Deficits in emotional intelligence underlying
adolescent sex offending
NICOLE MORIARTY, CON STOUGH, PATRICK TIDMARSH,
DARREN EGER AND SUSAN DENNISON
The present study investigated whether a battery of tests designed to measure different
levels of emotional intelligence could differentiate adolescent sex offenders from a
non-offender control group. Fifteen male adolescent sex offenders ranging in age from
14 to 17 years were recruited through Health and Community Services (VIC,
Australia) and 49 non-offender males, matched for age, completed the battery. The
battery comprised the Trait Meta-Mood Scale (TMMS), Davis' Interpersonal
Reactivity Index (IRI), the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP-32), the Revised
Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and the Openness to Feelings facet of the NEO
PI-R. Discriminant analyses using all five tests showed that 89?9 per cent of the sample
were correctly allocated their respective groups. Overall the sex offenders were higher
on aggression and attention to feelings, less clear about their feelings and less capable
to repair unpleasant moods and prolong positive ones. It was concluded that these
findings could be the focus of treatment approaches for adolescent sex offenders.
r 2001 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
Introduction
Until recently, there has been little research examining the causes of sexual offences
committed by adolescents, perhaps because of the belief that few sexual offences of any
serious consequences are perpetrated by adolescents and that they will ``grow out'' of such
behaviours (Davis and Leitenberg, 1987). However, between 50 and 80 per cent of chronic
adult sexual offenders committed their first sexual offence as adolescents and adolescents
commit approximately 20 per cent of all sexual offences, although these indices may vary by
up to 15 per cent (Fehrenback, Smith, Monastersky and Deisher, 1986; Davis and
Leitenberg, 1987; Bremer, 1992; Criminal Justice Commission, 1999). Recent statistics also
indicate that among male adolescent sex offenders between 50 and 70 per cent have
committed a previous sexual offence (Fehrenback et al., 1986). Early intervention and
treatment programmes are therefore critical in reducing the number of life-long sex offenders
in the community. In order to improve current treatment programmes for adolescent sex
offenders, more research is required (Sapp and Vaughn, 1990) to build upon the general
treatment strategies currently in use (Bremer, 1992).
The ability to understand one's emotional states or emotional problems is an important
indicator of healthy mental functioning (Siegel, Platt and Peizer, 1976). Previous studies
have shown that adolescent offenders have difficulty in labelling their own and the
emotional states of others (Savitsky and Czyzewski, 1978), have difficulty in controlling their
anger and establishing meaningful relationships with their peers and are in families that are
emotionally disengaged (Bischof, Stith and Whitney, 1995). Savitsky and Czyzewski (1978)
Reprint requests and correspondence should be addressed to: Con Stough, Neuropsychology Laboratory (BSEE),
Swinburne University of Technology, PO Box 218 Hawthorn, VIC 3122 Australia (E-mail: cstough@swin.edu.au).
0140-1971/01/060743+09 $35Á00/0 # 2001 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
Journal of Adolescence 2001, 24, 743­751
doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0441, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on
compared adolescent male offenders and non-offenders on two tasks designed to assess
reactions to non-verbal expressions of others. They reported that when compared to the non-
offenders, the offender group was less accurate in labelling the emotional states of others.
Many treatment programmes for adolescent sex offenders assess victim empathy and the
offender's emotions prior to offences in the hope of allowing the adolescent sex offender to
identify their pattern of behaviour prior to offending. Empathy has long been considered an
important factor in sex offending. For example, Marshall, Hudson, Jones and Fernandez
(1995) and Marshall, Anderson and Champagne (1997) have suggested that a lack of
empathy specific to the victim acts as a self-serving bias which allows the sex offender to
overcome any internal inhibitions or emotional disturbance he might otherwise feel.
Although Marshall et al. (1995) found that empathy deficits were person-specific in sex
offenders and that they were not necessarily unempathic towards everyone.
Previous research has demonstrated that adolescent sex offenders differ when compared to
other adolescents in a range of personality traits, including social skill deficits (Valliant and
Fehrenbach et al., 1986; Bergeron, 1997), fear of intimacy (Marshall, 1989), feelings of
powerlessness (Davis and Leitenberg, 1987), anger (Lewis, Shanok and Pincus, 1979),
impulsivity and inability to understand and identify emotions in themselves and in others
(Savitsky and Czyzewski, 1978). Although to date there is no published material available
regarding emotional intelligence in adolescent sex offenders, there is some evidence to
suggest that sex offenders have problems with the evaluation of their own emotions and the
emotions of others. Given the growth of a theoretical framework for emotional intelligence
the investigation of this construct in adolescent sex offenders may reveal the importance, or
otherwise, of emotional intelligence for this population and in turn may provide useful
information for the development and improvement of treatment programs.
The current conceptualization of emotional intelligence is that it is identified as a core
aptitude related to the capacity to reason with emotions (Salovey and Mayer, 1996). It is
separate from related concepts such as emotional achievement and emotional competence
(Salovey and Mayer, 1996). The mental ability model of emotional intelligence focuses on
emotions themselves and their interactions with thought (Mayer, Salovey and Caruso, in
press). The model predicts that those who are emotionally intelligent are ``more likely to
have grown up in biosocially adaptive households (i.e. have had emotionally sensitive
parenting); to be non-defensive; to be able to reframe emotions effectively (i.e. be
realistically optimistic and appreciative); to choose good emotional role models; and to be
able to communicate and discuss feelings and develop expert knowledge in a particular
emotional area such as aesthetics, moral or ethical feeling, social problem solving, leadership,
or spiritual feeling'' (Mayer et al., p. 11). Those who are good at connecting thoughts to
feelings (i.e. are emotionally intelligent) may better ``hear'' the emotional implications of
their own thoughts, as well as understand the feelings of others (Mayer and Geher, 1996).
Several models of emotional intelligence have been proposed in recent years. Some are
labelled ability models and focus on the interplay of emotion and intelligence as traditionally
defined, while mixed models include mental abilities, dispositions and traits and describe a
compound conception of intelligence (Mayer et al., in press). The mental ability model of
emotional intelligence described by Salovey and Mayer will be used in this study, as research
has shown increasing support for the existence of a mental ability model of emotional
intelligence that is somewhat distinct from standard analytical intelligence (Mayer et al., in
press). Research works on the mixed models of emotional intelligence are more preliminary
to-date (Mayer et al., in press).
744 N. Moriarty et al.
In view of the current state of the literature and the lack of previous research examining
emotional intelligence in sex offenders, a general hypothesis is that male adolescent sex
offenders will report deficits in emotional functioning compared to adolescent non-offenders.
Although the introduction of a psychometric measure of emotional intelligence is most likely
premature, investigation into the differences between different groups of adolescents may
provide useful information regarding emotional development in adolescents, particularly
those who engage in inappropriate sexual behaviour.
The present study uses a battery of tests to examine emotional intelligence in adolescent
sex offenders, addressing branches 1, 3 and 4 of Mayer and Salovey's mental model of
emotional intelligence. As the first branch includes the recognition of emotions in others,
elements within Branch 1 may be measured psychometrically by the Toronto Alexithymia
Scale Revised (Bagby, Parker and Taylor, 1994a). Alexithymia refers to a diminished ability to
identify and/or communicate feelings (Kroner and Forth, 1995). Empathy is also relevant to
Branch 1, as it has been previously regarded as a fundamental social skill which allows the
individual to anticipate, understand and experience the point of view of others (Davis and
Franzoi, 1991). Davis (1983) developed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) which is a
psychometric measure of empathy based on a multidimensional approach and is comprised
of two key elements, cognitive empathy and emotional (or affective) empathy (Davis and
Franzoi, 1991). Interpreting the meaning that emotions convey regarding interpersonal
relationships is central to emotional intelligence and is incorporated in branch 3. The
Inventory of Interpersonal problems (IIP-32) measures the difficulties people have in their
interpersonal relationships (Barkham, Hardy and Startup, 1996). A high score on this may
indicate the existence of interpersonal problems, reflective of poor understanding of the
progression of feelings in relationships. The Trait Meta-Mood Scale (TMMS; Salovey, Mayer,
Goldman, Turvey and Palfai, 1995) is used to measure the Branch 4 factors clarity of moods
and ability to repair moods.
Method
Participants
Fifteen male adolescents sex offenders were recruited through the Health and Community
Services (Victoria, Australia) and ranged in age from 14 to 17 years (M=16?93 years,
S.D.=1?79 years). The offenders were outpatients on court orders to attend the Male
Adolescent Programme for Positive Sexuality (MAPPS). Treatment time varied from a few
weeks to a few years. The severity and nature of the crimes committed by these adolescents
included rape, aggravated rape, attempted rape, sexual penetration of another individual
under 17 years, indecent assault, attempted indecent assault and gross indecency. Forty-nine
non-offending male adolescents ranging in age from 14 to 17 years (M=15?24 years,
S.D. =1?07 years) a secondary school.
Tests
The Trait Meta Mood Scale (TMMS)
The TMMS (Salovey, Mayer, Goldman, Turvey and Palfai, 1995) was designed assess
relatively stable individual differences in dealing with emotions. Heng (1996) modified the
Deficits in emotional intelligence underlying adolescent sex offending 745
scale to include 23 items with factor loadings 40?20 from the original 48 items. Ten items
load on attention, seven on clarity, and six on mood repair. Subjects respond to each item
with a rating of 1 to 5 (1=``strongly disagree'', 2=``disagree'', 3=``neither agree nor disagree'',
4=``somewhat agree'' and 5=``strongly agree''). Possible scores ranged from 10 to 50 for
attention, 7 to 35 for clarity and 6 to 30 for mood repair. The overall Cronbach's alpha for the
23 item version was a=0?84 (Heng, 1996).
The Toronto Alexithymia Scale
Mayer and Salovey's mental model of emotional intelligence includes the recognition of
emotions in others, which may be measured psychometrically by the Toronto Alexithymia
Scale Revised (Bagby, Parker and Taylor, 1994a, b). Alexithymia refers to a diminished ability
to identify and/or communicate feelings (Kroner and Forth, 1995). The Toronto Alexithymia
Scale Revised, (TAS-R; Bagby et al., 1994a, b) consists of 20 items and participants respond
to each item on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 ``strongly disagree'' to 5 ``strongly agree''.
Factor analysis has revealed three factors for the TAS-20. Factor 1 reflects the capacity to
identify feelings and to distinguish between feelings and the bodily sensations of emotional
arousal. Factor 2 measures inability to communicate feelings to other people, while factor 3
assesses externally oriented feelings (Bagby et al., 1994a, b). An alexithymic is classified as
scoring 60 or above on the 20-item scale. The TAS-20 has demonstrated acceptable internal
consistency (a=0?81), as have the three factors (Factor 1, a=0?78; Factor 2, a=0?75; and
Factor 3, a=0?66). The test-retest reliability of the TAS-20, with a testing period of 3 weeks
has been reported to be 0?77 (Bagby et al., 1994a, b).
The IIP-32
Interpreting the meaning that emotions convey regarding interpersonal relationships is
central to emotional intelligence. The Inventory of Interpersonal problems (IIP-32) measures
the difficulties people have in their interpersonal relationships (Barkham, Hardy and Startup,
1996). A high score on this may indicate the existence of interpersonal problems, reflective
of poor understanding of the progression of feelings in relationships. Thirty-two items
constituting the short form of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP-32) (Barkham,
Hardy and Startup, 1996) was employed. Responses for each of the items are made on a five-
point scale ranging from 0 (``not at all'') to 4 (``extremely''). The overall internal consistency
of the inventory is high (0?86) (Barkham et al., 1996). Items in the inventory load on eight
areas of difficulty in which individuals experience difficulty in interpersonal relationships;
hard to be sociable (a=0?89); assertive (a=0?86); supportive (a=0?75); involved
(a=0?75); being too aggressive (a=0?85); being too caring (a=0?72); too dependent
(a=0?71) and too open (a=0?80). The overall retest correlation (with a time lag of two
months) for the IIP-32 was 0?70, and for each of the eight areas of difficulty retest
correlations ranged from 0?56 to 0?81. High scores indicate a high degree of interpersonal
problems.
Interpersonal Reactivity Index
Davis's Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI, 1983) is a multidimensional approach to
individual differences in empathy. The 28-item instrument consists of four 7-item subscales,
which assess perspective taking, fantasy, empathic concern, and personal distress. Responses
are made on a five-point scale ranging from (0) ``does not describe me well'' to (4) ``describes
me well''. The internal reliability coefficients (standardized alpha) for each of the subscales
746 N. Moriarty et al.
range between 0?70 to 0?78. Test­retest reliabilities, measured from 60 to 75 days, revealed
correlations ranging from 0?61 to 0?79 in males and 0?62 to 0?81 in females (Davis, 1983).
Procedure
The juvenile sex offenders completed the tests during weekly group counselling sessions held
by MAPPS. The tests were administered in groups, requiring approximately 45 min to
complete the questionnaires. Offenders who were not receiving group counselling answered
the questionnaires in individual sessions. The assessment of the non-offending male
adolescents was conducted in several different class sessions and administered in groups.
Each participant (MAPPS and non-offenders) were given an identification number and read
an information sheet before written consent was obtained, both from the adolescents and
from parents or guardians when the adolescents under 16 years of age.
Results
To examine the possible differences in emotional intelligence characteristics between
adolescent sex offenders and non-offenders, a series of one-way analyses of variance
(ANOVAs) were performed. The results are summarized in Table 1.
For the IIP-32 the adolescent sex offenders had a higher mean item total and in general
found it harder to be sociable, assertive, and supportive, were more aggressive and open and
less caring and dependent when compared to a control group of adolescents. Both groups
scored similarly on the hard to be involved factor. However, the two groups only significantly
differed on the too aggressive factor, with sex offenders reporting higher aggression than the
control group of adolescents, F(1,62)=4?57, p40?05.
The adolescent sex offenders scored lower compared to the control group on Davis' IRI
overall scale score and on each of the four factors, although none of these differences were
statistically significant. The adolescent sex offenders scored somewhat lower on the overall
scale of the TMMS as well as on clarity of feelings and mood repair, although these
differences were also non-significant. The sex offender group however scored significantly
higher than the control group on the attention to feelings factor, F(1,62)=6?07, p40?05.
There were no significant differences between the control group and adolescent sex offenders
on the total TAS or the three factors of the TAS.
Discriminant analysis
A discriminant analysis was performed to examine whether the battery of tests could be used
as a measure to detect adolescents who had committed sex offences. The analysis, based on
unequal group sizes, included the factor and total scores from each of the questionnaires
administered. The analysis identified one discriminant function, with the largest contributor
being the `clarity of feelings' factor (r=0?41), followed by the `too aggressive' factor
(r=0?35) and the `difficulty in identifying feelings' factor (r=0?32). The relationships
between the groups and predictors was not highly reliable, w2
(21, N=64)=23?97, p40?05.
However, the function was able to correctly classify 89.1 per cent of the adolescents, with
53.3 per cent of the adolescent sex offenders and 100 per cent of the non-offending control
group being correctly classified.
Deficits in emotional intelligence underlying adolescent sex offending 747
Discussion
Despite a general pattern of differences in emotional intelligence between the adolescent sex
offenders and non-offending adolescents, there were few significant differences between the
groups. Where significant differences did exist, the sex offenders were higher on aggression
and attention to feelings than the control group, consistent with reports that adolescent sex
offenders are aggressive (Goleman, 1996) and show deficits in emotional understanding
(Bremer, 1992; Dolan, Holloway, Bailey and Kroll, 1996). The adolescent sex offenders
tended to be non-significantly higher on the IIP-32 than the control group, indicating a
tendency for the adolescent sex offenders to have more interpersonal problems. Although
the general trend is consistent with past research that has indicated that adolescent sex
Table 1 One-way ANOVAs comparing the traits of adolescent sex offenders and adolescent
controls
Scale Factor Group F-Ratio
1. Sex 2. Control
Offenders Group
M S.D. M S.D.
IIP-32 TOTAL 1?41 0?70 1?28 0?43 0?69
Hard to be sociable 4?87 3?27 4?10 2?53 0?91
Hard to be assertive 5?07 4?22 4?57 3?04 0?25
Too aggressive 8?73 5?11 6?24 3?53 4?57*
Too open 6?00 3?27 5?63 2?31 0?24
Too caring 5?00 2?70 5?49 2?38 0?46
Hard to be supportive 5?87 3?64 4?65 2?89 1?79
Hard to be involved 4?67 4?37 4?80 3?03 0?11
Too dependent 5?13 4?07 5?51 2?80 0?17
IRI TOTAL 52?67 12?32 56?02 11?03 1?01
Fantasy scale 12?80 4?51 13?80 4?22 0?62
Perspective-taking 13?87 4?58 15?02 3?57 1?41
Scale
Empathic concern 13?27 4?11 13?82 2?71 0?42
Scale
Personal distress 12?73 4?11 13?20 7?40 0?06
Scale
TMMS TOTAL 76?40 16?02 79?63 12?63 0?11
Attention to feelings 7?13 13?37 36?00 11?30 6?07*
Clarity of feelings 20?73 5?12 23?49 3?30 1?85
Mood repair 18?53 4?12 20?14 3?98 0?66
TAS-20 TOTAL 61?80 10?14 59?69 7?74 3?62
Difficulty in 19?87 5?76 17?06 4?72 0?19
identifying feelings
Difficulty describing 14?93 3?37 15?37 3?33 0?07
feelings
Externally orientated thinking 24?20 4?11 23?94 3?04 0?73
Note: *po0?05; df.=1?62; n=15 (Group 1), n=49 (Group 2).
748 N. Moriarty et al.
offenders are socially isolated (Fehrenbach et al., 1986; Marshall, 1989; Valliant and
Bergeron, 1997) and have a lack of empathy for their victims (Goleman, 1996), differences
were not large enough as to provide sufficient support for the findings of past research.
There was no evidence that adolescent sex offenders display less empathy when compared
to the control group. Previous research has demonstrated a lack of empathy in adolescent sex
offenders (Kaplan and Arbuthnot, 1985; Kroner and Forth, 1995 e.g. Goleman, 1996).
However, Marshall et al. (1995, 1997) have suggested that empathy deficits are person
specific and not general deficits. Adolescent sex offenders were less able to reflect upon and
manage emotions compared to non-offending adolescents by paying more attention to their
feelings. There was a non-significant trend for them to be less clear about their feelings and
less capable to repair unpleasant moods and prolong positive ones. These findings suggest
that adolescent sex offenders may be confused about their feelings and devote time into
analysing them. Furthermore, if they are unable to identify their feelings they would be
unable to assess whether moods require repairing. Groth (1977) reported that adolescent sex
offenders had a predominant mood state of depression and emptiness, which may suggest an
inability to terminate negative mood states.
The present investigation also found that adolescent sex offenders were alexithymic,
although the control group also recorded high scores on this scale. This finding suggests that
deficits in experiencing and expressing emotions might be a characteristic of adolescents in
general, although perhaps more pronounced in adolescents who commit sex offences.
Although the sex offender group did not score higher on impulsiveness than the control
group, both groups scored in the very high range, demonstrating a low capacity to control
their impulses, which may be a general characteristic of male adolescents. Nevertheless, this
impulsiveness teamed with other maladaptive traits may contribute to deviant sexual
behaviour.
Based on the scores on the emotional intelligence battery the control group was correctly
classified as such. However, accuracy in classifying the sex offender group was lower, with
only half of the members of this group being correctly classified. This finding indicates that
the adolescent sex offenders are a heterogenous group, which may not comprise similar levels
of emotional intelligence. This finding is also likely to be influenced by the various offences
that the offender group committed, ranging from rape to gross indecency. Further research is
required to examine potential differences in emotional intelligence between sex offenders
using a larger sample that enables any differences between offence types to be statistically
examined.
A number of methodological considerations in the present study limit the conclusions that
can be afforded to significant findings. In particular the small sample size and variability
between groups may have impeded the detection of any true differences between sex
offender and non-offender adolescents. The control group was not matched on demographic
variables such as socio-economic status, level of education or a number of other factors that
may have increased the risk of engaging in criminal activities. Clearly further research is
required to establish the uniqueness of these findings to adolescent sex offenders.
Despite the limitations, the present study indicated that adolescent sex offenders have
difficulty identifying feelings and are more aggressive than non-offending male adolescents.
These variables were important in discriminating between the offender and control groups in
the discriminant analysis. The sex offenders also demonstrate a high degree of impulsiveness,
which teamed with a tendency for aggressiveness and difficulty in identifying feelings, may
contribute to the motivation to offend. To date there is very little research on adolescent sex
Deficits in emotional intelligence underlying adolescent sex offending 749
offending compared to adult sex offending and therefore programmes being initiated to
provide treatment and intervention for adolescent sex offenders may benefit from the
preliminary findings of this research. The discovery of some deficits in aspects of emotional
intelligence is promising and further replication and development of measures may provide
useful guides for the development of treatment programs that address emotion related
deficits.
References
Bagby, R. M., Parker, J. D. and Taylor, G. T. (1994a). The Twenty-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale-I.
Item Selection and Cross Validation of the Factor Structure. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,
38(1), 23­32.
Bagby, R. M., Taylor, G. J. and Parker, J. D. (1994b). The Twenty-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale-II.
Convergent, Discriminant and Concurrent Validity. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 38(1), 33­
40.
Barkham, M., Hardy, G. and Startup, M. (1996). The IIP-32: a short version of the Inventory of
Interpersonal Problems. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32, 21­35.
Bischof, G., Stith, S. and Whitney, M (1995). Family environments of adolescent juvenile sex offenders
and other juvenile delinquents. Adolescence, 30(117), 157­170.
Bremer, J. D. (1992). Serious Juvenile sex Offenders: treatment and Long Term Follow-up. Psychiatric
Annals, 22(6), 326­332.
Criminal Justice Commission. (1999). Reported Sexual Offences in Queensland. Research and Prevention
Division; Criminal Justice Commission.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring Individual Differences in Empathy: evidence for a Multidimensional
Approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113­126.
Davis, G. E. and Leitenberg H. (1987). Adolescent Sex Offenders. Psychological Bulletin, 101(3),
417­427.
Dolan, M., Holloway, J., Bailey, S. and Kroll, L. (1996). The Psychosocial Characteristics of Juvenile
sexual Offenders. Medicine, Science and the Law, 36(4), 343­352.
Fehrenbach, P. A. Smith, W., Monastersky, C. and Deisher, R. (1986). Adolescent Sexual Offenders:
offender and Offence Characteristics. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 56(2), 225­233.
Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence; Why it can Matter More than IQ. Bloomsbury Publishing,
London.
Groth, A. N. (1977). The adolescent sexual offender and his prey. International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 21(3), 249­254.
Heng, F. (1996). Emotional Intelligence: an Exploration of its Measurement, Manifestations and Correlates.
Unpublished Thesis Paper. Swinburne University of Technology.
Kaplan, P. J. and Arbuthnot, J. (1985). Affective Empathy and Cognitive Role Taking in Delinquent
and Nondelinquent Youth. Adolescence, 20(78), 323­333.
Kroner, D. and Forth, A. (1995). The Toronto Alexithymia Scale with Incarcerated Offenders.
Personality and Individual Differences, 19(5), 625­634.
Lewis, D., Shanok, S. and Pincus, J. (1979). Juvenile sexual Assaulters. American Journal of Psychiatry,
136(9), 1194­1196.
Marshall, W. L. (1989). Intimacy, Loneliness and Sexual Offenders. Behaviour Research Therapy, 27(5),
491­503.
Marshall, W. L., Anderson, D. and Champagne, F. (1997). Self-esteem and its relationship to sexual
offending. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3, 161­186.
Marshall, W. L., Hudson, S. M., Jones, R. and Fernandez, Y. M. (1995). Empathy in sex offenders.
Clinical Psychology Review, 15(2), 99­113.
Mayer, J. and Geher, G. (1996). Emotional Intelligence and the Identification of Emotion. Intelligence,
22, 89­113.
Mayer, J., Salovey, P. and Caruso, D. (in press). Competing Models of Emotional Intelligence. In
Handbook of Human Intelligence, R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). New York: Cambridge. (Subject to editing).
750 N. Moriarty et al.
Salovey, P. and Mayer, H. (1996). Some final thoughts about personality and intelligence. In Handbook
of Mental Control, D. M. Wegner and J. W. Pennebaker (Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall,
pp. 303­319.
Salovey, P., Mayer, H. Goldman, S., Turvey, C. and Palfai, T. (1995). Emotional attention, clarity
and repair. Exploring emotional intelligence using the trait meta mood scale. In Emotion, Disclosure
and Health, J. W. pennebaker (3rd Ed). Washington: American Psychological Association,
pp. 125­154.
Sapp, A. and Vaughn, M. (1990). Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment at State Operated Correctional
Institutions. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 34(2),
131­146.
Savitsky, J. and Czyzewski, D. (1978). The Reaction of Adolescent Offenders and Nonoffenders to
Nonverbal Emotion Displays. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6(1), 89­96.
Siegel, J., Platt, J. and Peizer, S. (1976). Emotional and Social Real Life Problem Solving Thinking in
Adolescent and Adult Psychiatric Patients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32(2), 230­232.
Valliant, P. and Bergeron, T. (1997). Personality and Criminal Profile of Adolescent Sexual Offenders,
General Offenders in Comparison to Nonoffenders. Psychological Reports, 81, 483­489.
Deficits in emotional intelligence underlying adolescent sex offending 751