioning measures Table 3 shows the correlations between the social desirability scales and the socialfunctioning measures pre- and post-treatment. Most of the social-functioning measures significantly correlate in the direction which would be expected with both self-deceptive enhancement and impression management subscales at both the pre- and post-treatment stage. So where we would expect to see a positive correlation this was revealed (e.g. as socially desirable responding increases self-esteem scores also increase) and where we would expect a negative correlation this was also revealed (e.g. as socially desirable responding increases impulsivity scores decrease). However the Relationship Style Questionnaire Dismissing style subscale did not correlate with self-deceptive enhancement pre- or post-treatment, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index Personal Distress subscale did not significantly correlate with impression management, and the Aggression control subscale from the Emotional control questionnaire did not significantly correlate with self-deceptive enhancement. These results suggest that there is a relationship between the social-functioning measures and social desirability. When offenders appear to be responding in a socially desirable manner on the BIDR they appear to score better on these other measures too. This suggests that offenders may be employing socially desirable tactics also when completing these measures too. By applying Cohen s principle regarding correlation size to the results in Table 3 it can be seen that just under half of the correlations are between 0.3 and 0.1 and would therefore be considered small. Approximately half of the correlations are considered moderate (0.50.3) and only four significant correlations would be considered large. The distinction between the magnitudes of the correlations found appears to be particularly important when comparing the correlations between the two social desirability subscales, which show that the majority of the correlations in Table 3 are higher for self-deceptive enhancement than they are for impression management.

14 Table 2. Impression management and self-deceptive enhancement mean and standard deviation pre- and post-treatment for total sample, offence type and risk groups. RM2000 Offence type Total sample Low Medium High Very high Child molester Rapists Impression Pre 6.34 (4.18) 7.10 (4.21) 5.99 (4.14) 5.53 (3.96) 5.28 (3.99) 6.49 (4.11) 5.79 (4.13) management Post 7.47 (4.35) 7.88 (4.31) 7.19 (4.41) 7.21 (4.18) 7.03 (4.43) 7.52 (4.19) 7.23 (4.69) Self-deceptive Pre 5.39 (3.29) 5.51 (3.47) 5.65 (3.39) 5.18 (3.23) 5.38 (3.34) 5.29 (3.27) 5.92 (3.56) enhancement Post 7.21 (3.63) 7.27 (3.69) 7.32 (3.71) 7.28 (3.82) 7.29 (3.48) 7.09 (3.57) 7.58 (3.80) Psychology, Crime & Law 227

15 228 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling Table 3. Correlations between the social desirability scales and the social-functioning measures pre- and post-treatment. Pre-treatment Post-treatment Self-deception enhancement Impression management Self-deception enhancement Impression management Self-esteem 0.43* 0.24* 0.37* 0.25* Impulsivity 0.36* 0.36* 0.39* 0.34* Ruminations 0.22* 0.23* 0.26* 0.25* IRI Fantasy 0.15* 0.16* 0.15* 0.13* IRI Empathic Concern 0.16* 0.28* 0.24* 0.26* IRI Perspective Taking 0.33* 0.37* 0.45* 0.38* IRI Personal Distress 0.42* * 0.28* Locus of control 0.48* 0.27* 0.55* 0.31* ECQ Rehearsal 0.24* 0.21* 0.22* 0.22* ECQ Emotional Inhibition 0.27* 0.11* 0.33* 0.21* ECQ Aggression Control * 0.10* 0.29* ECQ Benign Control 0.39* 0.43* 0.48* 0.45* RSQ Secure Style 0.34* 0.18* 0.39* 0.24* RSQ Fearful Style 0.34* 0.22* 0.39* 0.29* RSQ Pre-Occupied Style 0.26* 0.15* 0.32* 0.18* RSQ Dismissing Style * * SPSI Positive Problem 0.43** 0.27** 0.50** 0.32** Orientation Scale SPSI Negative Problem 0.45** 0.24** 0.50** 0.29** Orientation Scale SPSI Rational Problem 0.40** 0.31** 0.53** 0.40** Solving Scale SPSI Impulsivity 0.42** 0.31** 0.50** 0.37** Carelessness Style SPSI Avoidance Style 0.38** 0.23** 0.42** 0.25** SPSI Total Scale 0.52** 0.34** 0.61** 0.41** UCLA 0.26*** 0.16*** *Significant at by Bonferroni s correction; **significant at by Bonferroni s correction; ***significant at 0.01 (administered pre-treatment only). Examining the relationship between social desirability and offence-specific measures Table 4 shows the correlations between the social desirability scales and the offencespecific measures pre- and post-treatment. Most of the offence-specific measures significantly correlate in the direction which would be expected with both self-deceptive enhancement and impression management subscales both pre- and post-treatment. The correlations were such that where we would expect a positive correlation this was revealed (e.g. as socially desirable responding increases openness to women scores also increase) and where we expect to find a negative correlation this was found (e.g. as socially desirable responding increases sexual entitlement decreases). However, the Hypermasculinity Callous Sex Attitudes subscale did not significantly correlate with self-deceptive enhancement pre-treatment. In addition, the MSI Incest lie subscale and the MSI Justifications subscales did not significantly correlate with impression management pre- or post-treatment.

16 Psychology, Crime & Law 229 Table 4. Correlations between the social desirability scales and the offence-specific measures pre- and post-treatment. Pre-treatment Post-treatment Self-deception enhancement Impression management Self-deception enhancement Impression management Deceitful women 0.25* 0.20* 0.34* 0.22* Sex with children 0.18* 0.07* 0.20* 0.10* Openness to women 0.33* 0.13* 0.36* 0.18* Openness to men 0.30* 0.15* 0.36* 0.20* Sexual Entitlement 0.33* 0.23* 0.41* 0.26* Children and Sex Questionnaire 0.16* 0.09* 0.23* 0.17* Cognitive Distortions Children and Sex Questionnaire 0.12* 0.10* 13* 0.15* Emotional Congruence Hypermasculinity Danger as 0.09* 0.31* 0.11* 0.30* exciting Hypermasculinity Violence as 0.08* 0.26* 0.10* 0.17* manly Hypermasculinity Callous sex * 0.08* 0.12* attitudes MSI Sexual Obsessions 0.21* 0.22* 0.21* 0.20* MSI Child Molest Lie 0.19* 0.11* 0.16* 0.12* MSI Rape Lie 0.13* 0.18* 0.07* 0.12* MSI Incest Lie 0.10* * 0.02 MSI Exhibitionism Lie 0.08* 0.08* 0.09* 0.10* MSI Cognitive Distortion/ 0.22* 0.10* 0.26* 0.14* Immaturity MSI Justifications 0.08** * 0.00 MSI Child Molest Scale 0.17* 0.08* 0.15* 0.11* MSI Rape Scale 0.11* 0.17* 0.08* 0.13* MSI Paraphilias Scale 0.14* 0.19* 0.14* 0.19* *Significant at by Bonferroni s correction. These results suggest that there is a relationship between the offence-specific measures and social desirability such that offenders are employing socially desirable responding when completing these self-report measures. By applying Cohen s principles regarding correlation size to the results in Table 4 it can be seen that only eight of the significant correlations would be considered moderate (0.30.5), whilst the remaining significant correlations would be considered small. Furthermore, there appears to be very little difference between the magnitudes of the correlations between self-deceptive enhancement and impression management. Changes to socially desirable responding scores pre- to post-treatment Two repeated-measure MANOVAs were conducted to examine the effect of treatment on the group members impression management and self-deceptive enhancement scores pre- and post-treatment. A highly significant effect of treatment was found for self-deceptive enhancement F(1,1343) , p B0.01, with scores increasing

17 230 N.L. Mathie and H.C. Wakeling post-treatment. A highly significant effect of treatment was also found for impression management F(1,1343) , pb0.01, with scores increasing post-treatment. Examining the differences in impression management and self-deception enhancement scores for offence type Based on the analysis conducted on the demographic information of both groups from Table 1 significant differences were found between child molesters and rapists in terms of their age, risk, number of victims and number of previous convictions. Based on this analysis a series of ANCOVAs were conducted using age, risk, number of victims and number of previous convictions as covariates. No significant difference between child molesters and rapists was found for self-deceptive enhancement pre-treatment, F(1,646) 1.43, p 0.05, or post-treatment F(1,625) 0.30, p Additionally, there was no significant difference between child molesters and rapists for impression management pre-treatment, F(1,646) 0.64, p 0.05, or post-treatment, F(1,625) 0.16, p Examining the differences in impression management and self-deception enhancement for risk levels Two one-way ANOVAs were performed to detect any differences between risk groups for impression management at both the pre- and the post-treatment stages. A significant difference between risk groups (as measured by RM2000/s) on impression management scores was found pre-treatment, F(3,1434) 12.94, pb0.01. Post hoc analyses revealed that low risk offenders scored significantly higher than all other risk groups. A significant difference between risk groups was also found posttreatment, F(3,1379) 3.22, pb0.05. Post hoc analyses revealed that low risk offenders scored significantly higher than the medium and high risk groups. Although the impression management score for the very high risk group was the lowest of the four risk groups, the difference between this group and the low risk group did not reach significance (p0.05) presumably due to the smaller sample size of the very high risk group. The MANOVAs reported earlier also examined the relationship between risk and socially desirable responding. A significant interaction between risk level and impression management scores was found, F(3,1343) 4.42, p B0.01, with lower risk offenders scores changing significantly less than all other risk groups (pb0.01 for all groups). Two further one-way ANOVAs examined the relationship between risk and selfdeceptive enhancement scores. No significant differences were found at either the pre- or post-treatment stage. Furthermore the MANOVAs found no significant interaction between risk level and self-deceptive enhancement scores. It would appear that the lower risk offenders are more likely to deceive others but are no more likely to deceive themselves than higher risk offenders. Examining the relationship between social desirability and age Age was found to significantly correlate with impression management, r(1684) 0.14, p B0.01 as measured at the pre-treatment stage. However, there was no