Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Use of Self-Report Questionnaires

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Assessment and Obligatory Treatment of Violent and Sexually Violent Offenders

Abstract

The validity of self-report questionnaires in forensic populations is controversial. This chapter provides an overview of the internal and external factors that may affect the responding on these scales in various forensic populations. Internal factors refer to factors that relate to individual respondent characteristics, while external factors relate to the circumstances in which the questionnaires are completed. Further, the psychometric properties of non-English versions of self-report questionnaires that are commonly used in the forensic field are discussed. Finally, conclusions and recommendations are presented for the use of self-report questionnaires among offenders, followed by a description of new developments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adida, M., Clark, L., Pomiettoa, P., Kaladjian, A., Besnier, N., Azorina, J., et al. (2008). Lack of insight may predict impaired decision making in manic patients. Bipolar Disorders, 10, 829–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: Matthew Bender & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, P., & Meyer, R. G. (2003). Marlow-Crowne Social Desirability Scale and short form C: Forensic norms. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59, 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.10136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Arkowitz, S., & Vess, J. (2003). An evaluation of the Bumby RAPE and MOLEST scales as measures of cognitive distortions with civilly committed sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 237–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. T., Van Hasselt, V. B., & Sellers, A. H. (2008). Validation of the Novaco Anger Scale in an incarcerated offender population. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 741–754. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808316275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beech, A., Friendship, C., Erikson, M., & Hanson, R. K. (2002). The relationship between static and dynamic risk factors and reconviction in a sample of U.K. child abusers. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 155–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, M., Fiszdon, J., Richardson, R., Lysaker, P., & Bryson, G. (2007). Are self-reports valid for schizophrenia patients with poor insight? Relationship of unawareness of illness to psychological self-report instruments. Psychiatry Research, 151, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boer, D. P., Wilson, R. J., Gauthier, C. M., & Hart, S. D. (1997). Assessing risk for sexual violence: Guidelines for clinical practice. In C. D. Webster & M. A. Jackson (Eds.), Impulsivity: Theory, assessment, and treatment (pp. 326–342). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, F. B., & Smith, B. D. (2001). Refining the architecture of aggression: A measurement model for the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 138–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bumby, K. M. (1996). Assessing the cognitive distortions of child molesters and rapists: Development and validation of the MOLEST and RAPE Scales. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 8, 37–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campos, J. A. D. B., Zucoloto, M. L., Bonafé, F. S. S., Jordani, P. C., & Maroco, J. (2011). Reliability and validity of self-reported burnout in college students: A cross randomized comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. online administration. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1875–1883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, C. G., Thake, J., & Vilhena, N. (2010). Social desirability biases in self-reported alcohol consumption and harms. Addictive Behaviors, 35, 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.11.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, P. M., & Magaletta, P. R. (2006). The short-form Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ-SF): A validation study with federal offenders. Assessment, 13, 227–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, P. M., Wang, E. W., & Buffington-Vollum, J. (2005). Factor structure of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ) with mentally ill male prisoners. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 546–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, K. S., & Skeem, J. L. (2005). Violence risk assessment. Getting specific about being dynamic. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 347–383. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.3.347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drenth, P. J. D., & Sijtsma, K. (2006). Testtheorie. Inleiding in de theorie van de psychologische test en zijn toepassingen [Testtheory. Introduction to the theory of the psychological test and its applications]. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fossati, A., Maffei, C., Acquarini, E., & Di Ceglie, A. (2003). Multigroup confirmatory component and factor analyses of the Italian version of the Aggression Questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 54–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavaghan, M. P., Arnold, K. D., & Gibbs, J. C. (1983). Moral judgment in delinquents and nondelinquents: Recognition versus production measures. Journal of Psychology, 114, 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1983.9915424

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Genoud, P. A., & Zimmermann, G. (2009). French version of the 12-item Aggression Questionnaire: Preliminary psychometric properties. 11th Congress of the Swiss Psychological Society, Neuchâtel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, A. L., & Mills, J. F. (2011). Measuring Socially Desirable Responding within a forensic context: Response style or criminal proclivity. Crime Scene. Psychology Behind Bars and in Front of the Bench, 18, 13–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, K. R., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005482921333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. D., Michie, C., & Cooke, D. J. (2007). Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments. Evaluating the ‘margins of error’ of group v. individual predictions of violence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(Suppl. 49), s60–s65. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.190.5s60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, V. (2011). Meten en meetinstrumenten [Measuring and measurement instruments]. In I. Franken & W. Van den Brink (Eds.), Handboek Verslaving [Handbook addiction] (pp. 245–274). Utrecht: De Tijdstroom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, R. R. (2007). Socially desirable responding does moderate personality scale validity both in experimental and non-experimental contexts. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 39, 184–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/cjbs2007015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holden, R. R., & Book, A. S. (2012). Faking does distort self-report personality assessment. In M. Ziegler, C. MacCann, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), New perspectives on faking in personality assessment (pp. 71–84). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, R. R., & Passey, J. (2010). Socially desirable responding in personality assessment: Not necessarily faking and not necessarily substance. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 446–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.04.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsveld, R. H. J., Kraaimaat, F. W., Bouwmeester, S., Polak, M. A., & Zwets, A. J. (2014). Behavior on the ward of personality disordered inpatients and chronically psychotic inpatients during a three-year stay in a Dutch forensic psychiatric hospital. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 25, 684–704. https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2014.947308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsveld, R. H. J., Kraaimaat, F. W., & Zwets, A. J. (2012). The Adapted Version of the Sociomoral Reflection Measure (SRM-AV) in Dutch forensic psychiatric patients. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 11, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2012.723667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsveld, R. H. J., Muris, P., Kraaimaat, F. W., & Meesters, C. (2009). The Aggression Questionnaire in Dutch violent forensic psychiatric patients and secondary vocational students. Assessment, 16, 181–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsveld, R. H. J., Muris, P. E. H. M., & Kraaimaat, F. W. (2011). The Novaco Anger Scale-Provocation Inventory (1994 version) in Dutch forensic psychiatric patients. Psychological Assessment, 23, 937–944. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsveld, R. H. J., Timonen, B., Kraaimaat, F. W., Zwets, A. J., & Kanters, T. (2014). The Attitudes toward Women Inventory (AWI) in Dutch violent forensic psychiatric inpatients. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 14, 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2014.964105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iftikhar, R., & Malik, F. (2014). Translation and validation of Aggression Questionnaire in a Pakistani children cohort. Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 12, 39–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J., Thomas-Peter, B., & Gangstad, B. (2003). An investigation of the factor structure of the Novaco Anger Scale. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 31, 429–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. P., Thomas-Peter, B. A., & Trout, A. (1999). Normative data for the Novaco Anger Scale from a non-clinical sample and implications for clinical use. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 417–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmus, E., & Beech, A. R. (2005). Forensic assessment of sexual interest: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 193–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2003.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanters, T., Hornsveld, R. H. J., Nunes, K. L., Zwets, A. J., Buck, N. M. L., Muris, P., & Van Marle, H. J. C. (2016). Aggression and social anxiety are associated with sexual offending against children. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 15, 265–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2016.1193073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelsey, K. R., Rogers, R., & Robinson, E. V. (2015). Self-report measures of psychopathy: What is their role in forensic assessments? Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 37, 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-014-9475-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroner, D. G., & Weekes, J. R. (1996). Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding: Factor structure, reliability, and validity with an offender sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 323–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., & Widows, M. (2005). Professional manual for the psychopathic personality inventory-revised (PPI-R). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindqvist, J. K., Dåderman, A. M., & Hellström, A. (2003). Swedish adaptations of the Novaco Anger Scale-1998, the Provocation Inventory, and the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 773–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindqvist, J. K., Dåderman, A. M., & Hellström, A. (2005). Internal reliability and construct validity of the Novaco Anger Scale-1998-S in a sample of violent prison inmates in Sweden. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11, 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loza, W. (1996) Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ): A tool for assessing violent and nonviolent recidivism. Unpublished manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loza, W., & Green, K. (2003). The Self-Appraisal Questionnaire. A self-report measure for predicting recidivism versus clinician-administered measures: A 5-year follow-up study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 781–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260503253240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mathie, N. L., & Wakeling, H. C. (2011). Assessing socially desirable responding and its impact on self-report measures among sexual offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17, 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160903113681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, J. F., & Kroner, D. G. (1999). Measures of Criminal Attitudes and Associates (MCAA). Unpublished instrument and user’s guide.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, J. F., & Kroner, D. G. (2005). An investigation into the relationship between socially desirable responding and offender self-report. Psychological Services, 2, 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/1541-1559.2.1.70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, J. F., & Kroner, D. G. (2006). Impression management and self-report among violent offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21, 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260505282288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, J. F., Kroner, D. G., & Forth, A. E. (1998). Novaco Anger Scale: Reliability and validity within an adult criminal sample. Assessment, 5, 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, J. F., Loza, W., & Kroner, D. G. (2003). Predictive validity despite social desirability: Evidence for the robustness of self-report among offenders. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 13, 140–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosher, D. L., & Sirken, M. (1984). Measuring a Macho personality constellation. Journal of Research in Personality, 18, 150–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano, K. (2001). Psychometric evaluation of the Japanese adaptation of the Aggression Questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 39, 853–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijman, H., Bjørkly, S., Palmstierna, T., & Almvik, R. (2006). Assessing aggression of psychiatric patients: Methods of measurement and its prevalence. In D. Richter & R. Whittington (Eds.), Violence in mental health settings. Causes, consequences, management (pp. 11–23). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Novaco, R. W. (1994). Anger as a risk factor for violence among the mentally disordered. In J. Monahan & H. J. Steadman (Eds.), Violence and mental disorder (pp. 21–59). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novaco, R. W. (2003). The Novaco Anger Scale and Provocation Inventory: Manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olver, M. E., Kingston, D. A., Nicholaichuk, T. P., & Wong, S. C. P. (2014). A psychometric examination of treatment change in a multisite sample of treated Canadian federal sexual offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 38, 544–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000086

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1988). Manual for the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR-7). Toronto/Buffalo: Multi-Health Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding: The evolution of a construct. In H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 49–60). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettersen, C., Nunes, K. L., & Cortoni, F. (2016). Does the factor structure of the Aggression Questionnaire hold for sexual offenders? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 811–829. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854815618692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettersen, C., Nunes, K. L., & Cortoni, F. (2018). The factor structure of the Aggression Questionnaire with violent offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. Advance online publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyna, C., Ivacevich, M. G. L., Sanchez, A., & Brussino, S. (2011). The Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire: Construct validity and gender invariance among Argentinean adolescents. International Journal of Psychological Research, 4, 30–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salbach-Andrae, H., Klinkowski, N., Lenz, K., & Lehmkuhl, U. (2009). Agreement between youth-reported and parent-reported psychopathology in a referred sample. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 18, 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-008-0710-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santisteban, C., Alvarado, J. M., & Recio, P. (2007). Evaluation of a Spanish version of the Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire: Some personal and situational factors related to the aggression scores of young subjects. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1453–1465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stams, G. J., Brugman, D., Dekovic, M., van Rosmalen, L., van der Laan, P., & Gibbs, J. C. (2006). The moral judgment of juvenile delinquents: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 24, 697–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-006-9056-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, D., Mann, R., Webster, S., Blud, L., Travers, R., Friendship, C., & Erikson, M. (2003). Distinguishing between and combining risks for sexual and violent recidivism. In R. A. Prentky, E. S. Janus, & M. C. Seton (Eds.), Understanding and managing sexually coercive behavior. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 989, 223–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Berg, J. W., Smid, W. J., Schepers, K., Wever, E. C., Van Beek, D. J., Janssen, E., et al. (2018). The predictive properties of dynamic sex offender risk assessment instruments: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 30, 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, E., Gibbs, J., Stams, G. J., Bijleveld, C., Hendriks, J., & Van der Laan, P. (2011). Moral development and recidivism: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55, 1234–1250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X10396441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Von Collani, G., & Werner, R. (2005). Self-related and motivational constructs as determinants of aggression. An analysis and validation of a German version of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1631–1643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, G. D. (2006). Risk-appraisal versus self-report in the prediction of criminal justice outcomes: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854805284409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, S. D., Mann, R. E., Thornton, D., & Wakeling, H. C. (2006). Further validation of the short self-esteem scale with sexual offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 12, 207–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T. Y., Boyd, J. C., Cascardi, M. A., & Poythress, N. (1996). Factor structure and convergent validity of the Aggression Questionnaire in an offender population. Psychological Assessment, 8, 398–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Ruud H. J. Hornsveld & Sabine J. Roza

  2. Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Floris W. Kraaimaat

  3. Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Henk L. I. Nijman

  4. Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada

    Kevin L. Nunes

  5. University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

    Emma J. Palmer

Authors
  1. Ruud H. J. Hornsveld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Floris W. Kraaimaat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henk L. I. Nijman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sabine J. Roza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kevin L. Nunes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Emma J. Palmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruud H. J. Hornsveld .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Ruud H. J. Hornsveld

  2. Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Floris W. Kraaimaat

  3. KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Luk A. C. L. Gijs

  4. University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

    Emma J. Palmer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hornsveld, R.H.J., Kraaimaat, F.W., Nijman, H.L.I., Roza, S.J., Nunes, K.L., Palmer, E.J. (2019). The Use of Self-Report Questionnaires. In: Hornsveld, R., Kraaimaat, F., Gijs, L., Palmer, E. (eds) Assessment and Obligatory Treatment of Violent and Sexually Violent Offenders. Advances in Preventing and Treating Violence and Aggression . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27840-3_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation