Firesetting and nonfiresetting delinquents a comparison of neuropsychiatric, psychoeducational, experiential, and behavioral characteristics

Ritvo, E; Shanok, Shelley S.; Lewis, Dorothy Otnow

doi:10.1007/bf00709560

Cited by 32 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, since positive reinforcement does not need to be directly experienced for social learning to occur, learning associated with fire may occur vicariously through mere exposure to fires or key models of firesetting behavior (e.g., parents and caregivers). There is indeed some evidence suggesting that firesetters are more likely to have experienced early exposure to fire (see Macht & Mack, 1968;Wolford, 1972), to have experienced fire as a form of punishment (Haines, Lambie, & Seymour, 2006;Ritvo, Shanok, & Lewis, 1983), or to have a family history of firesetting (Rice & Harris, 1991).…”

Section: Single Factor Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Firesetting (M-TTAF)

Gannon

Ciardha

Doley

et al. 2012

Aggression and Violent Behavior

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Single Factor Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Firesetting (M-TTAF)

Gannon

Ciardha

Doley

et al. 2012

Aggression and Violent Behavior

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Vreeland and Levin (1980) argue that firesetting holds instantly reinforcing consequences in the form of (i) the sensory excitement associated with fire, and (ii) the sirens, noise, and (ii) firesetters are raised in environments where fire is more pervasive (e.g., countryside locations; Wolford, 1972) or fire is used as a punishment (Haines, Lambie, & Seymour, 2006;Ritvo, Shanok, & Lewis, 1983), and (iii) firesetters originate from families who hold a history of firesetting (Rice & Harris, 1991).…”

Section: Social Learning Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Firesetting: Psychopathology, theory and treatment

Gannon

Pina

2010

Aggression and Violent Behavior

100

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we comprehensively review the characteristics of adult firesetters, and the etiological features of firesetting. In particular, we pay attention to contemporary research available regarding the core traits and psychopathological features required to understand firesetters, and the classificatory systems and etiological theories developed to understand firesetting. This evaluation of contemporary research suggests that clinical knowledge and practice relating to firesetting is extremely underdeveloped relative to other areas of forensicclinical psychology. We conclude that there are very few etiological theories available to guide consulting clinicians in this area, and little information available specifying the exact criminogenic needs associated with firesetters, or how these needs compare to other offender groups. The significant lack of contemporary treatment programs designed to target firesetting behavior is also noted. We conclude by highlighting core areas for future research and treatment progression. Latest available statistics show that around 323,900 intentionally set fires were recorded by US fire departments in 2005 and these fires caused 490 deaths, 9,100 injuries, and created over 1 billion dollars of costs relating to property destruction (Hall, 2007). Given the enormous societal costs associated with intentional firesetting, it is curious that current psychological understanding of this act is relatively underdeveloped, especially when one compares the extant firesetting literature to that relating to violence or sexual offending. The only existing reviews on firesetting behavior have tended either to focus solely upon child and juvenile firesetters (Kolko, 1985), or have approached firesetting from a psychiatric perspective (Blumberg, 1981;Geller, 1987;Geller, 2008;Ritchie & Huff, 1999). Thus, there is a strong need for a psychologically-informed review on firesetting for consulting clinicians and forensic psychologists who work with adult firesetters.Our paper does not intend to provide an exhaustive review of firesetting since to do so would entail numerous historical pieces. However, we do aim to provide a comprehensive and contemporary overview of the diagnostic criteria, etiological features, theory, and treatment relevant to adult firesetting. Our main aim is to provide clinical practitioners with a comprehensive psychological understanding of adult firesetters, paying particular attention to clinical and etiological features, firesetting behavioral specificity, issues of diagnostic criteria relevant to pathological firesetting, and current treatment issues. Based upon this review, we then make some suggestions for future empirical research and evidence-based practice relevant to firesetting. In order to increase the clarity and focus of this review, and unless otherwise stated, we will focus our discussions on firesetting committed by individuals over the age of 18. We will, however, refer to research with juveniles and children where we feel it is appropriate to ...

show abstract

“…In the last 20 years, three general domains have emerged for risk factors associated with fire setting: characteristics of the child, aspects of parenting, and the broader family climate. Among the (Gruber, Heck, & Mintzer, 1981;Jacobson, 1985;Sakheim & Osborn, 1999;Showers & Pickrell, 1987), having higher impulsivity or traits of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Geller, 1992;Sakheim & Osborn, 1986), having social skill deficits and poor peer relations (Kolko, Kazdin, & Meyer, 1985;Sakheim & Osborn, 1999;Sakheim, Osborn, & Abrams, 1991;Sakheim, Vigdor, Gordon, & Helprin, 1985), displaying other conduct problems or antisocial behavior (Heath, Hardesty, Goldfine, & Walker, 1985;Showers & Pickrell, 1987), or having been abused (Jayaprakash, Jung, & Panitch, 1984;Ritvo, Shanok, & Lewis, 1982;Showers & Pickrell, 1987). Parenting factors that have been empirically linked to firesetting behavior include harsh (Jayaprakash et al, 1984) or lax (Kolko & Kazdin, 1990) discipline, lack of parental involvement (Kolko & Kazdin, 1990), less parental acceptance of the child (Kolko & Kazdin, 1990), and limited monitoring and supervision (Kazdin & Kolko, 1986;Kolko & Kazdin, 1990;Sakheim & Osborn, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Domains of risk in the developmental continuity of fire setting

McCarty

McMahon

2005

Behavior Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Juvenile fire setting is a serious, dangerous, and costly behavior. The majority of research examining youth fire setting has been cross-sectional. We sought to examine early risk attributes that could differentiate fire setters from non-fire setters, in addition to examining their association with the developmental continuity of fire-setting behavior into late childhood. Using a sample of 361 youth drawn from 4 different U.S. communities, this study examined the association between a broad array of risk variables from the child, parent, and family domains, and fire-setting behavior over the course of 2 developmental periods: prior to 4th grade, and between 4th and 6th grade. Youth were classified into I of 4 groups (non-fire setters, desisters, later-onset fire setters, and persisters) based on their reported fire-setting behavior during these periods. Children who set fires had higher levels of risk on most of the variables assessed. Persistence of fire setting was associated with elevated parental depressive symptoms and more interparental conflict and ineffective discipline. The findings highlight the need for multi-component preventive interventions to address the breadth of risk experienced by fire-setting youth and their families.JUVENILE FIRE setting represents a behavior that can become serious, dangerous, and costly. Juveniles are arrested for a greater share of arsons than any other type of crime, accounting for 50% of the fire-setting offenders, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (U.S. Department of Justice, 1999). Additionally, fire setting may be a marker of more seriously disturbed youth, as fire-setting youth tend to exhibit a variety of aggressive and antisocial acts (Stickle & Blechman, 2002). Youth who are actually adjudicated for arson have increased probability of being placed in a residential treatment facility. Even preadolescent youth represent a large proportion of fire setters who have caused serious damage; for example, over one-third of the juvenile arson arrests in 1997 involved children age 12 or younger (U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).Despite the lack of strong theory in this area, knowledge about fire setting has been greatly advanced through the research and conceptual framework developed by Kazdin (e.g., 1985, 1992), most of which has focused on youth between the ages of 6 and 13. In the last 20 years, three general domains have emerged for risk factors associated with fire setting: characteristics of the child, aspects of parenting, and the broader family climate. Among the (Gruber, Heck, & Mintzer, 1981;Jacobson, 1985;Sakheim & Osborn, 1999;Showers & Pickrell, 1987), having higher impulsivity or traits of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Geller, 1992;Sakheim & Osborn, 1986), having social skill deficits and poor peer relations (Kolko, Kazdin, & Meyer, 1985;Sakheim & Osborn, 1999;Sakheim, Osborn, & Abrams, 1991;Sakheim, Vigdor, Gordon, & Helprin, 1985), displaying other conduct problems or antisocial behavior (Heath, Hardesty, Goldfin...

show abstract

Firesetting and nonfiresetting delinquents a comparison of neuropsychiatric, psychoeducational, experiential, and behavioral characteristics

Cited by 32 publications

References 12 publications

The Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Firesetting (M-TTAF)

The Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Firesetting (M-TTAF)

Firesetting: Psychopathology, theory and treatment

Domains of risk in the developmental continuity of fire setting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About