Using the entries in your Annotated Bibliography assignment, write a paper in which you discuss and (if appropriate) take positions on the following in your topic area: Current theories, explanations,...

Using the entries in your Annotated Bibliography assignment, write a paper in which you discuss and (if appropriate) take positions on the following in your topic area:

1. Current theories, explanations, proposed relationships among constructs, and absence of theories about meaningful phenomena in your topic area.
   
   


2. Contradictions, inconsistencies, and ambiguities regarding findings related to theories in your topic area.

4-5 pages

Attachments:

.4 is the annotated bibliographies and .6ma is the graded paper that I turned in and the critiques from my professor and the changes required.

RUNNING HEAD: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 13 NORTHCENTRAL UNIVERSITY ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET Student: Sarah Barnes THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETELY FILLED IN Follow these procedures: If requested by your instructor, please include an assignment cover sheet. This will become the first page of your assignment. In addition, your assignment header should include your last name, first initial, course code, dash, and assignment number. This should be left justified, with the page number right justified. Save a copy of your assignments: You may need to re-submit an assignment at your instructor’s request. Make sure you save your files in accessible location . Academic integrity: All work submitted in each course must be your own original work. This includes all assignments, exams, term papers, and other projects required by your instructor. Knowingly submitting another person’s work as your own, without properly citing the source of the work, is considered plagiarism. This will result in an unsatisfactory grade for the work submitted or for the entire course. It may also result in academic dismissal from the University. Michelle Ackerman, PhD PSY-7109: Planning Dissertation Research in Psychology Week 4- Prepare an Annotated Bibliography Faculty Use Only Annotated Bibliography Sarah Barnes Northcentral University Annotated Bibliography Bourke, M. L., Fragomeli, L., Detar, P. J., Sullivan, M. A., Meyle, E., & O'Riordan, M. (2015). The use of tactical polygraph with sex offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 21(3), 354-367. This descriptive study was designed to find if men who are in possession of child pornography have a history of hands-on sexual offenses of minors. This study relied on an investigation method known as tactical polygraph to uncover any undisclosed sexual offending behaviors amongst the population in this study. The authors in this study relied on 127 participants who willing agreed to take a polygraph regarding his/hers hands-on offenses. The participants were currently under investigation for being in the possession of or the possible distribution of child pornography, none of the participants have been changed at the time of this study. This study took place over three phases; the initial interview, the pre-interview, and the post-interview. The results of the study found that of the 127 interviewed, 73 (52.8%) of them admitted to engaging in hands-on sexual offenses of at least one child, and only 6 (4.7%) were found to have been honest with no hands-on offenses. Limitations in this study is the lack of ages for the participants and the fact that all the participants are only males. Calleja, N. G. (2015). Juvenile Sex and Non-Sex Offenders: A Comparison of Recidivism and Risk. Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling, 36(1), 2-12. This study was done between 2005-2008 as a contribution to the emerging body of research related to comparative recidivism between subtypes of adolescent offenders and to investigate four commonly perceived risk factors related to adolescents who have sexually offended. Consistent with past research on recidivism, recidivism was evaluated within 1 year post-release from residential treatment. This study relied on the participation of 166 male juveniles who had been treated in a residential treatment facility. The participates were between the ages of 14-21, coming from different racial backgrounds, and split into group based on the types of crime. Other variables that were taken into considerations were involvement with the child welfare system, criminal records of parents as well of the juveniles. The study took place in the Midwestern United States in a secured residential facility. Recidivism data were collected through a search of the statewide juvenile and criminal justice databases for a period of up to 2 years post-release. Recidivism was defined as a new criminal offense that resulted in disposition in either the juvenile or the adult criminal justice system. The overall recidivism rate for all three subgroups was 23.4%, with 39 of the youth reoffending within 2 years post-release. The recidivism rates varied greatly among offender types. Only 3% of the juvenile sex offenders reoffended compared with 19% of the juvenile substance-using offenders and 32.9% of the juvenile general offenders. “The major types of recidivism crimes included unarmed robbery (16%), stolen vehicle (15%), armed robbery (13%), assault (13%), firearm (10%), and drug-related charges (10%), with the remaining recidivism charges consisting of a variety of crimes. Sex offenses did not compose any of the recidivism crimes” (Calleja, 2015). This study has been able to provide more insight to this topic, the importance of risk assessments, and the need for future research in this area. Christiansen, A. K., & Vincent, J. P. (2013). Characterization and prediction of sexual and nonsexual recidivism among adjudicated juvenile sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 31(4), 506-529. This study was conducted for the purpose of being able to evaluate and characterize risk factors in juveniles that have previously been charged with sexual offenses to better determine the severity and recidivism. It was thought that the majority of juvenile sex offenders would most likely reoffend in a nonsexual manner rather than recommitting a sexual offence. The authors in this study relied on information gathered from a database in Maricopa County, AZ, and by the National Juvenile Court Data Archive. The authors relied on data previously collected on 43,906 male juvenile offenders 18 and under, 695 of these participants had at least one sexual offense. With the help and use of past research on this population static risk factors were examined for this study. The authors used the COX regression procedures SAS 9.2 to compute the data using the Wald statistic (two tailed test). The findings in this study were consistent with previous research projects. Findings agreed with the hypothesis that juvenile sex offenders have a low rate of reoffending, re-offenses of nonsexual offenses are at a higher rate. This study recommends that data collected by facilities for juvenile sex offenders should include more specific offense data, historical information about the offenders’ past experiences (e.g. abuse, violent, out of home placements, home environment) and psychologically relevant variables. It is also recommended to review options such as, self-reporting data for further research. Cook, R., Barkley, W., & Anderson, P. B. (2013). The Sexual History Polygraph Examination and Its Influences on Recidivism. Journal of Social Change, 5(1), 1. The authors in this study wanted to conduct an analysis of data to determine if there is a significant difference in recidivism between those who had a sexual history polygraph examination (SHPE) versus those who did not. This study took place in Oregon in a community correctional office. There were 166 male participants that were used in this study, each of the participants were sexual offenders, aged 17-73, mandated to submit to a polygraph and they had recently been released from prison back into the community under strict supervision. Of the 166 participants 93 of them had completed the SHPE and 73 had not. Upon collection the data between 1999 and 2005 it was found that those sex offenders who submitted to the SHPE offered more information regarding their offending history and the increased number of victims versus those who did not submit to this polygraph. Glowacz, F., & Born, M. (2013). Do adolescent child abusers, peer abusers, and non-sex offenders have different personality profiles? European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 22(2), 117-125 This study was designed to identify two subpopulations of sex offenders based on the age of the victims and on the age difference between the abuser and the victim (child sexual abusers vs. peer sexual abusers), and to compare the personality characteristics of these two subgroups with those of juvenile non-sex offenders. This study consisted of 67 juveniles ages 13-18. 20 participants were non-sex offenders (JNSOs), 26 child sexual abusers (CAs), and 21 peer sexual abusers. The authors had the participants complete The Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory, MACI, which is a 160-item self-report inventory for adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years. Once the self-reports were completed the results were gathered and found that, “peer sexual abusers scored higher on the unruly and forceful personality scales, on social insensitivity, and on delinquent predisposition. Peer sexual abusers also reported higher scores on substance-abuse proneness, impulsive propensities, and antisocial functioning than CAs, but their scores were similar to those of JNSOs. Our results show clear similarities between PAS and JNSOs in terms of personality and clinical characteristics, especially with regard to antisocial personality traits” (Glowacz & Born, 2013). Child sexual abusers did not display any type of personality characteristics typical of PA’s and JNSO’s which predisposed them to delinquent activities. The results in this study raised questions as to whether juvenile sex offenders should be treated within the same institutions as non-sex offenders and of same treatment programs should be implemented for all types of juvenile sex offenders across the board.. Jensen, T. M., Shafer, K., Roby, C. Y., & Roby, J. L. (2015). Sexual history disclosure polygraph outcomes: Do juvenile and adult sex offenders differ? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30(6), 928-944 The purpose of this study for these authors was to find if there is a difference in adults and juvenile sex offenders when it comes to passing a court-ordered polygraph. The authors collected polygraph data of sex offenders between the years of 2000 and 2012 in the Intermountain West area. This study relied on data that consisted of 86 juveniles and 238 adult offenders, mixed female and male participants, ages were not listed in this study. The data compared the results of the polygraphs results, it was determined that of the 86 juveniles 58 passed the polygraph and 28 failed whereas of the 238 adult offenders 163 passed and 75 failed. The results of this study found that there is not much of a difference between juvenile and adult sex offenders. It was found that juveniles are less likely to fail a polygraph, but overall both groups were found to be about one third likely to fail a polygraph. Limitations with polygraphs are across the board, there are many arguments about the ethical and coercive sides of the polygraph. Keelan, C. M., & Fremouw, W. J. (2013). Child versus peer/adult offenders: A critical review of the juvenile sex offender literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18732-744. The authors in this study completed this research to identify any differences between offenders who offend on children versus those who offend on adults or peers. This study was conducted by reviewing 21 previous studies on this topic. The