Social Problem Solving and Offending: Evidence, Evaluation and Evolution / Edition 1 available in Hardcover, Paperback
Social Problem Solving and Offending: Evidence, Evaluation and Evolution / Edition 1
- ISBN-10:
- 0470864060
- ISBN-13:
- 9780470864067
- Pub. Date:
- 10/14/2005
- Publisher:
- Wiley
Social Problem Solving and Offending: Evidence, Evaluation and Evolution / Edition 1
Buy New
$221.95Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780470864067 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Wiley |
| Publication date: | 10/14/2005 |
| Series: | Wiley Series in Forensic Clinical Psychology , #22 |
| Pages: | 336 |
| Product dimensions: | 6.87(w) x 9.70(h) x 0.97(d) |
About the Author
James McGuire is Professor of Forensic Clinical Psychology at the University of Liverpool, UK, Director of Studies for the Doctorate in Clinical Psychology programme, and an honorary consultant clinical psychologist in Mersey Care NHS Trust. A chartered clinical and forensic psychologist, he carries out psycholegal work involving assessment of offenders and has prepared reports on young offenders charged with offences of violence, for hearings of the Mental Health Review Tribunal on adults detained in secure hospitals, and for the Criminal Cases Review Commission. He has conducted research in prisons, probation services, and other settings on aspects of the effectiveness of treatment with offenders and allied topics. He has engaged in a range of consultative work with criminal justice agencies in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Canada, Australia and Hong Kong. He was co-organizer of the What Works series of conferences, and has written or edited 12 books and numerous other publications on this and related areas.
Read an Excerpt
Social Problem Solving and Offending
Evidence, Evaluation and EvolutionJohn Wiley & Sons
Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.All right reserved.
ISBN: 0-470-86407-9
Chapter One
SOCIAL PROBLEM SOLVING: BASIC CONCEPTS, RESEARCH, AND APPLICATIONSJAMES MCGUIRE University of Liverpool, UK
INTRODUCTION
The phrase "problem solving" has several levels of meaning in mental health and related fields. There is, first, a general sense in which it can be used metaphorically to describe any planned therapeutic effort. Given its function of alleviating distress, therapy by its very nature can be envisioned as helping to solve a problem. There is also a second, more focused, use of the term which arises in psychotherapy and counselling process research, in which problem solving is used to specify certain actions by counsellors or therapists during clinical sessions.
The sense in which it will be used in the present book is distinct from both of the foregoing definitions. In what follows, we will be considering a specific approach, method, or set of procedures within cognitive-behavioural therapy, which has evolved over the past 30 years and is now particularly influential in shaping the design of intervention programmes in a number of inter-related fields.
This opening chapter has three objectives. The first is to describe the origins of the concepts and theoretical underpinnings of a cluster of methods collectively known as social or interpersonal problem-solving training. The second is to provide a brief outline of these methods and an account of the empirical justification for their use. Other chapters will expand considerably upon this and will give illustrations of it in a range of settings. The third objective is to review ways in which the models and methods developed on this basis have been used in the design of intervention programmes, and applied in criminal justice and mental health settings.
There is, of course, another separate though overlapping use of the term "problem solving". This occurs primarily within cognitive psychology where it is employed mainly to designate processes that are involved in solving abstract or impersonal problems, connected with the manipulation of objects or ideas in fields such as logic, mathematics, or science. A large volume of research has been conducted on mental operations such as induction, deduction, syllogistic and analogical reasoning, and creativity (Eysenck, 2001). While studies of this type were traditionally performed in laboratory settings, cognitive psychologists have also extended their research to investigate the processes that underpin everyday reasoning (see, for example, Galotti, 1994). The subject matter nevertheless remains primarily the application of mental effort to the solution of problems in the impersonal, material, or abstract ideational world.
DEFINITIONS AND BASIC CONCEPTS
In the sense that will concern us here, problem solving has been defined as "the self-directed cognitive-behavioral process by which a person attempts to identify or discover effective or adaptive solutions for specific problems encountered in everyday living" (D'Zurilla & Nezu, 2001, p. 212). Alternatively it may be conceptualised as "a goal-directed sequence of cognitive and affective operations as well as behavioral responses for the purpose of adapting to internal or external demands or challenges" (Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987, p. 375). In this respect the terms problem solving and coping have sometimes been viewed as synonymous (Heppner & Hillerbrand, 1991). Engaging in this process inevitably activates some of the routines involved in other types of reasoning and typically studied in cognitive psychology research. It has been widely recognised, however, that there are additional activities involved in attempting to solve problems in the interpersonal domain. While practical, mechanical problem solving is an intrinsic part of healthy adjustment and everyday functioning, it may be insufficient for adaptive behaviour in complex social environments. Another way to characterise this difference is in terms of a distinction between the "well-structured" tasks that are customarily used in cognitive psychology experiments, versus the more "ill-structured" problems encountered in daily life (ibid.) In these contexts, therefore, other procedures are called into play.
Problem solving self-evidently links two elements: the problem with which the individual begins and which leads to engaging in the exercise; and the solution which presumably is an objective or desired outcome of that effort. It is important therefore to clarify what we mean by these terms. D'Zurilla and Nezu have described a problem as "any life situation or task (present or anticipated) that demands a response for adaptive functioning, but for which no effective response is immediately apparent or available to the person, due to the presence of some obstacle(s)" (2001, pp. 212-213). A solution is "a situation-specific coping response or response pattern (cognitive and/or behavioral) which is the product or outcome of the problem-solving process when it is applied to a specific problematic situation" (ibid., p. 213). Put at its simplest, problem-solving training or therapy is designed to help individuals find their way from problems to solutions, using a systematised sequence of methods and steps. Perhaps more importantly, it is also designed to enable them to acquire the capacity to repeat this when necessary on subsequent occasions.
Within cognitive social learning theory, effective problem solving is regarded as a skill. To be more precise, it is made possible through the acquisition or development of some constituent types of skill. While this concept is firmly established in the behavioural domain, skilled activity at a cognitive level is more difficult to define. Skills are generally conceptualised as over-learned, automatic sequences of behaviour, which can be controlled and directed towards achievement of a goal. On a behavioural level, this includes motor skills (driving, speed-typing, playing tennis or the piano). On a cognitive level, skilled sequences of activity underpin many kinds of frequently recurring thought processes, as well as language and speech production. In the cognitive-interpersonal domain, individuals deploy skills in activities that range from communication, interaction, or building and maintaining relationships, to negotiation and resolving conflicts.
Origins of Research on Social Problem-Solving
A key question that arises is whether, like their counterparts on the behavioural level, skills for solving problems in the cognitive-interpersonal domain can be learned through conscious effort and repeated practice. The origins of this form of intervention are generally traced to two main approaches or traditions. While in practical terms they are very close and exhibit numerous similarities, there are also some important differences between them, primarily in terms of their conceptual and research origins.
In the first approach, formulated by D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971), and later refined by D'Zurilla and Nezu (1982), problem-solving concepts were articulated as an extension of principles of behaviour modification. These authors specified a number of mediational stages in the process of behaviour change. Their proposals were initially made during the late 1960s, a period of rapid evolution in behaviourism when the importance of mediating events was beginning to be more broadly recognised. This was associated, among other changes, with the formal statement of cognitive social learning theory by Bandura (1977) and the emergence of the first integrated models of behavioural and cognitive therapies (Mahoney, 1974; Meichenbaum, 1977). A specific impetus for the advent of problem-solving concepts arose from the failure, in many studies of behaviour modification, to demonstrate adequate generalisation of intervention effects. In social skills training, for example, transfer and generalisation of acquired skills are facilitated by the inclusion of training elements focused on perceptual and cognitive aspects of social encounters (Akhtar & Bradley, 1991).
The second approach was derived from work in applied settings but from the outset had a strong developmental emphasis. Spivack and Levine (1963) discovered differences between normally adjusted and social-problem groups in the way they thought about problems. A group of adolescent boys resident in a reform school was compared with a "normal" control group on a large number of measures of various aspects of self-regulation. The latter were assessed by means of a series of specially designed tasks that called upon processes hypothesised to be necessary for the effective solution of problems in the interpersonal domain. Among them was one task in which participants were given the beginning and the end of a story and asked to make up a central, connecting section. A highly significant difference was found between the two populations both in the length and the quality of the stories they invented. The idea that impoverished "means-end thinking", as this skill was designated, might characterise the poorly-adjusted adolescent led to the broader notion that an individual's performance on measures such as this might have implications for other areas of his or her functioning.
In the model that emerged from this (Spivack, Platt, & Shure, 1976), it was hypothesised that some problems could result from the absence of, or failure to apply, certain cognitive-interpersonal abilities. Such problem-solving "deficits" might include repeated rigidity when a situation demanded flexibility of response; acting impulsively without considering the alternatives; or neglecting to look ahead and anticipate the ramifications of a particular decision or course of action.
There are numerous overlaps between these two approaches. But there has also been a tendency for them to be applied in different specialist areas. The D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) model has been more frequently used, or cited as a seminal source, in work on emotional and mental health problems (Nezu, D'Zurilla, Zwick, & Nezu, 2004; Nezu, Nezu, & Houts, 1993). Specific areas of focus have included anxiety-related problems (Nezu et al., 2004); depression (Nezu, Nezu, & Perri, 1989); closed head injury (Foxx, Martella, & Marchand-Martella, 1989c); obesity (Perri et al., 2001); and schizophrenia (Favrod, Caffaro, Grossenbacher, Rubio, & Von Turk, 2000). The approach has also been applied within psychological responses to cancer (Nezu, Nezu, Houts, Friedman, & Faddis, 1999) and a variety of other medical problems (Nezu et al., 2004). When the methods are used in healthcare services, they are most commonly designated as problem-solving therapy.
By contrast, the model of Spivack et al. (1976) has been more extensively applied in child development and educational settings. In this context it has sometimes formed part of a broader curriculum designed to teach thinking skills for application to social problems. This parallels methods such as those developed by Feuerstein (1980). It has also been used with other difficulties including conduct disorder, substance abuse, gambling, and criminal offending. In educational and criminal justice settings, work of this kind is more frequently entitled problem-solving training. Despite these differences in focus and nomenclature, to a large extent the fundamental methods remain the same.
Elements of Problem-Solving Training
In their initial conceptualisation, D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) envisaged problem solving as a progression through five stages. They were delineated as:
1. Problem orientation or "set";
2. Problem definition and formulation;
3. Generation of alternative solutions;
4. Decision-making;
5. Solution implementation and verification.
In advocating the view that the ability to secure ideas for solving problems is a skill that can be acquired, D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) cited research on the procedure of brainstorming. This was originally developed by Alex Osborn, an advertising executive, during the 1930s and described in his book Applied Imagination (Osborn, 1963). The term is derived from the metaphor of using the brain to storm a problem. D'Zurilla and Goldfried were impressed by studies which had suggested that producing more ideas led to producing better ideas. Although this expectation was fulfilled in their own experimental studies, it was not always fully confirmed by subsequent research (Stein, 1975). It has, however, been shown both that brainstorming leads to generating more ideas and that individuals can be trained to engage in it and produce more ideas than prior to such training. In problem-solving therapy, a collection of methods is employed for sequential development, practice, and application of each of the five skills in the D'Zurilla and Goldfried model.
By contrast, the work of Spivack et al. (1976) revolved around the following core propositions:
1. A number of separate cognitive skills can be isolated that are crucial for effective functioning in interpersonal situations. They include, for example, the ability to think of several options before acting, or to appreciate the likely consequences of an act.
2. Different combinations of these skills are important for adjustment during different phases of development (early and middle childhood, adolescence, adulthood).
3. These skills, though cognitive in nature, are directed towards the interpersonal domain and are psychometrically distinct from what we normally assume we assess by means of conventional intelligence tests.
4. Through specially developed methods of training it is possible to enable individuals deficient in those skills to acquire them, with consequent improvements in interpersonal adjustment.
It is a proposal common to both these approaches that the absence of effective problem-solving is associated with interpersonal difficulties and other mental health or behavioural problems. There are two possible causal pathways leading to this outcome.
In the first, poor problem solving is a result of inhibition of skill. Individuals have the ability to solve problems but they do not apply it. This is primarily a motivational issue and unlikely to be remedied by training. In the second, the problem derives from a deficit of skill. Individuals have not acquired adequate levels of skill for effective problem-solving, most probably as a consequence of limited learning opportunities, constrained by parenting or other socialisation influences.
The manner in which interpersonal learning occurs is a function of its wider socio-cultural context. It is therefore often emphasised within problem-solving training procedures that the focus of intervention is upon the how rather than the what of problem-solving. Individuals are given assistance in acquiring or improving skills (changes in cognitive-behavioural capacities) without any presumptions regarding the ways in which those skills will be applied (the content of their thinking). This is based on the supposition that while culture has a profound influence on the dominant themes is individuals' thoughts (expressed through language, beliefs, values, personal goals), most aspects of cognitive processing show much less variation. However, more research is needed in order to determine the parameters of this.
Whatever its exact content, social problem-solving training is a comparatively distinct form of intervention within the broader cognitive-behavioural repertoire. Its application draws on methods of change including functional analysis of habitual reactions, skills practice, rehearsal, and feedback as used in behaviour modification. Additionally however, it draws on methods more familiar within cognitive and self-control therapies, such as self-monitoring, analysis of thinking patterns and distortions, Socratic questioning, guided discussion, and reflection. Thus, it occupies an intermediate point on a conceptual continuum between more behaviourally-oriented and cognitively-oriented therapies (McGuire, 2000a). Figure 1.1 depicts this relationship and locates problem-solving within a broader framework of connections between other cognitive-behavioural approaches.
The component skills isolated in the studies of D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) and Spivack et al. (1976) and in numerous subsequent studies, have also been incorporated within integrative information-processing models of social adjustment and responding (Akhtar & Bradley, 1991; Crick & Dodge, 1994). In these models, a sequence of events and processes is hypothesised to precede an observed behavioural response. They include the encoding of environmental cues, attribution of motives, the generation of alternative solutions, pursuit of appropriate social goals, and acquisition of skills for enactment of social behaviours. These may be modified by tendencies towards egocentrism or limited perspective-taking. Individuals vary in their level of or engagement in different phases of the above sequence, and their competencies within discrete elements should be assessed directly using a comprehensive procedure designed to probe each area of potential deficit in turn.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Social Problem Solving and Offending Copyright © 2005 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
About the Editors.List of Contributors.
Series Editors’ Preface.
Preface.
Acknowledgement.
PART I: EVIDENCE.
1. Social Problem Solving: Basic Concepts, Research, and Applications (James McGuire).
2. Social Problem Solving and the Development of Aggression (Liisa Keltikangas-Järvinen).
3. Social Problem Solving in Aggressive Children (Walter Matthys and John E. Lochman).
4. Social Problem Solving, Personality Disorder, and Substance Abuse (Laura E. Dreer, Warren T. Jackson, and Timothy R. Elliott).
5. Social Problem-Solving Deficits in Offenders (Daniel H. Antonowicz and Robert R. Ross).
6. Problem-Solving Therapy: Theory, Practice, and Application to Sex Offenders (Christine Maguth Nezu, Thomas J. D’Zurilla, and Arthur M. Nezu).
PART II: EVALUATION.
7. Social Problem-Solving Programs for Preventing Antisocial Behavior in Children and Youth (Friedrich Lösel and Andreas Beelmann)
8. The Development of Social Problem-Solving Interventions in Young Offender Mental Health Services: A Focus upon Self-Harm and Suicide Risk (Fiona H. Biggam and Kevin G. Power).
9. The Reasoning and Rehabilitation Program: Outcome Evaluations with Offenders (Daniel H. Antonowicz).
10. The Think First Programme (James McGuire).
11. Stop & Think! Social Problem-Solving Therapy with Personality-Disordered Offenders (Mary McMurran, Vincent Egan, and Conor Duggan).
PART III: EVOLUTION AND EXPLORATION.
12. Social Cognition and Sex Offenders (Theresa A. Gannon, Devon L.L. Polaschek, and Tony Ward).
13. Social Cognition in Psychopaths: Implications for Offender Assessment and Treatment (Ralph C. Serin and Shelley L. Brown).
14. Moral Reasoning (Robin Harvey).
15. Social Problem-Solving and Offending: Reflections and Directions (Mary McMurran).
Index.