Denial and Minimization Among Sex Offenders: A Review of Competing Models of Deception

Rogers, Richard; Dickey, Rob

doi:10.1177/107906329100400103

Cited by 32 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants' perspectives of why they denied in such settings seemed to support Rogers and Dickey's (1991) adaptational model of denial. However the adaptational model does not appear to fully capture the experiences of denial and offenders concerns of neutralizing the label 'sex offender'.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Simon's experience of a local establishment served to entrench his denial, more as a situational response to fear and threat. Although not in a therapeutic climate, this does highlight that direct confrontation of individuals offence denial, particularly if the individual perceives themselves in adversarial settings (see Rogers & Dickey, 1991), is likely to cause resistance and to further entrench the denial state. Most participants felt that engaging deniers in some offending behaviour programmes would be positive and should be encouraged.…”

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…This is reminiscent of Rogers and Dickey's (1991) adapational model, which considers rational choice elements of denial. This model rests on three assumptions: (1) the individual sees that they are in an adversarial setting, (2) they believe that if they disclose their offence they have something to lose and that there is something to be gained from denial, and (3) the individual considers what the best approach is for them to achieve their goals.…”

Section: Conscious and Relational Denialmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…There are obvious benefits to denying one's guilt Á particularly prior to conviction Á since denial of wrongdoing (pleading 'not guilty') may result in acquittal, given that prosecution for sexual offences typically relies on the testimony of the victim alone. In short, denial may be a gamble worth taking, as it could aid an individual in avoiding some of the internal and external negative consequences associated with admitting an offence (Rogers & Dickey, 1991). However, at other times, denial ceases having a positive impact (at least short term); for example, an individual who denies to the police and courts that they have committed any offence will not be eligible for any reductions in sentence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

Blagden

Winder

Thorne³

et al. 2011

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Conscious and Relational Denialmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

Blagden

Winder

Thorne³

et al. 2011

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, denial may be related to recidivism for psychopathic sexual offenders but not for non-psychopathic sexual offenders. For psychopaths, denial may reflect hostility, pathological lying, and manipulation (Hare 1991), whereas for the non-psychopaths, it may be motivated by guilt and embarrassment (Hanson andMorton-Bourgon 2004, 2005;Rogers and Dickey 1991;Sewell and Salekin 1997;Ward et al 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Denial Predicts Recidivism for Some Sexual Offenders

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined whether there were variables that moderated the relationship between denial and recidivism among adult male sexual offenders. The first study (N = 489) found that the relationship with sexual recidivism was moderated by risk (as measured by the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sexual Offense Recidivism) but not by psychopathy (as measured by the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised). Contrary to expectations, denial was associated with increased sexual recidivism among the low-risk offenders and with decreased recidivism among the high-risk offenders. Post hoc analyses suggested that the risk item most responsible for the interaction was "relationship to victims". For incest offenders, denial was associated with increased sexual recidivism, but denial was not associated with increased recidivism for offenders with unrelated victims. These interactions were substantially replicated in two independent samples (N = 490 and N = 73). The results suggest that denial merits further consideration for researchers as well as those involved in applied risk assessment of sexual offenders.

show abstract

Denial and minimization among sex offenders

Dietz

2020

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A review of empirical studies of offenders-particularly sex offenders, and more particularly those who offend against children-demonstrates that denial of offenses and minimization of offending behavior are quite common at every stage of the criminal justice process. This is true during police interviews, during pretrial and presentencing mental health evaluations, among incarcerated offenders, among offenders seeking treatment, among offenders facing parole review, and among offenders already released into the community. This review highlights gaps in the research literature arising from inconsistencies in the definitions and measurement of denial and minimization, from the stage of adjudication or treatment at which measurements are made, and from the use of polygraphy to increase disclosures. Despite these limitations on the generalizability of empirical findings, it appears beyond dispute that many sex offenders maintain their innocence in the face of evidence to the contrary or even criminal conviction, and that many are able to recite additional crimes they have committed when they believe it is in their self-interest to do so. 1 | INTRODUCTION Sex offenses are regularly underreported. Not unexpectedly, those who regularly underreport sex offenses include the offenders themselves. This brief review focuses on the frequency with which offenders-particularly sex offenders, and more particularly those who offend against children-deny or minimize having committed the crimes of which they are suspected or for which they have been convicted. It focuses on empirical studies of suspected or convicted offenders in which researchers have quantified the number of subjects admitting or denying the offense.

show abstract

Denial and Minimization Among Sex Offenders: A Review of Competing Models of Deception

Cited by 32 publications

References 44 publications

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

Denial Predicts Recidivism for Some Sexual Offenders

Denial and minimization among sex offenders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About