Crime and substance Crime and substance abuse: risk and abuse: risk and

protective factorsprotective factors

Concetta Pastorelli Concetta Pastorelli in collaboration with in collaboration with

Laura Panerai, Valeria CastellaniLaura Panerai, Valeria Castellani , , Maria Gerbino, Giovanni VecchioMaria Gerbino, Giovanni Vecchio

Interuniversity Center for the Study Interuniversity Center for the Study of Prosocial and Antisocial of Prosocial and Antisocial

Behavior, University of Rome, Behavior, University of Rome, SapienzaSapienza

Centro Italiano di Solidarieta’, Centro Italiano di Solidarieta’,

Rome - ItalyRome - Italy

Interuniversity Center for the Study of Interuniversity Center for the Study of Development of Prosocial and Antisocial behaviorDevelopment of Prosocial and Antisocial behavior

UNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA “LA SAPIENZAUNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA “LA SAPIENZA

UNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI NAPOLI “FEDERICO II”UNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI NAPOLI “FEDERICO II”

UNIVERSITA’ “CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE” DI MILANOUNIVERSITA’ “CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE” DI MILANO

UNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI FIRENZEUNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI FIRENZE

UNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI PADOVAUNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI PADOVA

UNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI CATANIAUNIVERSITA’ DEGLI STUDI DI CATANIAUNVERSITA’DEGLI STUDI DI TORINOUNVERSITA’DEGLI STUDI DI TORINO

Promoting, Developing, Promoting, Developing, EnhancingEnhancing and Protecting Personal and and Protecting Personal and Collective Resources through Collective Resources through

Research, Teaching, and Research, Teaching, and InterventionIntervention

AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments

The Centro Italiano The Centro Italiano di Solidarieta’ Team, di Solidarieta’ Team, his President:,Don his President:,Don Mario Picchi, and Mario Picchi, and Vice President, Juan Vice President, Juan Pares Pares

The The Interuniversity Interuniversity Center TeamCenter Team

The participants who so generously allowed us to The participants who so generously allowed us to interview and assess them for hoursinterview and assess them for hours

Centro Italianodi Solidarietà di Roma

The Sert ( territorial service)Team, their chiefs, psychologists and social workersThe Sert ( territorial service)Team, their chiefs, psychologists and social workers The Funding Agencies, Regione LazioThe Funding Agencies, Regione Lazio

UNIVERSITA’ DI ROMA

“LA SAPIENZA”

According to a psycosocial perspective we capitalize on the most relevant research findings related to the development of drug-use/abuse and delinquency within an ecological approach

Individuals are embedded in an ecological niche

and individual -organismic factors play a role in conjunction with contextual forces

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Simultaneous measurement of a broad array of risk and protective factors is important to predict adequately the initiation and maintenance of antisocial behavior.

It is important to assess risk and protective factors at multiple levels: community, peer, family, individual

RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS

AIMS OF THE AIMS OF THE STUDYSTUDY

To examine the prevalence of To examine the prevalence of crimes in a group of drug addicted crimes in a group of drug addicted adultsadults

To identify the most relevant risk To identify the most relevant risk and protective factors associated and protective factors associated with crimes in a group of drug with crimes in a group of drug addicted adultsaddicted adults

PARTICIPANTSPARTICIPANTS 178 Young Adults and Adults 178 Young Adults and Adults receiving residential receiving residential (49.4%) or(49.4%) or nonresidential (50.6%) substance nonresidential (50.6%) substance abuse treatment in the city of Romeabuse treatment in the city of Rome

Residential Community Treatment: Residential Community Treatment: Progetto Uomo, CeIS Progetto Uomo, CeIS Non-residential Treatment: Local Non-residential Treatment: Local public facilities -Methadone delivery public facilities -Methadone delivery (2 centers:Sert) (2 centers:Sert)

Participants were invited to Participants were invited to complete the assessment during the complete the assessment during the first week of their entry to the first week of their entry to the program program Approximately 22%Approximately 22% refused to participate refused to participate in the study.in the study.

PROCEDUREPROCEDURE FFirst session: Informed consent, irst session: Informed consent,

semi-structured interviewsemi-structured interview

Second session: Self reported Second session: Self reported questionnairesquestionnaires

Third Session: Self reported Third Session: Self reported questionnairesquestionnaires

Average Hours: 3.5 Average Hours: 3.5

Crime-related VariablesCrime-related Variables

Violent criminalityViolent criminality11 : : physical assault with and without a weapon, physical assault with and without a weapon, threatening someonethreatening someone, , being involved in being involved in gang-fightsgang-fights

Not violent criminalityNot violent criminality 11: stealing property, : stealing property, destroying property, destroying property, shoplifting, or selling drugsshoplifting, or selling drugs

Penal problemsPenal problems: financial crimes, assalt against pubblic officer, : financial crimes, assalt against pubblic officer, illegal possesion of drug, drug pushing, physical violence, theft, illegal possesion of drug, drug pushing, physical violence, theft, ect.ect.

11((Elliot, Huizinga, Ageton 1985)Elliot, Huizinga, Ageton 1985)

Contextual Risk factorsContextual Risk factors Conditions of NConditions of Neighborhood eighborhood

(crimes, drug addiction, (crimes, drug addiction, minorile minorile job, prostitution, illiteracy, etc)job, prostitution, illiteracy, etc)

Substance Availability in the Substance Availability in the neighborhoodneighborhood

Interpersonal Risk factorsInterpersonal Risk factors AggregationAggregationwith deviant peerswith deviant peers 11

Family problems (Penal problems, Family problems (Penal problems, Substance problems, Use of violence)Substance problems, Use of violence)

Family conflictFamily conflict 2 2

1( Capaldi Patterson, 1989)1( Capaldi Patterson, 1989)

2 (Honess, Charman, Zani,Cicognani, Xerri, Jackson, & Bosma (1997)2 (Honess, Charman, Zani,Cicognani, Xerri, Jackson, & Bosma (1997)

Contextual and Psychosocial Contextual and Psychosocial Variables/1Variables/1

Individual Risk Factors Individual Risk Factors IrritabilityIrritability : :tendency to react impulsively,

controversially, or rudely at the slightest provocation or disagreement 1

Hostile Rumination:Hostile Rumination: tendency to maintain or even increase the desire for vengeance, in opposition to the tendency to quickly recover from ill feelings or desires to retaliate 22

Moral disengagement:Moral disengagement: tendency tendency to disengage internal moral control that allows different types of mis-conducts while preserving one’s own personal standards (moral justification, attribution of blame, etc.) 3

11(Caprara, Pastorelli, Perugini, Barbaranelli, 1991)(Caprara, Pastorelli, Perugini, Barbaranelli, 1991) 2 (2 (Caprara, 1985)Caprara, 1985) 3 (Caprara, Pastorelli, Bandura 1995)3 (Caprara, Pastorelli, Bandura 1995)

Contextual and Psychosocial Contextual and Psychosocial Variables/2Variables/2

Protective Protective FactorsFactors

Education LevelEducation Level Personality traits: Emotional Stability, Personality traits: Emotional Stability,

Coscientiousness, Friendliness, Openess Coscientiousness, Friendliness, Openess 11 Self-Esteem Self-Esteem 22 Self efficacy beliefsSelf efficacy beliefs in various domains in various domains 33 “beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and

execute the courses of action required to produce given attainment”

a) in resisting transgressive peer pressuresa) in resisting transgressive peer pressures b) in establishing social relationships b) in establishing social relationships c) in regulating negative and positive affects c) in regulating negative and positive affects d) in managing effectively their relationsd) in managing effectively their relations1 (1 (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, 1993)Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, 1993) 2 (Rosenberg, 1965)2 (Rosenberg, 1965)3( Pastorelli, Caprara, Barbaranelli, Rola, Rozsa, Bandura, 2001)3( Pastorelli, Caprara, Barbaranelli, Rola, Rozsa, Bandura, 2001)

%%

AgeAge

18-3518-35 57,5%57,5%>35>35 42,5%42,5%

GenderGender

MaleMale 86%86%FemaleFemale 14%14%

Yearly Family Income Yearly Family Income (EURO)(EURO)

<16.000<16.000 24%24%16-30.00016-30.000 34%34%31-40.00031-40.000 22%22%

>40.000 euro>40.000 euro 20%20%

SampleSample

%%

EducationEducation

< High School < High School DiplomaDiploma

64%64%

High School DiplomaHigh School Diploma 31%31%University University 5%5%

School-ProblemsSchool-Problems

Disciplinary ProblemsDisciplinary Problems 45,8%45,8%Expulsions from Expulsions from

schoolsschools10,4%10,4%

Family HistoryFamily History

Family Substance Family Substance abuseabuse

55,6%55,6%

Family crimesFamily crimes 28%28%

SampleSample

Primary Primary substancesubstance

Secondary Secondary substancesubstance

Tertiary Tertiary substancesubstance

CocaineCocaine 23%23% 41%41% 20,4%20,4%

HeroineHeroine 44%44% 20%20% 11,2%11,2%

CannabisCannabis 18%18% 20%20% 33%33%

AlcoholAlcohol 12,2%12,2% 10%10% 17%17%

Other Other SubstancesSubstances

2,8%2,8% 9%9% 18,4%18,4%

Primary, secondary, tertiary Primary, secondary, tertiary substancesubstance

82.4% OF THE SAMPLE USES MULTIPLE DRUGS

<11 <11 yearsyears

11-14 11-14 yearsyears

14-16 14-16 yearsyears

16-20 16-20 yearsyears

>20 >20 yearsyears

AlcoholAlcohol 20%20% 16%16% 28%28% 25%25% 11%11%

HeroineHeroine 1%1% 13%13% 22%22% 33%33% 31%31%

OppiateOppiate 3%3% 16%16% 24%24% 27%27% 30%30%

Depressant Depressant -- 10%10% 21%21% 31,5%31,5% 37,5%37,5%

CocaineCocaine -- 13,6%13,6% 32%32% 29%29% 25,4%25,4%

AmphetaminesAmphetamines -- 11%11% 26%26% 49%49% 14%14%

CannabisCannabis 6%6% 46%46% 31%31% 15%15% 2%2%

hallucinogenshallucinogens 7,7%7,7% 12,3%12,3% 23%23% 42%42% 15%15%

InhalantInhalant 9%9% 27%27% 14%14% 32%32% 18%18%

Age of First Use of DrugsAge of First Use of Drugs

Violent Violent crimes in the crimes in the last 6 monthslast 6 months

Not violent Not violent crimes in crimes in the last 6 the last 6 monthsmonths

Penal Penal Problems Problems across lifeacross life

48.7%48.7% 68.7%68.7% 60%60%

CrimesCrimes

Types of Penal Problems Types of Penal Problems across Lifeacross Life

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

%

financial crimes insult against pubblic officerillegal possession of drug robberydrug pushing physical violencetheft other

CONTEXTUAL, INTERPERSONAL AND

INDIVIDUAL RISK AND PROTECTIVE

FACTORSFOR CRIME

Age of Age of use of use of drugsdrugs

IrritabilIrritabilityity

Hostile Hostile RuminatiRuminati

onon

Moral Moral disengagdisengag

ementement

S. Efficacy S. Efficacy in in

regulating regulating transgrestransgres

sive sive pressurespressures

Risky Risky neighborhoodneighborhood

Substance Substance availabilityavailability

Deviant Deviant friendsfriends

Family Family problems with problems with lawlaw

Family Family substance substance abuseabuse

-

Significant Relations Contextual-Interpersonal and

Individual Risk/Protective Factors

<.25; <.25; >=.25>=.25

Violent Violent Criminal Criminal

actsacts

Not Violent Not Violent Criminal Criminal

ActsActs

Penal Penal ProblemsProblems

Risky neighborhoodRisky neighborhood

Substance availabilitySubstance availability

Deviant friendsDeviant friends

Family legal problemsFamily legal problems

Family substance abuseFamily substance abuse

Age of first use of drugsAge of first use of drugs

IrritabilityIrritability

Moral disengagementMoral disengagement

Significant Relations between Risk Factors and Crimes

<.25; <.25; >=.25>=.25

Violent Violent Criminal Criminal

actsacts

Not Not Violent Violent

Criminal Criminal ActsActs

Penal Penal ProblemProblem

ss

Father EducationFather Education-- --

Mother educationMother education--

Self efficacy beliefs inSelf efficacy beliefs in

Resisting to Resisting to transgressive pressurestransgressive pressures

-- --Self efficacy beliefs inSelf efficacy beliefs in

Regulating negative Regulating negative affectaffect

--

SIGNIFICANT RELATIONS PROTECTIVE FACTORS AND CRIMES

-<.25-<.25

Violent Violent Criminal Criminal

actsacts

Not Violent Not Violent Criminal Criminal

ActsActs

Penal Penal ProblemProblem

ss

RISKY NRISKY NEIGHBORHOODEIGHBORHOOD IIIIIIDEVIANT FRIENDSDEVIANT FRIENDS II IIDISAPPROVAL OF DRUG DISAPPROVAL OF DRUG USEUSE

IVIV

MORAL DISENGAGEMENTMORAL DISENGAGEMENT IIII IIIIIIIRRITABILITYIRRITABILITY IVIVHOSTILE RUMINATIONHOSTILE RUMINATION IIIIII IVIVFRIENDLINESS/HOSTILITYFRIENDLINESS/HOSTILITY IIII

CONSCIENTOUNESSCONSCIENTOUNESS VVCONFLICT WITH MOTHERCONFLICT WITH MOTHER II VVS. EFFICACY IN S. EFFICACY IN REGULATING REGULATING TRANSGRESSIVE TRANSGRESSIVE PRESSURESPRESSURES

VV IIII

MAIN FACTORS THAT DISCRIMINATE PEOPLE WHO COMMIT OR DO NOT COMMIT CRIMES

Violent profileViolent profile

-1

-0,8-0,6

-0,4

-0,20

0,2

0,4

0,60,8

1

not

yes

Not violent profileNot violent profile

-1

-0,8

-0,6

-0,4

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

Irrita

bility

Hostile

Rum

inat

ion

Mor.

Disen

gagm

ent

Conflict

with

moth

er

Devia

nt frie

nds

Conditions

of Nei

ghborhood

Friendlin

ess

Conscio

untess

Reg

ulato

ry S

elf-e

ffica

cy

S.E.R

egula

ting n

egat

ive

affe

ct

Disap

prova

l of d

rug u

se

notyes

Penal Problems ProfilePenal Problems Profile

-1

-0,8

-0,6

-0,4

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

YesNot

Summing UpSumming Up

Regarding the typology of drugs: Regarding the typology of drugs: - Multiple drugs Multiple drugs - Decrease of heroin and parallel Decrease of heroin and parallel

increase of cocaineincrease of cocaine

Regarding the typology of individuals and Regarding the typology of individuals and their contexts in relation of criminal their contexts in relation of criminal activity we may sustain they follow activity we may sustain they follow distint pathwaysdistint pathways::

Violent pathwayViolent pathway

Not Violent pathwayNot Violent pathway

Summing UpSumming Up

1.1. Violent pathwaysViolent pathways

More importance of More importance of personality personality characteristicscharacteristics related to related to emotional emotional controlcontrol (more irritable and hostile, more (more irritable and hostile, more incline to revenge -hostile rumination)incline to revenge -hostile rumination)

They lack of regulatory capacity both They lack of regulatory capacity both emotionally and interpersonallyemotionally and interpersonally

Summing UpSumming Up

1.1. Not-Violent pathwaysNot-Violent pathways

Less importance of personality-Less importance of personality-temperamental characteristicstemperamental characteristics

More importance of intrafamilial and More importance of intrafamilial and interpersonal experiences that relate interpersonal experiences that relate to individuals capacity regulate to individuals capacity regulate themselves morally and in the peer-themselves morally and in the peer-context.context.

Summing UpSumming Up

1.1. Both Violent and Not-Violent Both Violent and Not-Violent pathwayspathways

Actively Actively disengage internal moraldisengage internal moral control for justifying what they do control for justifying what they do and alleviate guilt feelingsand alleviate guilt feelings

Activelly associate with Activelly associate with deviant peers deviant peers