Journal of Sexual Aggression (September 2005), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp.

249 /258

The emotional intelligence of adult sex offenders: ability based EI assessment

Michelle L. Puglia, Con Stough,* James D. Carter & Megan Joseph
Brain Sciences Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn 3122, Victoria, Australia

Abstract Previous research has suggested that sex offenders are deficient in several areas of emotional functioning such as empathy, emotional perception, emotional management and interpersonal functioning. It is unclear, however, whether sex offenders display a general deficit in emotional functioning or whether their emotional deficits are specific to the circumstances in which offences occur. The present study aimed to provide a broad assessment of the emotional functioning of sex offenders by assessing their emotional intelligence (EI) using an abilities-based emotional intelligence test. Nineteen sex offenders, 18 non-sex offending prisoners and 19 controls were administered the Perception, Assimilation and Management branch subtests from the Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). The results indicated that the sex offenders were not significantly different than the control group, as assessed by these three branches of the MSCEIT. The results lend support to the suggestion that the emotional deficits displayed by sex offenders may be offence-specific. Implications for the use of the MSCEIT in sex offending populations and the role of EI in relapse prevention programmes are discussed. Keywords sex offending; emotional intelligence; MSCEIT; emotions; empathy

Introduction Several studies have demonstrated that sex offenders display deficits in a number of emotional functions, including empathy (Fisher, Beech & Browne, 1999; Marshall, Hudson, Jones & Fernandez, 1995; Rice, Chaplin, Harris & Coutts, 1994; Scully, 1988), emotional perception (Lisak & Ivan, 1995; Malamuth & Brown, 1994; Marshall et al., 1995; Scully, 1988), the management of negative emotions (Bridges, Wilson & Gacono, 1998; Brown & Forth, 1997) and interpersonal relationships (Bumby & Hansen, 1997; McKibben, Proulx & Lusignan, 1994; Overholser & Beck, 1986). Such emotional deficits appear to be related to the commission of offences (Grubin, 1997; Ward, Louden, Hudson & Marshall, 1995) and also appear to be a key factor in relapse (Ward et al., 1995). Modern relapse prevention programmes developed for sex offenders are multifaceted and address the cognitive,
*Corresponding author: Professor C. Stough, Brain Sciences Institute, Mail 99, Swinburne University, PO Box 218, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia. Tel: '/61 3 9214 8167. Fax: '61 3 9214 5230. E-mail: cstough@swin. / edu.au

ISSN 1355-2600 print/1742-6545 online # 2005 National Organisation for the Treatment of Abusers DOI: 10.1080/13552600500271384

250

M. L. Puglia et al.

behavioural and affective functioning of these offenders (Marshall, 1996, 199; Nagayama Hall, 1995). The affective components of such programmes aim to improve empathy (Marshall, 1996; Pithers, 1994, 1999), emotional control (Nagayama Hall; Roger & Masters, 1997) and interpersonal functioning (Hayes, Brownell & Barlow, 1983; Marshall, 1999). As recidivism rates remain high (Serin, Mailloux & Malcolm, 2001), it is important to continue to revise and develop the therapeutic approach to emotional functioning in sex offenders (Hilton, 1993). While many studies have demonstrated that sex offenders display deficits in particular emotional functions, few studies have assessed multiple emotional functions in order to provide a broad assessment of emotional functioning in sex offenders. It is important to do so, as it is unclear whether sex offenders display a general emotional deficit or whether the emotional deficits they display are specific to the victim or specific to the circumstances in which the sex offences occur (offence-specific). Hudson et al. (1993) provided evidence to suggest that sex offenders do display general deficits in emotional function. They found that when compared to violent offenders, both the rapists and paedophiles were significantly less sensitive to the perception of emotion displayed in photographs of target faces of both males and females. They also found that compared to controls, paedophiles were less accurate in the perception of emotions in both adult and child targets. In contrast, Fernandez, Marshall, Lightbody and OSullivan (1999) suggested that sex offenders general ability to perceive emotions is normal, as is their capacity for empathy, and that their deficits in empathy and perception are displayed only towards their victims, or those like their victims. Fernandez et al. reported that 61 paedophiles were able to perceive the emotions of, and empathize with, a child who had been disfigured in a car accident, but were significantly less able to perceive the emotions of, and empathize with, a child victim of sexual abuse. Furthermore, the paedophiles displayed their greatest deficits in empathy and emotional perception towards their own victims. Similarly, Pithers (1999) provided evidence for a context-specific empathy deficit in a group of 30 sex offenders. The sex offenders scored significantly lower on a self-report measure of empathy while in the same dysphoric mood experienced prior to an attack than when in typical moods. It is therefore unclear whether sex offenders display general or offence-specific deficits in emotional functioning. The assessment of Emotional Intelligence (EI) may provide a comprehensive method by which to assess the general emotional functioning of sex offenders. EI is a novel construct that generally refers to a range of emotional capacities that are believed collectively to contribute to successful functioning in many spheres of life (BarOn, 1997; Goleman, 1996; Mayer & Salovey, 1997). To date, the EI of sex offenders has been reported in only one previous study. Moriarty, Stough, Tidmarsh, Eger and Dennison (2001) reported that juvenile sex offenders displayed lower levels of self-reported EI than did adolescent controls. Specifically, they found that a group of 15 sex offenders were less clear about their feelings and had more difficulty identifying them, were more aggressive and were less able to moderate negative moods and prolong positive moods than a group of 49 age-matched male controls. These results suggested that juvenile sex offenders display a deficit in general emotional functioning. Apart from juvenile sex offenders, the EI of convicted criminals and of individuals on parole has also been reported to be lower than the EI of a normative sample (BarOn, 1997; Smith, 2001). However, EI has not been assessed in adult sex offenders and this is the aim of the present study. For the purposes of the present study, the Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test, research version 1.1 (MSCEIT, version 1.1, Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 1999) was employed as a measure of EI. As a performance-based measure, the MSCEIT avoids

The emotional intelligence of adult sex offenders

251

problems such as impression management and distorted self-concept, inherent in self-report assessments, particularly self-report assessments of offender populations (Grossman, Haywood & Wasyliw, 1992; Haywood, Grossman & Hardy, 1993; Kalichman, 1990; Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2000). The MSCEIT has been reported to be a reliable and a valid measure of the four-branch mental ability model of EI (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2000b). These four branches are: (1) perception, which refers to the ability to accurately perceive emotions and emotional content (Mayer & Salovey, 1997); (2) assimilation, which refers to the ability to integrate emotions with other mental processes (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2000a, 2000b); (3) understanding, which refers to the ability to understand the nature of emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997); and (4) management, which refers to the capacity to consciously regulate emotions in an adaptive and productive manner (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey, Bedell, Detweiller & Mayer, 2000). In the present study, the subtests relevant to only three of the four branches were administered, as limited time was available to test incarcerated participants and it was therefore necessary to reduce the length of the measure. As the Understanding branch subtests have been found to have the lowest internal consistency (Palmer & Stough, 2002), these subtests were not administered in the present study. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the general emotional functioning of adult male sex offenders on a range of emotional abilities from the Perception, Assimilation and Management branches of the mental ability model of EI. In order to account for the influence that factors such as criminality and incarceration may have on emotional functioning, a group of incarcerated, adult sex offenders was compared to a group of incarcerated offenders convicted of offences other than sex offences (non-sex offending prisoners) as well as a group of normal, age-matched controls. It was hypothesized that sex offenders would produce significantly lower scores on the Perception, Assimilation and Management branches of the MSCEIT than both non-sex offending prisoners and normal controls. A further aim of the present study was to conduct a reliability analysis of the MSCEIT within the offender groups. The internal consistency of the MSCEIT subtests has been demonstrated in an assessment of 309 respondents from the Australian Standardization Sample (Palmer & Stough, 2002). However, the MSCEIT has not been administered previously to an offending population and, as such, the internal consistency of the MSCEIT within this group has not been demonstrated.

Method Participants Participants were 19 incarcerated sex offenders (mean age0/44.42 years, SD 0/10.65), 18 incarcerated non-sex offending prisoners (mean age0/31.72 years, SD 0/6.22) and 19 control participants with no criminal history (mean age 0/43.37, SD 0/11.03). The sex offenders were significantly older than the non-sex offending prisoners (t35 0/4.40, p B/0.001), but there was no significant age difference between sex offenders and controls (t36 0/0.30, p /0.05). There was no significant difference in the years of education between the sex offenders (M0/11.58 years, SD0/1.12) and non-sex offending prisoners (M0/11.11 years, SD 0/1.13), (t35 0/1.26, p /0.05). Although an attempt was made to match the controls to sex offenders on education, the vast majority of the males from the Australian Standardization Sample (Palmer & Stough, 2002) had completed secondary school, but many of the sex offenders from the current sample had not. As a consequence, the controls selected for the current

252

M. L. Puglia et al.

study had completed significantly more years of education (M0/12.89 years, SD0/2.26) than the sex offenders (t36 0/ (/2.27, pB/0.05). Previous research has indicated that older age and higher levels of education are associated with higher levels of EI (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 1999). As there were significant differences between the age and years of education of the groups in the present study, these variables were treated as covariates in the data analysis. All sex offenders were recruited from Her Majestys Prison, Ararat; non-sex offending prisoners were recruited from HM Prison Ararat and Her Majestys Prison Langi Kal Kal. The controls were selected from the Australian Standardization Sample (n 0/119 males) (Palmer & Stough, 2002) and were matched for age with the sex offenders. All participants were male. The sex offender group consisted of both child sex offenders and those who offended against adults. The sex offenders were serving sentences for a range of contact and non-contact sexual offences including rape, penetration of a minor, stalking and child prostitution. Length of sentence ranged from 6 months to natural life. The non-sex offending prisoners were currently serving sentences for a range of offences such as armed robbery, finance offences and driving and drug-related offences. Length of sentence ranged from 2 months to 6 years. None of the non-sex offending prisoners had been convicted previously of a sex offence. Materials The Perception, Assimilation and Management branch subtests from the MSCEIT, version 1.1 were administered. The Perception branch includes the Faces, Landscapes and Designs subtests. On each of these subtests, subjects are required to indicate, on a five-point scale, the extent to which an emotion is expressed in photographs of either a face, a landscape or an abstract design. All three subtests consist of 35 items. The Assimilation branch includes the Synaesthesia, Sensation Translation and Facilitation subtests. The Synaesthesia subtest requires the test-taker to generate a given emotion and indicate how similar that emotion is to each of five sensory adjectives, (e.g. cold, blue, sweet). The Sensation Translation subtest requires the test-taker to imagine feeling a number of sensations simultaneously, for example, feeling bitter, warm and heavy, and then indicate the extent to which this combination of sensations is similar to each of five emotions (e.g. sad, frustrated, happy). The Facilitation subtest requires subjects to indicate the extent to which five different emotions would facilitate the completion of particular activities, such as following a recipe. The Management branch includes the Emotional Management and Social Management subtests. The Emotional Management subtest consists of 30 items and requires subjects to indicate how effective five possible courses of action would be in regulating or managing an individuals internal emotions. The Social Management subtest consists of 25 items and requires subjects to indicate how effective five possible courses of action would be in regulating or managing emotions in order to achieve a satisfactory outcome in a social situation. Scoring the MSCEIT Consensus scoring was used to assess performance on the MSCEIT as this method has previously been found to be most appropriate (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 1999). Consensus scoring is based on the premise that a higher level of agreement with the standardization sample equates with better performance on the ability under assessment (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2000; Mayer, DiPaolo & Salovey, 1990). Consensus scores were calculated for each

The emotional intelligence of adult sex offenders

253

item of the MSCEIT. Item scores were summed to provide subtest total scores. Subtest scores from a given branch were then summed to calculate branch scores. Procedure Subjects were recruited by placing advertisements on prison notice boards. A research assistant, employed by the Department of Justice, Victoria, as a therapist at both Ararat and Langi Kal Kal Prisons, administered the MSCEIT to the offender participants. Data from the prison files of the sex offenders and the non-sex offenders, including age and years of education, was obtained by the therapist and used to complete information sheets for each participant. In order to categorise sex offenders and non-sex offending prisoners, information pertaining to current and previous criminal convictions was also requested. The three-branch version of the MSCEIT was presented to the offender participants in the form of two booklets: Form A and Form B. Form A contained the Assimilation and Management subtests and the written components of the Perception subtests. Form B contained the visual stimuli of the Perception subtests. The participants were requested to refer to the corresponding visual stimulus in Form B when completing each Perception subtest. The subtests were presented in the following order: Faces, Synaesthesia, Emotions in Relationships, Designs, Facilitation, Landscapes, Emotional Management and Sensation Translation. Offenders completed the measures as part of weekly therapy sessions in groups. The MSCEIT required approximately 30 minutes to complete. Calculation of the offenders consensus scores were based on response frequencies per item taken from the males of the Australian Standardization Sample (Palmer & Stough, 2002). Branch totals were calculated for offender participants. Overall EI scores were not calculated due to the omission of the Understanding branch subtests from the assessment. Reliability analyses A reliability analysis was conducted on the Perception, Assimilation and Management branch subtests in order to assess the internal consistency of the MSCEIT when used in offender populations (n0/37). This analysis revealed the following values of Cronbachs alpha for each subtest: Perception subtests-Faces a 0/0.82, Landscapes a 0/0.90, Designs a 0/0.87; Assimilation subtests */Synaesthesia a 0/0.86, Facilitation a0/0.82, Sensation translation a 0/0.75; Management subtests */Social Management a 0/0.79; Emotional Management a 0/0.78. The values of Cronbachs alphas for the three branches were as follows: Perception a 0/0.94, Assimilation a 0/0.92 and Management a 0/0.86. The results of the reliability analyses suggest that the Perception, Assimilation and Management branch subtests of the MSCEIT are reliable when administered to offender populations.

Results Mean Perception, Assimilation and Management branch scores and standard error estimates for each group are presented in Table I. Years of education was found to moderately correlate with Assimilation (r0/0.31, p B/0.05) and age was found to correlate moderately with Management (r 0/0.34, p B/0.05). Relationships approaching significance were also found between education and Perception (r 0/0.27, pB/0.10) and age and Assimilation (r 0/0.22, pB/0.10). Therefore, the effects of age and education were partialled out of the main analyses.

254

M. L. Puglia et al.

Table I. Estimated mean branch scores for the sex offenders, non-sex offending prisoners and controls. Sex offendersa Branch Perception Assimilation Management
a

Non-sex offendersb M 38.04* 26.86 17.15 SE 1.67 1.24 0.72

controlsa M 44.87 27.93 17.63 SE 1.55 1.16 0.67

M 45.20* 30.04 18.42

SE 1.53 1.14 0.66

n 0/19; bn0/18; *indicates pB/0.01.

Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was employed to assess group differences on Perception, Assimilation and Management branch scores. Age and education acted as covariates. The mancova revealed that after accounting for the effects of age and education, there was a significant difference between the three groups on EI (Wilks lambda 0/0.77, F(6,98)0/2.22, pB/.05, eta squared0/0.120). An ancova revealed that the three groups significantly differed on Perception (F2,51 0/5.42, p B/0.01, eta squared 0/0.040). Planned contrasts revealed that sex offenders scored significantly higher on Perception than the nonsex offending prisoners (pB/0.01). There was no significant difference between the Perception scores of sex offenders and controls (p /0.05). Separate ancovas revealed that the three groups did not differ significantly on Assimilation scores (F2,51 0/1.78, p /0.05, eta squared0/0.065) or on Management scores (F2,51 0/0.82 p/0.05, eta squared0/0.031).

Discussion The results of the present study indicate that sex offenders do not display a deficit in EI when compared to non-sex offenders and normal controls, suggesting that sex offenders do not display a general deficit in emotional functioning. The EI of sex offenders, as assessed by the perception, assimilation and management branch subtests of the MSCEIT, was comparable to that of non-sex offenders and normal controls. The sex offenders in fact displayed higher scores than both the non-sex offending prisoners and the controls on all three branches of the MSCEIT, although this difference was significant only between sex offenders and non-sex offending prisoners on the Perception branch. The finding that sex offenders did not display a deficit in emotional function contrasts with the findings of previous studies in which sex offenders have been found to display deficits in particular emotional functions such as emotional perception, interpersonal relationships and empathy (Fisher et al., 1999; Hudson et al., 1993; Marshall, Hudson, Jones & Fernandez, 1995; Moriarty, Stough, Tidmarsh, Eger & Dennison, 2000; Overholser & Beck, 1986). As sex offenders did not display a general deficit in emotional functioning, the findings of the present study lend support to the suggestion that emotional deficits that are displayed by sex offenders are more likely to be specific to the circumstances in which the sex offences are committed (Fernandez et al., 1999; Pithers, 1999). For example, the results of the present study suggest that sex offenders do have effective knowledge on how to manage emotions. However, if their emotional deficiencies are offence-specific, they may not have the capacity to implement that knowledge under specific circumstances, such as an interpersonal crisis, and this may lead to an attack. Such a suggestion has important implications for the design of relapse prevention programmes for sex offenders, as treatment would need to focus on the offence-specific nature of these deficits in order to be effective.

The emotional intelligence of adult sex offenders

255

Considering the individual branches of the MSCEIT that were assessed, the finding that sex offenders ability to perceive emotions in external stimuli was no different to that of normal controls and was superior to that of other convicted prisoners contrasts with previous research which has suggested that sex offenders do display an emotional perception deficit (Hudson et al., 1993) but is similar to that of Giannini and Fellows (1986), who found that the ability to perceive emotions in facial expressions in rapists was superior to that of a control group. The finding that sex offenders did not differ from non-sex offenders or normal controls on the assimilation branch subtests suggests that sex offenders do not display a deficit in the ability to assimilate emotion with thought, an important finding given that assimilation abilities have not been assessed previously in sex offender populations. The finding that sex offenders did not display a deficit on the management subtests of the MSCEIT suggests that they have an adequate understanding of how to manage emotions effectively. This contrasts with previous research, which has found sex offenders to be deficient in both the management of their own emotions (Kalichman, 1990; Looman, 1995; Moriarty et al., 2001) and the management of emotions associated with interpersonal situations (Groth, Burgess & Holstrom, 1977; Marshall, 1989; McKibben et al., 1994). This inconsistency may be due to the fact that in the current study, the sex offenders knowledge on how to best manage emotions was assessed generally by evaluating the best course of action taken by a fictional character in a hypothetical situation, whereas in most previous studies, sex offenders have been assessed for their capacity in managing their own emotions and this has often been carried out by self-report (Looman, 1995; Moriarity et al., 2001). It is possible that sex offenders may possess adequate theoretical knowledge on effective emotional management strategies but may nevertheless experience difficulty managing their own emotions, particularly when experiencing intense emotional states, which is often the case during the lead-up to an attack (Brown & Forth, 1997; Ward et al., 1995). It should be considered that the findings of the present study suggest that sex offenders do not display a general deficit in EI, as assessed by the MSCEIT. Therefore, the differences in findings between the present study and those of previous studies may be due to the different instruments that have been used to measure emotional functioning. In most previous studies, self-report measures or vignettes have been used (Fernandez et al., 1999; Fisher et al., 1999; Looman, 1995; Malamuth & Brown, 1994; Moriarty et al., 2001). These measures rely on the test-takers capacity to identify and report their own emotional functioning accurately, often in scenarios that are particularly relevant to the circumstances surrounding the type of offences that they commit. The MSCEIT, on the other hand, provides a more general measure of overall emotional intelligence and relies on a consensus scoring method. Hence, the different methods of assessing emotional function may contribute to the differences in findings between studies. When evaluating the findings of the present study, it is important to consider that a high level of EI may not only be used for altruistic purposes but also for malevolent purposes (Giannini & Fellows, 1986; Howitt, 1995; Pithers, 1999; Salovey et al., 2000). As sex offenders in the present study were found to display well-developed levels of emotional intelligence, the findings of the present study support the possibility that some sex offenders may utilize their EI malevolently in order to manipulate potential victims. As such, it is possible that current relapse prevention programmes that are designed to enhance empathy, social skills and other emotional skills may inadvertently increase sex offenders capacity to manipulate potential victims (Hilton, 1993; Roys, 1997). Further studies are required to investigate whether well-developed EI is actually used malevolently by some sex offenders. In such studies, it may be appropriate to separately assess the EI of different types of sex

256

M. L. Puglia et al.

offenders, in accordance with Diagnostic and Statistical Man ual version IV (DSM-IV) classifications (APA, 2000), as it has been suggested that the emotional functioning of sex offenders may differ between types (Dennison, Stough & Birgden, 2001; Fisher et al., 1999; Hillbrand, Foster & Hirt, 1990; Langevin, Paitich, Freeman, Mann & Handy, 1978). While sex offenders in the present study did not display a deficit in EI, the non-sex offending prisoners displayed the lowest branch scores of the three groups, a finding that is consistent with previous studies in which the EI of convicted criminals has been reported to be lower than that displayed in normative samples (BarOn, 1997; Smith, 2001). The assessment of EI may therefore prove to be useful in assessing the emotional deficiencies of non-sex offenders and may also be used to determine the offenders level of progress in therapy, as it is believed that EI can be improved with education (Goleman, 1996; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Mayer et al., 2000). The assessment of EI could also be used to identify individuals that are most likely to reoffend (Smith, 2001). Finally, the results of the present study revealed that the subtests from the Perception, Assimilation and Management branches of the MSCEIT displayed a high level of internal consistency when administered to sex offenders and non-sex offenders, suggesting that the MSCEIT is a reliable assessment tool for these populations. However, if the emotional deficits of sex offenders are offence-specific then the MSCEIT, as a global or non-specific measure of emotional functioning, is unlikely to reveal deficits in the use of emotions in this group. In conclusion, the results of the present study indicate that the EI of sex offenders, as assessed by the perception, assimilation and management branches of the MSCEIT, is not deficient when compared to normal controls and other incarcerated non-sex offending prisoners. The results suggest that sex offenders do not display a general deficit in emotional functioning. Further study is required to determine whether emotional deficits displayed by sex offenders are offence-specific and whether sex offenders may utilize their EI for maladaptive purposes. Future research could also examine non-ability assessment of emotional intelligence. Of particular benefit may be 360-degree assessment of emotional intelligence in which self-appraisal is contrasted with expert or care-giver rater-appraisal of emotional intelligence.

References
American Psychiatric Association (APA) (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn, text revision). Washington, DC: Author. BarOn, R. (1997). Development of the BarOn EQ-I: a measure of emotional and social intelligence. Proceedings of the 105th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association , Chicago. Bridges, M., Wilson, J. & Gacono, C. (1998). A Rorschach investigation of defensiveness, self perception, interpersonal relations and affective states in incarcerated paedophiles. Journal of Personality Assessment , 70 , 365 /385. Brown, S. & Forth, A. (1997). Psychopathy and sexual assault: static risk factors, emotional precursors and rapist subtypes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65 , 848 /857. Bumby, K. & Hansen, D. (1997). Intimacy decits, fear of intimacy and loneliness among sexual offenders. Criminal Justice and Behaviour , 24 , 315 /331. Dennison, S., Stough, C. & Birgden, A. (2001). The big 5 dimensional personality approach to understanding sex offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 7 , 243 /261. Fernandez, Y., Marshall, W., Lightbody, S. & OSullivan, C. (1999). The child molester empathy measure: description and examination of its reliability and validity. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment , 11 , 17 /32. Fisher, D., Beech, A. & Browne, K. (1999). Comparison of sex offenders to nonoffenders on selected psychological measures. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43 , 473 /491. Giannini, A. & Fellows, K. (1986). Enhanced interpretation of nonverbal facial cues in male rapists: a preliminary study. Archives of Sexual Behaviour , 15 , 153 /156.

The emotional intelligence of adult sex offenders

257

Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence: Why it Can Matter More than IQ . Great Britain: Bloomsbury Publishing. Grossman, L., Haywood, T. & Wasyliw, O. (1992). The evaluation of truthfulness in alleged sex offenders self reports: 16PF and MMPI validity scales. Journal of Personality Assessment , 59 , 264 /275. Groth, A., Burgess, A. & Holstrom, L. (1977). Rape: Power, anger and sexuality. American Journal of Psychiatry, 134 , 1239 /1243. Grubin, D. (1997). Predictors of risk in serious sexual offenders. British Journal of Psychiatry, 170 (Suppl. 32) , 17 /21. Hayes, S., Brownell, K. & Barlow, D. (1983). Hetero-social skills training and covert sensitisation effects on social skills and sexual arousal in sexual deviants. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 21 , 383 /392. Haywood, T., Grossman, L. & Hardy, D. (1993). Denial and social desirability in clinical evaluations of alleged sex offenders. Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases , 181 , 183 /189. Hillbrand, M., Foster, H. & Hirt, M. (1990). Rapists and child molesters: psychometric properties. Archives of Sexual Behaviour , 19 , 65 /71. Hilton, Z. (1993). Childhood sexual victimization and lack of empathy in child molesters: explanation or excuse? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 37 , 287 /296. Howitt, D. (1995). Paedophiles and Sexual Offences Against Children . New York: John Wiley & Sons. Hudson, S., Marshall, W., Wales, D., McDonald, E., Bakker, L. & McLean, A. (1993). Emotional recognition skills of sex offenders. Annals of Sex Research , 6 , 199 /211. Kalichman, S. (1990). Affective and personality characteristics of MMPI prole subgroups of incarcerated rapists. Archives of Sexual Behaviour , 19 , 443 /459. Langevin, R., Paitich, D., Freeman, R., Mann, K. & Handy, L. (1978). Personality characteristics and sexual anomolies in males. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science , 10 , 222 /238. Lisak, D. & Ivan, C. (1995). Decits in intimacy and empathy in sexually aggressive men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 10 , 296 /308. Looman, J. (1995). Sexual fantasies of child molesters. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science , 27 , 321 /332. Malamuth, N. & Brown, L. (1994). Sexually aggressive mens perceptions of womens communications: testing three explanations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 , 699 /712. Marshall, W. (1989). Intimacy, loneliness and sexual offenders. Behavioural Research and Therapy, 27 , 491 /503. Marshall, W. (1996). Assessment, treatment, and theorising about sex offenders: developments during the past twenty years and future directions. Criminal Justice and Behaviour , 23 , 162 /199. Marshall, W. (1999). Current status of North American assessment and treatment programs for sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 14 , 221 /239. Marshall, W., Hudson, S., Jones, R. & Fernandez, Y. (1995). Empathy in sex offenders. Clinical Psychology Review, 15 , 99 /113. Mayer, J., Caruso, D. & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence , 27 , 1 /32. Mayer, J., Caruso, D. & Salovey, P. (2000). Selecting a measure of emotional intelligence: The case for ability scales. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School, and in the Workplace (pp. 320 /342). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mayer, J., DiPaolo, M. & Salovey, P. (1990). Perceiving affective content in ambiguous visual stimuli: a component of emotional intelligence. Journal of Personality Assessment , 54 , 772 /781. Mayer, J. & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Implications for Educators (pp. 3 /31). New York: Basic Books. Mayer, J., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D. (1999). MSCEIT (Research version 1.1) . Toronto Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Mayer, J., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D. (2000a). Competing models of emotional intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Human Intelligence (2nd edn) (pp. 396 /420). New York: Camebridge. Mayer, J., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D. (2000b). Test Manual for the MSCEIT V The Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional .2: Intelligence Test, version 2 [mockup draft of 1st edition] . Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems, Inc. McKibben, A., Proulx, J. & Lusignan, R. (1994). Relationships between conict, affect and deviant sexual behaviour in rapists and paedophiles. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32 , 571 /575. Moriarty, N., Stough, C., Tidmarsh, P., Eger, D. & Dennison, S. (2001). Decits in emotional intelligence underlying adolescent sex offending. Journal of Adolescence , 24 , 743 /753. Nagayama Hall, G. (1995). The preliminary development of theory-based community treatment for sexual offenders. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice , 26 , 478 /483. Overholser, J. & Beck, S. (1986). Multimethod assessment of rapists, child molesters and three control groups on behavioural and psychological measures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54 , 682 /687. Palmer, B. R. & Stough, C. (2002). Australian Normative Data on Emotional Intelligence Tests . Technical report. Australia: Swinburne University of Technology.

258

M. L. Puglia et al.

Pithers, W. (1994). Process evaluation of a group of therapy component designed to enhance sex offenders empathy for sexual abuse survivors. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32 , 565 /570. Pithers, W. (1999). Empathy: denition, enhancement, and relevance to the treatment of sexual abusers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 14 , 257 /284. Rice, M., Chaplin, T., Harris, G. & Coutts, J. (1994). Empathy for the victim and sexual arousal among rapists and non-rapists. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 9 , 435 /449. Roger, D. & Masters, R. (1997). The development and evaluation of an emotion control training program for sex offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2 , 51 /64. Roys, D. (1997). Empirical and theoretical considerations of empathy in sex offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 41 , 53 /64. Salovey, P., Bedell, B., Detweiler, J. & Mayer, J. (2000). Current directions in emotional intelligence research. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (2nd edn) (pp. 504 /520). New York: Guilford Press. Scully, D. (1988). Convicted rapists perception of self and victim: role taking and emotions. Gender and Society, 2 , 200 /213. Serin, R., Mailloux, D. & Malcolm, B. (2001). Psychopathy, deviant sexual arousal and recidivism rates among sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 16 , 234 /247. Smith, J.E. (2001). Emotional intelligence and behaviour: an exploratory study of people on parole. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 61(11-B) . USA: University Microlms International. Ward, T., Louden, K., Hudson, S. & Marshall, W. (1995). A descriptive model of the offense chain for child molesters. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 10 , 452 /472.