EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTERNALIZING, EXTERNALIZING, AND PSYCHOTIC PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AT FIVE LEVELS OF CRIMINAL RISK

Author

Cooper Mitchell Sparks, Southern Illinois University CarbondaleFollow

Date of Award

12-1-2024

Degree Name

Master of Arts

Department

Psychology

First Advisor

Morgan, Robert

Abstract

Though it is well established that mental illness is not a primary risk factor for criminal justice involvement, the relationship between mental illness and criminal risk with justice-involved persons with mental illness is not well understood (Bonta, et al., 1998; Morgan, et al., 2010; Skeem, et al., 2014). Specifically, psychopathology has not been understood at different levels of criminal risk. Using the Five-Level Risk and Needs System for criminal risk (Hanson, et al., 2017), the current study aimed to identify mean differences between different domains of psychopathology (i.e., internalizing, externalizing, and psychotic psychopathology) across five levels of criminal risk. Data were collected from 360 participants who were recruited from a southwestern state’s correctional department. Demographic variables such as age, years of education, relationship status, index offense, and mental health diagnoses (i.e., personality disorder, schizophrenia, substance use) were used to assess each participant’s level of criminal risk. The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking (PICTS; Walters, 1995) was used to as an estimated measure of recidivism. Only three of the five risk levels were identified in this sample (Levels II, III, and IV). To create the three psychopathology domains, raw scores from the relevant Million Clinical Multiaxial Inventory- III (MCMI- III; Million, et al., 1994) scales were used. For example, the internalizing domain was developed from the Schizoid, Avoidant, Depressive, Masochistic, Schizotypal, Borderline, Anxiety, Somatoform, Dysthymia, Post-traumatic, Thought Disorder, and Major Depressive scales. Although the initial plan was to examine differences by gender (i.e., evaluate males and females separately), the analysis was limited to the full sample and included gender as a covariate due to a small sample size within each risk level. Additionally, only three levels of risk were identified in the current sample (i.e., Levels II-IV). A multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was used to assess mean differences in internalizing, externalizing, and psychotic psychopathology across three levels of criminal risk in the full sample of justice-involved individuals while controlling for gender. No statistically significant differences in domain scores were found across risk levels, indicating that internalizing, externalizing, and psychotic types of psychopathologies present similarly across criminal risk levels. Results of this study suggest that internalizing, externalizing, and psychotic types of psychopathology would likely benefit from similar treatment dosages regardless of the individual’s criminal risk level.