Outcomes in a community sex offender treatment program: A comparison between polygraphed and matched non-polygraphed offenders

Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 381-393

  McGrath, Robert J ^a   Cumming, Georgia F ^b   Hoke, Stephen E ^a   Bonn Miller, Marcel O ^c  

^a Vermont Department of Corrections   (United States)

^b Vermont Center for the Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Abuse   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

Author keywords

Community supervision; Polygraph; Sanction; Sex offender; Treatment outcome

Indexed keywords

EID: 36549031750     PISSN: 10790632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11194-007-9058-z     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Abrams, S., & Abrams, J. (1993). Polygraph testing of the pedophile. Portland, OR: Ryan Gwinner Press.
2. Ahlmeyer, S., Heil, P., McKee, B., & English, K. (2000). The impact of polygraph on admissions of victims and offenses in adult sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 12, 123-138.
3. American Polygraph Association (1995). Standards for post conviction sex offender testing: Practice guideline. Chattanooga, TN: Author.
4. Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2007). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th Ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing.
5. Aos, S., Miller, M., & Drake, E. (2006). Evidence-based adult corrections programs: What works and what does not. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
6. Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (2005). Practice standards and guidelines for the evaluation, treatment, and management of adult male sexual abusers. Beaverton, OR: Author.
7. Branaman, T. F., & Gallagher, S. N. (2005). Polygraph testing in sex offender treatment: A review of limitations. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 23, 45-64.
8. Colorado Sex Offender Management Board (2004). Standards and guidelines for the assessment, evaluation, treatment and behavioral monitoring of adult sex offenders. Denver, CO: Author.
9. Cross, T. P., & Saxe, L. (2001). Polygraph testing and sexual abuse: The lure of the magic lasso. Child Maltreatment, 6, 195-206.
10. Cumming, G. F., & McGrath, R. J. (2000). External supervision: How can it increase the effectiveness of relapse prevention. In D. R. Laws, S. M. Hudson & T. Ward (Eds.), Remaking relapse prevention with sex offenders (pp. 236-253). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11. English, K., Pullen, S., & Jones, L. (1997). Managing adult sex offenders in the community: A containment approach. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
12. Friendship, C., & Thornton, D. (2001). Sexual reconviction for sexual offenders discharged from prison in England and Wales: Implications for evaluating treatment. British Journal of Criminology, 41, 285-292.
13. Gannon, T. A., Beech, A. R., & Ward, T. (in press). Does the polygraph lead to better prediction for sexual offenders? Aggression and Violence Behavior.
14. Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. T. Hartland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work (pp. 117-130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., Cullen, F. T., & Andrews, D. A. (2001). The effects of community sanctions and incarceration on recidivism. In L. L. Montiuk & R. C. Serin (Eds.), Compendium 2000 on effective correctional programming: Vol. 1 (pp. 18-21). Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.
16. Gordon, A., Harris, A., Murphy, W., Seto, M., Hanson, R. K., Marques, J. K., et al. (1998). Collaborative data base of sex offender treatment outcome. Beaverton, OR: Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, July.
17. Grubin, D., Madsen, L., Parsons, S., Sosnowski, D., & Warberg, B. (2004). A prospective study of the impact of polygraphy on high-risk behaviors in adult sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 16, 209-222.
18. Hanson, R. K. (1997). The development of a brief screening scale for sexual offense recidivism. Ottawa: Solicitor General of Canada.
19. Hanson, R. K. (2006). What works: The principles of effective interventions with offenders. Presentation at the 25th Annual Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. Chicago, IL.
20. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154-1163.
21. Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessment for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 119-136.
22. Harris, A., Phenix, A., Hanson, K., & Thornton, D. (2003). Static-99 coding rules. Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
23. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (2002). Prospective replication of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide in predicting violent recidivism among forensic patients. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 377-394.
24. Heil, P., Ahlmeyer, S., & Simmons, D. (2003). Crossover sexual offenses. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 221-236.
25. Hindman, J., & Peters, J. M. (2001). Polygraph testing leads to better understanding adult and juvenile sex offenders. Federal Probation, 65(3), 8-15.
26. Kelly, A. E. (2000) Helping construct desirable identities: A self-preservational view of psychotherapy. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 476-494.
27. Kokish, R. (2003). The current role of post-conviction sex offender polygraph testing in sex offender treatment. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 12, 175-194.
28. Mann, R. E., Webster, S. D., Schofield, C., & Marshall, W. L. (2004). Approach versus avoidance goals in relapse prevention with sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 16, 65-75.
29. Marshall, W. L. (2005). Therapist style in sexual offender treatment: Influence of indices of change. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17, 109-116.
30. McGrath, R. J. (Ed.) (1995). Vermont clinical practices guide for the assessment and treatment of adult sex offenders. Williston, VT: Vermont Center for Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Abuse.
31. McGrath, R. J., Cumming, G. F., & Burchard, B. L. (2003a). Current practices and trends in sexual abuser management: The Safer Society 2002 nationwide survey. Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press.
32. McGrath, R. J., Cumming, G., Livingston, J. A., & Hoke, S. E. (2003b). Outcome of a treatment program for adult sex offenders: From prison to community. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 3-17.
33. McGrath, R. J., & Hoke, S. E. (2001). Vermont assessment of sex offender risk manual. Middlebury, VT: Author.
34. McGrath, R. J., Hoke, S. E., & Vojtisek, J. E. (1998). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of sex offenders: A treatment comparison and long-term follow-up study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 203-225.
35. National Academies of Sciences (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
36. Pullen, S. (1997). Using the polygraph. In K. English, S. Pullen, & L. Jones (Eds.), Managing adult sex offenders in the community: A containment approach (pp. 15.3-15.6). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
37. Raskin, D. C., & Honts, C. R. (2001). The comparison question test. In A. Gale (Ed.), Handbook of polygraph testing (pp. 1-47). New York: Academic Press.
38. Stalans, L. J. (2004). Adult sex offenders on community supervision: A review of recent assessment strategies and treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 564-608.
39. Texas Council on Sex Offender Treatment (2006). Rules and regulations relating to council on sex offender treatment. Austin, TX: Author.
40. Turk, D. C., & Salovey, P. (Eds.) (1988). Reasoning, inference, and judgment in clinical psychology. New York: Free Press.
41. United States Census Bureau (2007). United States Census. [Online] Available: http://www.census.gov.
42. Wilcox, D. T. (2000). Application of the clinical polygraph examination to the assessment, treatment and monitoring of sex offenders. The Journal of Sexual Aggression, 5, 134-152.