Criminal Behaviours - Methods Of Modifying Behaviours: Anger Management Flashcards
(18 cards)
What is the general idea behind anger management
- prison = punishment, it doesn’t stop people from Recidivism (the tendency for a convicted criminal to reoffend)
- Anger management is a type of CBT: if we can get them to handle and understand their anger better (e.g. what their triggers are) = they’re less aggressive = less likely to reoffend.
- Raymond Novaco created the idea of anger management strategies for offenders. His main 2 aims of anger management are:
—> The short term aim is to reduce anger and aggression in prisons where it is a serious issue. Novaco (2013) describes prisons as ‘efficient anger factories’ due to the social climate (violent inmates, overcrowding, etc…)
—> The long term aim is rehabilitation and reduction of recidivism, especially the case for violent prisoners
What are the 3 main components to talk about when describing anger management
- Key aims (Novaco)
- Anger in prisons (HAB)
- Stress inoculation model (3)
Describe the key aims of anger management
- As this is a cognitive approach the aim is to change the way a person handles anger and aggression – the situation itself may not be changeable but the person can change the way they think about it and thus change their behaviour.
- Novaco (2011) has identified 3 key aims for anger management programmes:
1) Cognitive restructuring – greater self awareness of how you think and control over cognitive dimensions of anger
2) Regulation of arousal – learning to control the physiological state/reaction when feeling anger and aggression.
3) Behavioural strategies – such as problem-solving skills, strategic withdrawal and assertiveness
Describe how anger in prisons relates to anger management
- Criminals have hostile attribution bias which is a cognitive distortion that makes them turn to crime.
- The negative interpretations are going to increase their anger.
- So anger management aims to reduce that anger through changing their hostile attribution bias
Describe how the stress inoculation model relates to anger management
- programmes are based on work by Novaco (1975, 1977), drawing on stress inoculation training, a form of CBT
- Stress inoculation aims to provide a kind of vaccination against future ‘infections’. The therapy tends to be conducted with a group of offenders either inside prison or outside, e.g. during probation. The 3 key steps are:
1) Conceptualisation - clients learn about anger generally (e.g. where it comes from), how it can be both adaptive and non-adaptive.
- They analyse their own patterns of anger and identify situations which provoke anger in them, like what is and what are your triggers.
2) Skill acquisition (and rehearsal) - clients are taught various skills to help manage their anger, such as self-regulation, cognitive flexibility and relaxation.
- They are also taught better communication skills so they can resolve conflicts assertively without being angry
3) Application (and follow through) - clients apply the skills initially in controlled and non-threatening situations such as role plays of situations that previously made them angry.
- They receive extensive feedback from the therapist and other group members. Later clients can try out their skills in real world settings.
When evaluating this therapy’s effectiveness, what do you talk about
- supportive research (Taylor and Novaco, 75, 6 + Howell, 5)
- not appropriate for all solutions (Blacker ET al + Howell and Day)
- doesn’t remove the cause (Loza and Loza-fanous, 300)
Evaluate the effectiveness of anger management: supporting evidence
P: Is effective as there’s supporting research demonstrating it’s success
E: Taylor and Novaco reported a 75% improvement rate based on 6 meta-analyses
T: Therefore anger management is effective as there’s supporting evidence that outlines its effectivness in helping offenders improve their management of anger and aggression
C: However, there’s contradictory evidence. Howell et al cited 5 meta-analyses and found anger management only had moderate benefits. If we cannot be confident that it has consistent success, we cannot confidently call it effective.
Evaluate the effectiveness of anger management: not appropriate for all solutions
P: is effective as it can be appropriate for all. A common criticism is that those who struggle with self reflection will drop out of voluntary programmes, making the therapy not appropriate for all. However, there are solutions to this issue.
E: Blacker et al found proven success in alternative drama-based courses that are more engaging, relying less on verbal abilities. Additionally, Howell and Day created the ‘Anger Readiness to Change Questionnaire’ which reduces drop out by making sure those who are likely to engage are the ones receiving the treatment.
T: Therefore effective as anger management can accommodate all offenders, as well as identify when resources may be wasted on those not ready change, making programmes cost effective additionally
Evaluate the effectiveness of anger management: doesn’t remove the cause
P: Not effective as it doesn’t address the root cause of aggression, so won;t reduce criminal behaviour
E: Loza and Loza-fanous challenges the assumption that anger leads to criminal violence, finding that in 300 male prisoners there was no significant differences in anger levels between violent and non-violent offenders
T: Therefore anger management isn’t effective as violent offender may still occur even without aggression, therefore treating aggression will not treat violent offending. There are factors like motivations behind the crime (rather than the individual being generally angry) that also contribute.
COUNTER: it still has some value as the skills learnt may have broader benefits beyond just reducing aggression (like emotional regulation and cognitive restructuring).
When evaluating the ethical issues of anger management, what do you talk about
- voluntary consent
- psychological harm
- free will
Evaluate the ethical issues of anger management: voluntary consent
P: unethical issue of voluntary consent
E: individuals are often coerced into taking when AM is given as a part of their sentence. Refusal could lead to extended prison time, which undermines their free will to give genuine consent to participate
T: Therefore this is a weakness as without an informed and voluntary consent being given by participants, it violates their respect for autonomy which is therefore unethical.
COUNTER: that said, AM benefits both the individual and society by reducing aggressive behaviour and therefore reducing recidivism. Therefore the cost of compromising consent for the benefit of public safety and rehabilitation seems a necessary justification.
Evaluate the ethical issues of anger management: psychological harm
P: Unethical as it May cause harm through reflection
E: Watt et al found that offenders undergoing AM reported increased distress when reflecting on violent past actions
T: Therefore unethical as by forcing them to confront the harm they have caused (especially for those with pre-existing mental health conditions) could lead to severe emotional distress that increases the risk of depression, self-harm or suicide which are already present enough in prison populations
Evaluate the ethical issues of anger management: free will
P: Is ethical as skill acquisition and rehearsal helps offenders gain behavioural strategies that gives them free will to not be determined into criminality
E: Being taught how to resolve conflicts assertively without aggression, as well as cognitive flexibility and self-regulation, it empowers offenders with the necessary skills to participate in society appropriately long term
T: The ethical strength of this is that they don’t become dependent on therapists for intervention in the long term as they are able to re-use the skills they’ve learnt over and over again. Additionally, they no longer feel powerless and predetermined to a life of crime as they recognise they themselves are capable of change
When evaluating the social implications, what do you talk about
- reduce the cost of crime
- ineffectiveness creating social division
- reintegration into society
Evaluate the social implications of anger management: reduce cost of crime
P: strength to society is that reduced recidivism rates will decrease overall costs associated with crime in UK
E: Recent report from Police Exchange Think Tank estimates crime costs the UK up to £250 billion annually
T: By addressing underlying issues of aggression and anger, AM programmes can help rehabilitate offenders and reduce recidivism, resulting in significant economic savings for society that would otherwise have been spent on law enforcement, legal proceedings and incarceration. Prisons already struggle to secure fundings to match their demands from prison populations, so reduced populations can reduce their burdens
Evaluate the social implications of anger management: Ineffectiveness creates social division
P: a negative social implication comes from when there’s ineffective intervention, leading to pre-mature reintegration that put communities at risk of harm and leading to social division
E: Some offenders may be forced into AM by court mandates or by offers of reduced prison sentences. Offenders may just go through the motions to complete the programme and tick a box, without any actual reform happening and then when they’re re-integrated back into communities remain aggressive and commit crime again, putting society at risk
T: Therefore the negative social implication of this is that it erodes public trust in AM, decreasing likelihood of funding for future programmes and discouraging the mindset that criminals can be rehabilitated rather than punished — creating social division through the stigma that criminals are beyond saving and will never be ‘normal’ ever again —> could lead to more offending
Evaluate the social implications of anger management: equipping them for re-integration with society
P: A further benefit of anger management programs is their role in preparing inmates to become better future employees upon release by equipping them with techniques to cope with anger.
E: The Last Mile, a prison rehabilitation program, reports that 85% of its graduates secure employment within six months of release, attributing success to comprehensive training that includes emotional regulation skills.
T: By learning to manage anger effectively, former inmates are better prepared to handle workplace challenges, maintain stable employment, and reintegrate into society successfully. This not only benefits the individuals but also contributes to economic productivity and reduces the likelihood of reoffending.
Counter: However, securing employment post-release also depends on external factors such as employer biases and the availability of support networks, which anger management programs alone cannot address.
