Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:52:14.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patterns of denial in sex offenders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

H. G. Kennedy  and
D. H. Grubin
H. G. Kennedy*
Affiliation:
Department of Forensic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, London
D. H. Grubin
Affiliation:
Department of Forensic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, London
*
1 Address for correspondence: Dr. H. G. Kennedy, Department of Forensic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

Men convicted of sex offences (N = 102) were interviewed in two prisons. Cluster analysis was used to generate three groups according to pattern of denial; a fourth group was composed of men who denied their offence altogether. The groups differed in their ethnic make-up, offence type and past history of sexual offending.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 191 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Referemces

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edn) (DSM-III-R). APA: Washington.Google Scholar
Editorial (1990). Real insight. Lancet i 408–409.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Hodder & Stoughton: Sevenoaks.Google Scholar
Freud, S. (1914). Psychopathology of Everyday Life (transl. Brill, A. A.). Unwin: London.Google Scholar
Furby, L., Weinrott, M. R. & Blackshaw, L. (1989). Sex offender recidivism: a review. Psychological Bulletin 105, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, D. & Huxley, P. (1980). Mental Illness in the Community. Tavistock: London.Google Scholar
Gudjonnson, G. H. & Singh, K. K. (1989). The revised Gudjonnson blame attribution inventory. Personality and Individual Differences 10, 67–70.Google Scholar
Langevin, R. (1988). Defensiveness in sex offenders. In Clinical Assessment of Malingering and Deception (ed. Rogers, R.), pp. 269–290. Guilford Press: New York.Google Scholar
Lewis, A. (1934). The psychopathology of insight. British Journal of Medical Psychology 14, 332–348.Google Scholar
Loftus, E. F. (1981). Eyewitness testimony: psychological research and legal thought. In Crime and Justice, An Annual Review of Research, vol. 3 (ed. Tonry, M. and Morris, N.), pp. 105–151. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.Google Scholar
Paniagua, F. A. (1989). Lying by children: why children say one thing, do another. Psychological Reports 64, 971–984.Google Scholar
Schonell, F. J. & Schonell, F. E. (1965). Diagnostic and Attainment Testing. Oliver and Boyd: Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Scully, D. & Marolla, J. (1984). Convicted rapists' vocabulary of votive: excuses and justifications. Social Problems 31, 530–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, Z. V. & Stermac, L. (1990). The role of cognition in sexual assault. In Handbook of Sexual Assault: Issues, Theories, and Treatment of the Offender (ed. Laws, D. R. and Barbaree, H. E.), pp. 161–174. Plenum Press: New York.Google Scholar
SPSS Inc (1983). SPSS-X Users Guide. McGraw-Hill: Chicago.Google Scholar
Taylor, P. J. & Kopelman, M. D. (1984). Amnesia for criminal offences. Psychological Medicine 14, 581–588.Google Scholar
Williams, G. (1982). The theory of excuses. Criminal Law Review 00, 732–742.Google Scholar
Wilson, P. & Shine, J. (1990). Characteristics and potential treatment needs of sexual offenders. In Applying Psychology to Imprisonment: Young Offenders (ed. McCurran, M.). (Issues in Criminological and Legal Psychology, Issue 15.) British Psychological Society: London.Google Scholar