Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour

Michael T. Baglivio, Kevin T. Wolff, Matt DeLisi, Michael George Vaughn, Alex R. Piquero

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There is a view that young people presenting with an animal cruelty and firesetting combination represent a uniquely risky group, but prior work has relied on samples with insufficient power. Research question: What is the prevalence of the co-occurrence of animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour among young delinquents? What other features correlate with this?. Methods: We measured the prevalence of animal cruelty and firesetting among 292,649 juvenile offenders and used rare events logistic regression to examine demographic, criminal, mental health and family histories as correlates. Results: The prevalence of animal cruelty was 0.59%, accounting for 1732 young people, and of firesetting 1.56% (n = 4553). The co-occurrence of these behaviours was rare: 0.17% (n = 498), but approximately twice that expected by chance based on the prevalence of each behaviour individually (0.59% × 1.56% = 0.009%). Rates were higher in males, older youths and Whites. Among historical variables, criminal history was the strongest correlate, followed by mental health problems, then familial and individual indicators. Conclusions: As only male gender and being a victim of sexual abuse increased the odds of evidencing both animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour substantially above the odds for each behaviour individually, there thus appears to be little that is unique to the co-occurrence. Our findings suggest that sensitivity to the occurrence of each is the best way forward, with rather familiar assessments and interventions offering some hope of reducing these seriously damaging behaviours.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)484-500
Number of pages17
JournalCriminal Behaviour and Mental Health
Volume27
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Dec 1

Fingerprint

Firesetting Behavior
Animal Welfare
Animal Behavior
Hope
Mental Health
Sex Offenses
Logistic Models
Demography
Research

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Psychology (miscellaneous)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Baglivio, M. T., Wolff, K. T., DeLisi, M., Vaughn, M. G., & Piquero, A. R. (2017). Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 27(5), 484-500. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2018
Baglivio, Michael T. ; Wolff, Kevin T. ; DeLisi, Matt ; Vaughn, Michael George ; Piquero, Alex R. / Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour. In: Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health. 2017 ; Vol. 27, No. 5. pp. 484-500.
@article{fc91be10f89d4c83a49ed182f6da7a2b,
title = "Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour",
abstract = "Background: There is a view that young people presenting with an animal cruelty and firesetting combination represent a uniquely risky group, but prior work has relied on samples with insufficient power. Research question: What is the prevalence of the co-occurrence of animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour among young delinquents? What other features correlate with this?. Methods: We measured the prevalence of animal cruelty and firesetting among 292,649 juvenile offenders and used rare events logistic regression to examine demographic, criminal, mental health and family histories as correlates. Results: The prevalence of animal cruelty was 0.59{\%}, accounting for 1732 young people, and of firesetting 1.56{\%} (n = 4553). The co-occurrence of these behaviours was rare: 0.17{\%} (n = 498), but approximately twice that expected by chance based on the prevalence of each behaviour individually (0.59{\%} × 1.56{\%} = 0.009{\%}). Rates were higher in males, older youths and Whites. Among historical variables, criminal history was the strongest correlate, followed by mental health problems, then familial and individual indicators. Conclusions: As only male gender and being a victim of sexual abuse increased the odds of evidencing both animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour substantially above the odds for each behaviour individually, there thus appears to be little that is unique to the co-occurrence. Our findings suggest that sensitivity to the occurrence of each is the best way forward, with rather familiar assessments and interventions offering some hope of reducing these seriously damaging behaviours.",
author = "Baglivio, {Michael T.} and Wolff, {Kevin T.} and Matt DeLisi and Vaughn, {Michael George} and Piquero, {Alex R.}",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/cbm.2018",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "484--500",
journal = "Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health",
issn = "0957-9664",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "5",

}

Baglivio, MT, Wolff, KT, DeLisi, M, Vaughn, MG & Piquero, AR 2017, 'Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour', Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 484-500. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2018

Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour. / Baglivio, Michael T.; Wolff, Kevin T.; DeLisi, Matt; Vaughn, Michael George; Piquero, Alex R.

In: Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, Vol. 27, No. 5, 01.12.2017, p. 484-500.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Juvenile animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour

AU - Baglivio, Michael T.

AU - Wolff, Kevin T.

AU - DeLisi, Matt

AU - Vaughn, Michael George

AU - Piquero, Alex R.

PY - 2017/12/1

Y1 - 2017/12/1

N2 - Background: There is a view that young people presenting with an animal cruelty and firesetting combination represent a uniquely risky group, but prior work has relied on samples with insufficient power. Research question: What is the prevalence of the co-occurrence of animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour among young delinquents? What other features correlate with this?. Methods: We measured the prevalence of animal cruelty and firesetting among 292,649 juvenile offenders and used rare events logistic regression to examine demographic, criminal, mental health and family histories as correlates. Results: The prevalence of animal cruelty was 0.59%, accounting for 1732 young people, and of firesetting 1.56% (n = 4553). The co-occurrence of these behaviours was rare: 0.17% (n = 498), but approximately twice that expected by chance based on the prevalence of each behaviour individually (0.59% × 1.56% = 0.009%). Rates were higher in males, older youths and Whites. Among historical variables, criminal history was the strongest correlate, followed by mental health problems, then familial and individual indicators. Conclusions: As only male gender and being a victim of sexual abuse increased the odds of evidencing both animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour substantially above the odds for each behaviour individually, there thus appears to be little that is unique to the co-occurrence. Our findings suggest that sensitivity to the occurrence of each is the best way forward, with rather familiar assessments and interventions offering some hope of reducing these seriously damaging behaviours.

AB - Background: There is a view that young people presenting with an animal cruelty and firesetting combination represent a uniquely risky group, but prior work has relied on samples with insufficient power. Research question: What is the prevalence of the co-occurrence of animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour among young delinquents? What other features correlate with this?. Methods: We measured the prevalence of animal cruelty and firesetting among 292,649 juvenile offenders and used rare events logistic regression to examine demographic, criminal, mental health and family histories as correlates. Results: The prevalence of animal cruelty was 0.59%, accounting for 1732 young people, and of firesetting 1.56% (n = 4553). The co-occurrence of these behaviours was rare: 0.17% (n = 498), but approximately twice that expected by chance based on the prevalence of each behaviour individually (0.59% × 1.56% = 0.009%). Rates were higher in males, older youths and Whites. Among historical variables, criminal history was the strongest correlate, followed by mental health problems, then familial and individual indicators. Conclusions: As only male gender and being a victim of sexual abuse increased the odds of evidencing both animal cruelty and firesetting behaviour substantially above the odds for each behaviour individually, there thus appears to be little that is unique to the co-occurrence. Our findings suggest that sensitivity to the occurrence of each is the best way forward, with rather familiar assessments and interventions offering some hope of reducing these seriously damaging behaviours.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992411249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992411249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/cbm.2018

DO - 10.1002/cbm.2018

M3 - Article

C2 - 27593212

AN - SCOPUS:84992411249

VL - 27

SP - 484

EP - 500

JO - Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health

JF - Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health

SN - 0957-9664

IS - 5

ER -