The available research on self-esteem and the differing theoretical explanations of its effect on behaviour seems to provide little congruent evidence of whether or not self-esteem truly can be considered a substantive predictive factor for deviant behaviour. The available research in South Africa and internationally on self-esteem and offence type seems however to focus largely on aggressive and sexual offenders. The focus on aggressive offences could be due to the extensive, yet vacillating, perspective of violence as an expression of level of self-esteem. Whereas the prevalence of sexual offenders in the self-esteem research may be attributed to the high level of recidivism of sexual offenders and the often deep-seated psychological irregularities related to psychopathic tendencies such as anxiety, impulsivity and delusions of grandeur, commonly associated with this type of offence (Thornton et al., 2004:590). From a South African perspective it could be argued that the prevalence of these types of offences in the research may be related to their apparent prioritisation in the criminal justice system due to the notion that minimum sentencing legislation is said to be “aimed primarily, but not solely at sexual and violent offences” (Giffard & Muntingh, 2007:26).
3.2.1 Violent Offences
As previously mentioned, the traditional view of the relationship between violence and self- esteem is that individuals who display aggressive behaviour are perceived to have a low self- esteem (Leary et al., 1995:297). Parker et al., (2005:414) established in their study on the predictors of violent behaviour of a juvenile sample that low self-esteem and other personality factors such as unstable emotionality and increased anxiety predicted violent behaviour. Jordan and O'Hare (2007:126) provided an explanation from the behaviourist perspective and claimed that violence can be considered a learned response that acts as positive reinforcement for the individual’s behaviour that in turn increases self-esteem (see 2.4.2). In an article evaluating the effect of South Africa’s National Crime Prevention Strategy (NCPS), Bruce (2006) identifies variables that were not explicitly considered in the NCPS. Of relevance to this study, self-esteem and factors associated with the high levels of violence are considered and possible explanations provided. Reference is made to the available theories linking self-esteem and violence which include the low self-esteem and link to violent behaviour as well as the unstable high self-esteem link to violence which is
52
referred to in this article as a “disguised low self-esteem” (Bruce, 2006:34). It is further stated that self-esteem alone is not the actual cause of violent behaviour but rather an underlying factor that necessitates the use of certain psychological defences that manifest behaviourally as aggression. Bruce (2006:34) also makes a linkage between self-esteem and status inequality borne out of the vast relative disparity between individual status and economic situations. Such inflated ideas of self-worth, contrasted against a background of social and economic inequality can be seen as plausible illustrations of theoretical understandings of the discrepancy between the real and ideal self as purported by Rogers as well as Merton’s view of anomie (see 2.3).
Research conducted by Baumeister et al., (1996) that critically evaluated a number of studies that had found inverse relations between self-esteem and offending behaviour proposed that aggression and violent behaviour stem not from a low self-esteem but rather from a narcissistically high self-esteem and a threatened or fragile ego. The authors felt that the traditional perspective was grounded in the narrow view of past research defining high self- esteem as a positive attribute pertaining to good adjustment and social likeability and that synonyms for high self-esteem with negative connotations were forgotten and conveniently ignored, in reference to terms such as “arrogance”, “pride”, “conceitedness” and “narcissism”
(Baumeister et al., 1996:5). Numerous studies linking self-esteem to offences such as terrorism, murder, domestic violence and hate crimes were analysed and critiqued. The analysis established that none of the studies could unequivocally identify low self-esteem as a predictor of offending behaviour and that most of the research ignored indicators of high self- esteem. Illustrations of this can be found in research establishing that the participants showed
“exaggerated self-esteem” or demanded “unwarranted respect”, yet still maintained the low self-esteem conclusion. Self-esteem was in some cases poorly measured with conclusions about self-esteem being made from single items such as whether or not parents wanted their children to emulate them when they grew up and an over reliance on historical societal factors without incorporating the modern context (Baumeister et al., 1996:6). In addition to the critical analyses performed on the literature presented in the study, the authors also obtained support of the role of ego threats and fragile high self-esteem in aggressive behaviour. Further literature reviews established that factors such as being humiliated or insulted (real and perceived), confidence by males in their physical prowess, perceptions of superiority, being outspoken and extreme competitiveness all lead up or were related to expressions of aggression and violence on varying levels (Baumeister et al., 1996:15-25).
53
Self-esteem was also assessed in a study conducted across 18 Spanish prisons between male inmates incarcerated for intimate partner violence. Participants were split into two groups namely, psychopathic and non-psychopathic based on their psychopathy checklist scores. The results showed that inmates classified as psychopathic had significantly lower self-esteem levels than the non-psychopathic group, however both samples scored above the normative range for the self-esteem scale used, thus providing support for a high self-esteem link to aggressive behaviour (Echeburua & Fernandez-Montalvo, 2007:261). With reference to the results of other sociodemographic and correctional variables, it was found that for the entire sample the majority of participants were single or divorced, came from middle-low socioeconomic backgrounds and only had a primary school education (Echeburua &
Fernandez-Montalvo, 2007:259). In consideration of the recidivism research, these findings can be said to support the perspectives presented earlier in the chapter identifying factors commonly related to recidivism (see 3.1).
Beesley and McGuire (2009) assessed the differences in gender-role identity, hyper- masculinity, self-image and self-esteem, between two groups of offending population samples namely violent and property offenders and a third non-offending group where the comparative role of self-esteem in behaviour was assessed. The results of the study showed that there were no significant differences in self-esteem scores between the three subsets of the sample and that the majority of the scores fell between the mid to high range of the self- esteem scale, indicating average to high levels of self-esteem (Beesley & McGuire, 2009:264). This finding is in contrast to the popular view, which claims that self-esteem is generally lower in offending populations than in non-offending counterparts (Beesley &
McGuire, 2009:253). One can therefore establish that the findings of Beesley and McGuire’s (2009) research support the plausibility of Baumeister et al.’s (1996) perspective. However, the researchers continue to elaborate on their findings and state that in light of the substantial support for both high and low self-esteem relations to deviance it is plausible that the relationship between the factors may not be as linear as previously thought. Therefore, individuals with scores ranging in the upper and lower ends of the self-esteem scale can be said to be at equally high risk of eliciting violent behaviour (Beesley & McGuire, 2009:264).
Similarities can also be drawn here between this explanation and Kernis et al.’s (1989:1019) view of stability of self-esteem. Kernis et al. (1989) established that individuals with low and unstable high self-esteem were more likely to display aggressive behaviour than those with a
54
stable high self-esteem, even though unstable high self-esteem was a stronger predictor of aggressive responses than low self-esteem.
Beesley and McGuire’s (2009) findings could furthermore relate to one of the explanations proposed by Baumeister et al., (1996:7) which states that self-esteem may not be a predictor of offending behaviour at all but rather an influencing factor in target selection. In the sense that individuals with high self-confidence will seek out more difficult targets to bolster their already high self-perception whereas those with low self-esteem will be more inclined to seek out vulnerable targets such as women, children, the elderly and individuals from marginalised populations. Support for Baumeister et al.’s (1996) perspective on target selection becomes increasingly evident in consideration of sexual offender research.
3.2.2 Sexual Offences
As mentioned in the previous chapter, the role of perception in level of self-esteem is a crucial factor to account for when analysing the relationship between self-esteem and offending behaviour. Perception therefore not only determines how individuals experience the treatment and evaluations of others but also determines the individuals’ beliefs in their own abilities to satisfy general needs. Thornton et al., (2004:588) state that the means to satisfy a need for sexual gratification for someone with low self-esteem would have to be perceived as a non-threatening and non-demanding exercise. Therefore, in the case of sex offenders, the sexual assault of easily overpowered targets such as lone women and children may become attractive options if such actions are perceived to be less threatening or demanding than consensual options. This negative view of the self would also extend to the way in which individuals experience the perception of others. The focus on negative evaluations by others could create feelings of resentment towards these others and encourage the individual to behave in a manner indicative of power or status assertion in order to reciprocate the perceived inherently hostile perceptions of others (Thornton et al., 2004:589).
Webster, Mann, Thornton and Wakeling (2007:207) established that the link between low self-esteem and sexual offending behaviour had been supported in a review of the literature included in their study. However, it was also found that support for self-esteem as a significant predictor of recidivism remained contested. Reference was made to previous studies that collectively found sexual offenders to have a generally lower self-esteem than
55
non-offenders but not to vary significantly from other offender populations. An analysis of different types of sexual offenders revealed that those convicted of offences against same sex victims and children tended to have lower self-esteem scores than those who offended against the opposite sex (Webster et al., 2007:208). Similar conclusions were purported by Van der Hoven and Ovens (2003:22) as they claimed that it was common for paedophiles and child sex abusers to have low self-esteem. This could provide support for the close linkage between self-esteem and societal norms, specifically those related to sexual interactions, as those with offending behaviour reflecting the more traditional or mainstream sexual relations had higher self-esteem than those reflecting less popular or minority sexual practices. Findings showed low levels of self-esteem even after treatment in comparison to non-offenders despite marked improvements (Webster et al., 2007:213).
Oliver et al. (2007) conducted comparative research on a group of rapists and sexual murderers with the intent of investigating and comparing factors relating to family variables, personality, victimology and offence. It was established that the sexual murderer subset were more likely to be single at the time of the offence compared to the rapists being in a monogamous relationship. IQ scores were higher and victims tended to be younger for the rapist subset (Oliver et al., 2007:304). There were no mean differences found in terms of personality however, the rapist subset did score higher on the Paranoid Suspicion, Resentment and Self-Esteem scales of the Antisocial Personality Questionnaire (Oliver et al., 2007:306). The increased resentment score would support the findings of Thornton et al.
(2004:589) mentioned earlier in this section as a characteristic of sexual offenders. In addition to these conclusions drawn between the two sample groups, it was also found that the sample of convicted rapists scored lower on self-esteem assessment than the sexual murderers (Oliver et al., 2007:307). Further comparison to a non-offending sample revealed that 42.7% of the rapist sample and 17.9% of the sexual murderer sample had lower self- esteem than the normative sample. The rapist sample also had a higher mean number of previous violent offences which would provide support for the view that violent offenders have a lower level of self-esteem. In light of the Antisocial Personality Questionnaire results, this would however be a very one-dimensional conclusion to draw, as it is plausible to assume that the factors related to antisocial personality disorder such as grandiose feelings, neuroticism, depression and anxiety may outweigh the usually positive effects of high self- esteem (see 3.1.5).
56
As one can deduce there is a wide variety of available research that provides support for the relationship between both, high and low levels of self-esteem and offending behaviour. One of the biggest reasons for this wide discrepancy in the findings can be attested to the methodological, analytical and conceptual concerns of the studies. One particular concern is the environment in which the offenders are assessed (Baumeister et al., 1996:5; Bonta &
Gendreau, 1990:348). The cross-sectional nature of much of the research has also been identified as a detracting factor for sound conclusions due to the fluctuating nature of self- esteem. The popular perception that low self-esteem is related to offending behaviour has also been found to affect researcher analysis, as many clear indicators of high self-esteem as mentioned earlier in the section on violent offences (see 3.2.1) are overlooked or simply not included due to the narrow conceptualisation of the self-esteem factor (Baumeister et al., 1996:15). Furthermore, the psychological understanding required for research of this nature has also come into question with researchers from historical, sociological and even political orientations researching such phenomenon (Baumeister et al., 1996:24). Therefore, in order to perform research in the prison environment it is essential to understand, acknowledge or attempt to control for the effect of the incarceration experience on self-esteem as well as other confounding methodological, analytical and conceptual factors mentioned.