UNDERSTANDING CONATIVE REGULATION SYSTEMS – AN EXAMINATION OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN OFFENDERS AND NON-OFFENDERS

Sanja DJURDJEVIC, Zilijeta KRIVOKAPIC, Rosa SHAPIС, Sreten VICENTIC

Abstract


Introduction Numerous studies confirmed personality traits as being important predictors of criminal behavior. The aim of this research was to determine which constellation of basic personality traits incarcerated individuals and those serving alternative sanctions differ, and which traits make the difference between the criminal and the non-criminal populations. In this research, the model of personality used is a cybernetic model of conative functioning, which assumes that conative regulation systems almost completely describe the structure of personality.

Methods The study sample consisted of 391 male respondents (152 offenders serving prison sentence, 91 convicts sentenced to alternative penalties and 148 non-offenders). 

Examined variables were: the regulator of activity (Extroversion), the regulator of organic functions (Hysteria), the regulator of defense reactions (Anxiety), the regulator of attack reactions (Aggressiveness), the system for coordination of regulatory functions (Psychoticism) and the system for integration of regulatory functions (Integration).

Results There were significant differences in all dimensions of personality between groups, except for the framework of Extraversion. The traits that contribute to the difference between individuals serving prison sentence and offenders sentenced to alternative penalties are Integration and Aggressiveness. The traits that contribute to the difference between non-offenders and offenders serving prison sentence are Psychoticism, Integration, Aggressiveness, and Anxiety. Among offenders sentenced to alternative penalties and the general population no difference in personality traits was found.

Conclusions Our findings may indicate the need for mandatory diagnostic psychological evaluation of persons who have committed minor offenses, to ensure the right decision is made when choosing between prison and an alternative method of punishment.

 


Keywords


personality traits; offenders; disorganization; disorders; rehabilitation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Raine A. The anatomy of violence: The biological roots of crime. Pantheon/Random House, New York, NY; 2013.

Eysenck SBG & Eysenck HJ. Personality differences between prisoners and controls. Psychological Reports 1977; 40: 1023-1028.

Eysenck HJ. & Eysenck MW. Personality and individual differences. New York: Plenum, 1985.

Costa PTJ & McCrae RR. Primary Traits of Eysenck's P-E-N System: Three- and Five-Factor Solutions. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1995; 69(2):308-317.

Cale EM. A quantitative review of the relations between the “Big 3”higher order personality dimensions and antisocial behavior. J Res Pers. 2006;40:250–284.

Eysenck HJ. &Gudjonsson GH. The causes and cure of criminality. NeuYork:Plenum Press 1989.

Kujacic D, Medjedovic J &Knezevic G. The relations between personality traits and psychopathy as measured by ratings and self-report. Psychology 2015; 48(1):45–59.

Van Dam C JM, Janssens AM & De Bruyn EEJ. PEN, Big Five, juvenile delinquency and criminal recidivism. Pers Individ Dif. 2005;39:7–19.

Miller JD &Lynam D. Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: a meta-analiticrewiev. Criminology 2001; 39:765-798.

Romero E ,Luengo MA. &Sobral J. Personality and antisocial behavior:study of temperamental dimensions. Pers Individ Dif. 2001; 31:329-348.

Momirovic K, Wolf B &Dzamonja Z. The KON–6 Cybernetic Battery of Conative Tests, 1992; Belgrade: Association of Psychologists of Serbia.

Radulovic D &Radovanovic D.Personality traits of offenders involved in organized criminal activity. IJSHIM 1999;2:41-47.

Cattell RB. Personality: A Systematic Theoretical and Factual Study. New York: McGraw Hill 1950.

Guilford JP. Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill 1959.

Eysenck HJ. Handbook of abnormal psychology. Pitman. London 1970.

Burt SA. & Donnellan MB. Personality correlates of aggressive and non-aggressive antisocial behavior. Pers Individ Dif. 2008; 44(1):53-63.

Mitrovic D, Smederevac S, Colovic P, Kodzopeljic J &Dinic B.Personality prototypes based on dimensions of the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory among prisoners and non-prisoners. Pers Individ Dif. 2014; 69:50–55.

Mededovic J, Kujacic D &Knezevic G. Personality-related determinants of criminal recidivism. Psychology 2012; 45(3):277-294.

Association of Psychologists of Serbia. Catalog psychological measuring instruments. Available from URL: http://www.dps.org.rs /images/ stories/cpp/katalog%20testova%202014.pdf

Hosek A & Momirovic K. Structure of the relations between the juvenile delinquents'social status and personality characteristics. Psychology 1997:3,197-230.

Momirović K & Hošek A.Influence of cognitive and conative factors on criminal behavior. Psychology 1998:1-2; 29-44.

Momirovic A, Gjuric H & Goluban M. Thirty years of using a series of personality questionnaires constructed by computer, Psychiatr Danub 2014; 26:509-512.

Momirovic K, Hosek A, Radovanovic D, Radulovic D."Personality traits of recidivists determined by nonlinear canonical model", in: D. Radovanovic, Psihologija kriminala 1996:3, pp. 13.

Rolisona JJ, Hanochb Y & Michaela G. Characteristics of offenders: the HEXACO model of personality as a framework for studying offenders’ personality. J. forens. psychiatry psychol 2013; 24(1):71-82.

Boduszek D, Shevlin M, Adamson G & Hyland P. Eysenck's Personality Model and Criminal Thinking Style within a Violent and Nonviolent Offender Sample: Application of Propensity Score Analysis. Deviant Behav 2013; 34:483-493..

Heaven PC. Personality and self-reported delinquency: Analysis of the “Big Five”personality dimensions”. Pers Individ Dif 1996; 20:47–54.

Jakobwitz S & Egan, V. The dark triad and normal personality traits, Pers Individ Dif. 2006; 40:331–339.

Levine SZ & Jackson CJ. Eysenck's theory of crime revisited: Factors or primary scales? LEGAL CRIMINOL PSYCH 2004; 9:135–152.

Costa PTJ. & McCrae RR. Primary Traits of Eysenck's P-E-N System: Three- and Five-Factor Solutions. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995; 69:308-317.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.19057/јser.2016.4

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Article Metrics Graph

No metrics found.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.