NCJ Number
214940
Journal
Aggression and Violent Behavior Volume: 11 Issue: 4 Dated: July-August 2006 Pages: 323-340
Date Published
July 2006
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This article presents the Judgment Model of Cognitive Distortions (JMCD) for explaining sexual offending, a model arguing that a sexual offenders’ offense-endorsing cognitive distortions stem from different combinations of beliefs, values, and actions.
Abstract
The main premise of the JMCD is that cognitive distortions that endorse sexual offending cluster together into Thematic Networks (TN) of judgments about beliefs, values, and actions, which help to drive sexual offending. Clinical implications of the JMCD suggest that clinicians should work with the broad ideas involved in false beliefs and motivating values rather than concentrating on lists of individual distortions. A review of the literature reveals that previous research on the cognitive distortions of sexual offenders has focused narrowly on the individual offenders’ unique cognitive system; while the JMCD goes a step further to incorporate the fundamental values associated with the wider social context in which the offending behavior occurs. The JMCD contains three levels of analysis: micro-level, meso-level, and macro-level to show how beliefs, values, and actions interact in a dynamic manner to help people resolve various problems posed by the environment. The Thematic Networks common to both rapists and child molesters are described as “uncontrollability,” “dangerous world,” and “entitlement” and their corresponding false beliefs, values, and actions are explained. Thematic Networks particular to rapists and to child molesters are also identified and explained. The JMCD has implications for sex offender intervention programming because it shows how cognitive distortions may not be the product of longstanding false beliefs but may instead stem from sloppy thinking or from impression management problems. Followup studies should utilize prospective research designs to illustrate the role of cognitive distortions in the offense process. Figure, references