CitationDownload as .RIS
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Article Type: Editorial From: Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, Volume 3, Issue 3
This edition of the Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace (JACPR) continues our tradition of including a diverse range of engaging and interesting papers. The papers in this edition all explore risk, each with a different focus. Consistent with JACPR’s aims each paper presents findings of interest to both academics and practitioners with each including both theoretical and practical elements.
We open this edition with a paper by Chi Meng Chu, Michael Daffern, Stuart D.M. Thomas and Jia Ying Lim which explores the “treatment needs of gang-affiliated youth offenders”. Gangs, in one form or another, have represented a concern to societies across geographical and temporal space. Although many gangs may appear largely monetarily motivated, there is also likely to be other criminogenic needs that are being met by affiliation. Chi Meng Chu, Michael Daffern, Stuart D.M. Thomas and Jia Ying Lim explore these needs and compare them to a non-gang sample. Their analysis suggests both similarities and differences in criminogenic needs of gang – as compared to non-gang – affiliated young offenders. The implications of these findings are discussed in terms of treatment and a reduction in re-offending.
Predicting who is likely to re-offend upon release is an important goal for the courts, victims, psychologists/psychiatrists and society at large. Of all re-offences violent ones are the most likely to result in significant harm and to instil the fear in the public and attention from the media. It is, therefore, very important to accurately predict the likelihood of violent re-offending. The second paper is by Philip Howard and Louise Dixon and seeks to develop “an empirical classification of violent offences for use in the prediction of recidivism in England and Wales”. Using a very large forensic sample they create subsets of acts most likely to involve violence and then explore their predictive ability. Their results suggest violent offending is associated with other types of non-violent offending and that such information can be used to more accurately assess risk.
The third paper also explores risk, but from the perspective of trauma risk exposure of therapists. This paper by Arturo Roizblatt, Niels Biederman and Jac Brown and explores the “Therapeutic dilemmas and human rights violations: the experience of therapists working under extreme traumatization in Chile”. Vicarious traumatization in therapists. The authors discuss the very difficult dilemmas therapists from Chile faced when attempting to help clients negatively impacted by the country’s then ongoing political turmoil, repression and major human rights violations. They describe the “therapeutic paradox” experienced where the state of fear created by the regime simultaneously created client distress which required therapeutic intervention, while at the same time requiring therapeutic inaction to avoid being a victim of the regime themselves. In help therapists to effectively function in such systems the author offer useful strategies to protect, improve and enhance therapeutic services during political repression and human rights violations.
The forth paper by Sasha Johnson-Freyd explores the cross-cultural relationship between how much direct parental care men in a pre-inductrial society typically give and that society’s rate of aggression. Drawing on hormonal research, Johnson-Freyd investigates whether societies in which men typically supply large amounts of direct care to their offspring have lower rates of aggression than societies where men provide little or no direct care. The study found interesting differences in effects between inter-nation aggression (aggression directed to other nations) and intra-nation aggression (aggression within the nation).
Finally, there is a practice paper by Richard L. Davis that explores the risk that violence within families and parenting practices pose to crime and violence. In this paper, Richard L. Davis discusses the apparent paradox of allowing bullying and physical assaults upon children by parents as a means of disciplining children, and the aim to reduce violence in families and society at large. Richard L. Davis suggests that in order to effectively intervene in crime and violence it is necessary to start with the lessons children learn within the home. He concludes that coercive and abusive parenting styles are frequent precursors to later criminal and violent behavior both within the family and out on the streets. Richard L. Davis advocates positive parenting as an important measure in tackling these societal problems.
Overall, this edition presents papers all exploring risk from different perspectives. We hope as editors that you find these papers as thought provoking and engaging as we do. Additionally, we welcome submission of papers from readers on any topic within the remit of understanding of human conflict and its resolution.
Nicola Graham-Kevan, Jane L. Ireland, Michelle Davies, Douglas P. Fry