Taxometric Analysis of the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles in Incarcerated Offenders and College Students

• NCJ Number: 218739
• Journal: Criminal Justice and Behavior: An International Journal Volume: 34 Issue: 6 Dated: June 2007 Pages: 781-793
• Author(s): Glenn D. Walters; Katrina McCoy
• Date Published: June 2007
• Length: 13 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study tested differences in criminal thinking styles among male and female offenders and male and female college students using taxometric procedures.

Abstract

Results indicated significant differences between male and female offenders and male and female college students on the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS) thinking style scales. Significant differences were noted in age, race, and criminality between participants in the four groups. Of the four status-by-gender groups, female offenders scored the highest PICTS scores and female students scored the lowest PICTS scores. The findings suggest that a criminal lifestyle is a dimensional construct, which is consistent with previous analyses by Walters (in press). As such, the authors suggest that criminal thinking can be placed along a continuum ranging from normal thoughts of self-interest to deviant thoughts of crime. An unexpected finding, however, was that male college students scored slightly higher on a number of the PICTS scales than did the male incarcerated offenders. The findings have implications for interventions in that many more individuals might benefit from an intervention for criminal thinking. Participants were 820 individuals, consisting of 204 male inmates from a medium security Federal correctional institution, 233 female State and Federal prisoners, 177 male college students, and 216 female college students. All participants had previously participated in studies for which they completed the PICTS. Three taxometric analyses were used for the study: mean above minus below a cut (MAMBAC), maximum covariance (MAXCOV), and latent mode factor analysis (L-MODE). Each of these taxometric analyses are explained in turn. Data analysis involved the use of a two-way multivariate analysis of variance that crossed member status (offender vs. student) with gender. Limitations of the study are discussed and include the use of taxometric procedures to test for dimensionality. Tables, figures, references