Research Evidence for Psychological Explanations of Sex Offending Behavior - Essay Example

?Critically review the research evidence for two psychological explanations of sex offending behavior that may apply to Mr. Z: A very interesting case study is presented by Wilcox, Foss, and Donathy (2005) based on the behavioral analysis of a high-profile sex offender who is introduced as Mr. Z. This study is fraught with scientific evidence of reputable nature with the help of which it digs with acute intelligence into the hidden mental and behavioral aspects of Mr. Z’s notorious character. Basically, the purpose of this review is to critically analyze the extent to which two popular psychological explanations for sex offending behavior namely attachment theory and intimacy deficits can be applied to Mr. Z. This objective will be achieved by contemplating at length the research evidence provided for these two psychological theories and analyzing their relevance to the criminal makeup of Mr. Z’s character. The idea promoted by attachment theory is that the kind of interactions or attachments a person has as a child leave a lasting impression on the mind and hold powerful potential to shape his/her behaviors as an adult (Cherry, 2013). When there are not good “cumulative experiences with other people” (McCormack, Hudson, & Ward, 2002), a child is bound to develop a singularly warped sense of attachment or psychological connectedness as in case of Mr. Z. Sex-offenders’ parent-child attachment relationships are mostly found to be affectionless (McKillop et al., 2012, p. 591). When going through Mr. Z’s case study, one feature of his childhood history strikes the most which reveals that his father was a very strict figure who was frequently judgmental, treated his son disparagingly, and excessively rebuked him (Wilcox et al., 2005, p. 309). A very strict father and a detached mother very effectively contributed to a troubled childhood experience for Mr. Z which are the kind of things which can drastically affect self-esteem (Marshall, 1993, p. 109). It might also be the time around which he first began developing issues with reasoning and concentration. This traumatic experience and lack of secure attachments construct a roadmap for social awkwardness and isolation (Grotpeter & Elliott, 2002) which over time inculcated a sense of extreme sexual aggressiveness in Mr. Z as a way of getting even with others (Wilcox et al., 2005, p. 309). In a study done on three groups of 25 child molesters, 25 rapists, and 25 non-sex offenders all imprisoned, it was revealed that rapists were the loneliest of all (Garlick, Marshall, & Thornton, 1996, p. 251). Added to poor parenting was the factor of school bullying to which Mr. Z was exposed on routine basis. This suggests that since a very young age, he had really bad attachment experiences which are responsible for him painfully limited or even nonexistent relationship history because of not being able to relate to anyone. Attachment issues analyzed in sex offenders also identify that mostly male sex offenders vehemently assault women because of their inability to normally relate to others. They have no empathy which motivates them to fantasize about sexually aggressive acts (Keenan & Ward, 2000. p. 49; Marshall, 1993, p. 120) just like Mr. Z had sexual fantasies about animals and women. Not being able to attach to humans filled him with acute isolation and he became a sexual deviant turning to animals for sexual pleasure (Wilcox et al., 2005, p. 308). The second explanation for Mr. Z’s sex offending behavior can be related to the theory of intimacy deficits. Research done on sex offenders has generated much evidence to support the relationship between early interpersonal experiences and intimacy deficits (Ward et al., 1995). It was Marshall who scrutinized a large body of research evidence on intimacy deficits to link them to sexually aggressive attitudes found in criminals (Bumby & Hansen, 1997, p. 316). The connection between intimacy discrepancies and sexual offenders has been explored in several studies (Ward et al., 1995, p. 317). The conclusions drawn by Marshall concentrate on the active role played by intimacy issues in leading a person towards practical implementation of his sexually charged and unbelievably horrific fantasies. Mr. Z claims that all offenses he ever committed in life stem from a staggering relationship breakdown. He engaged in criminal activities to vent out the frustration which burnt him inside out. It was also because of low self-esteem stemming from pronounced intimacy deficits that he “was unable to get an erection” (Wilcox et al., 2005, p. 312). This suggests that an overpowering fear of rejection from humans discouraged him from healthy sexual performance and because with animals he was exposed to no such fear and did not care for approval, he developed an urge for sexual relationship with animals (Marshall, 1989, p. 491) and started getting sexual aroused by animal pornography instead. It is also opinioned by Marshall that sex offenders are substantially deficient in intimacy which makes them subjected to social isolation. According to this approach to sex offending behavior, it is usual for criminals like Mr. Z to blame himself for repeated failures in life because this blaming attitude cultivates fears of intimacy and an avoidance of normal intimate relationships. Avoidance of intimacy is commonest and dangerously high in sex-offenders in particular according to a study done on imprisoned sex-offenders and nonsexual offenders (Martin & Tardif, 2013). It is the consequence of deprivation of intimacy that sex is sought through aggressive means. It is stressed by Marshall that the importance of incorporating intimacy skill development in treatment programs conducted in prison facilities cannot be stressed enough (Goodrow & Lim, 1998, p. 149) because of the strong potential of attachment and intimacy deficits to instigate sexual offense and even zoophilia in some offenders as in case of Mr. Z who has highly pronounced zoosexual interests and tries to find intimacy in a relationship with an animal owing to his warped sense of intimacy and attachment. The explanations provided by attachment and intimacy deficit theories in reference to interests in rape and zoophilia found in male sex offenders share many similar characteristics and together both theoretical approaches can be used to effectively analyze Mr. Z’s criminal mind. Research also highlights a significant lack of explanatory depth in the approach of intimacy deficits when used alone to contemplate a criminal setting which suggests that relying on intimacy deficits alone to judge sexual offending is not a smart talent strategy. Research done on sex offenders has benefited an army of psychologists on myriad levels in better understanding the reasons behind heinous acts of sexual offense as committed by Mr. Z. It is suggested on grounds of such research that hardcore rapists frequently tend to rationalize their inhuman activities through acknowledging a sense of loneliness. In the case study, Mr. Z also claims that he committed crimes in a depressed state. Rapists and sex-offenders often experience considerably more loneliness in life than regular people or non-offenders (Parton & Day, 2002, p. 41). Because they also have traumatic childhood experiences often which negatively interfere with their ability of self-analysis, they blame many external factors for that dark and acutely distressing loneliness. There is a staggering difference between intimacy levels of sex offenders and non-offenders. Intimacy deficits and abnormal sexual urges as witnessed in Mr. Z are as closely linked as attachment issues and abnormal sexual patterns. The studies conducted by Seidman et al. (1994) in context of reasons behind sexual aggressiveness have several strengths and limitations. The strengths are related to establishing a good relationship powered by evidence between intimacy problems and loneliness suggesting that both are not only a product of imprisonment but also a product of sex offense which instead of filling empty spaces in the offenders’ lives as expected by them leaves them hungrier than ever. This study contributes abundantly to establishing a connection between intimacy deficits and sexual aggressiveness, but its limitation is that intimacy is only analyzed through the lens of relationship with a human while Mr. Z not only tried to get intimate with people by means of assault but also had an equally aggressive passion for animals too. Fear of intimacy is also not explored in the research at length. So, it is factors like this which limit the generalizability of Seidman et al.’s study to a particular set of relationship types. Unfotunately, zoophilia has not been as frenetically researched in male sex offenders as rape and other sex charges. In conclusion, different explanations for Mr. Z’s offensive behavior as discussed above identify that being unable to identify with anyone and going through repeated abuse and bullying at home and school changed him forever for the worse. Secure attachments are critically important in childhood because they leave permanent effects on minds. Being unable to attach to anyone in later life as an adult has huge repercussions as seen in the case of Mr. Z. That inability derives from traumatic childhood and adult life experiences and contributed a lot in stimulating him to engage in zoophilia and rape. To develop a richer understanding of Mr. Z’s character, there is need for more insightful research in other areas as well which looks beyond attachment and intimacy issues. It is quite likely for Mr. Z’s deep character to associate with other psychological explanations also because he displays a diversity of behaviors. References: Bumby, K.M., & Hansen, D.J. (1997). INTIMACY DEFICITS, FEAR OF INTIMACY, AND LONELINESS AMONG SEXUAL OFFENDERS, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24(3), 315–331. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=psychfacpub Cherry, K. (2013). Attachment Theory: The Importance of Early Emotional Bonds. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/loveandattraction/a/attachment01.htm Garlick, Y., Marshall, W.L., & Thornton, D. (1996). Intimacy deficits and attribution of blame among sexual offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 1(2), 251–258. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.1996.tb00323.x Goodrow, K.K., & Lim, M. (1998). Attachment Theory Applied to Juvenile Sex Offending. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 27(1), 149-165. Grotpeter, J.K., & Elliott, D.S. (2002). Violent Sexual Offending. Retrieved from http://dcj.state.co.us/ors/pdf/published_research_articles/del_elliots_sex_offender.pdf Keenan, T., & Ward, T. (2000). A theory of mind perspective on cognitive, affective, and intimacy deficits in child sexual offenders. Sex Abuse, 12(1), 49-60. Marshall, W.L. (1989). Intimacy, loneliness and sexual offenders. Behaviour, Research and Therapy, 27(5), 491-503. Marshall, W.L. (1993). The role of attachments, intimacy, and loneliness in the etiology and maintenance of sexual offending. Sexual and Marital Therapy, 8(2), 109-121. doi: 10.1080/02674659308408187 Martin, G.M., & Tardif, M. (2013). Examining sex offenders' intimacy deficits: their nature and their influence on sexually abusive behaviours. Journal of Sexual Aggression. doi: 10.1080/13552600.2013.849768. McCormack, J., Hudson, S.M., & Ward, T. (2002). Sexual offenders’ perceptions of their early interpersonal relationships: an attachment perspective. The Journal of Sex Research, 39(2). Retrieved from http://www.taasa.org/library/pdfs/TAASALibrary148.pdf McKillop, N., Smallbone, S., Wortley, R., & Andjic, I. (2012). Offenders’ attachment and sexual abuse onset: a test of theoretical propositions. Sexual Abuse, 24(6), 591-610. doi: 10.1177/1079063212445571. Parton, F., & Day, A. (2002). Empathy, intimacy, loneliness and locus of control in child sex offenders: a comparison between familial and non-familial child sexual offenders. Journal of Child Sex Abuse, 11(2), 41-57. Seidman, B.T., Marshall, W.L., Hudson, S.M., & Robertson, P.J. (1994). An examination of intimacy and loneliness in sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9, 518-534. Ward, T., Hudson, S.M., Marshall, W.L., & Siegert, R. (1995). Attachment Style and Intimacy Deficits in Sexual Offenders: A Theoretical Framework. Sex Abuse, 7(4), 317-335. doi: 10.1177/107906329500700407 Wilcox, D.T., Foss, C.M., & Donathy, M.L. (2005). A case study of a male sex offender with zoosexual interests and behaviours. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 11(3), 305-317. Read More