A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Decision-Making in Offender Populations with Mental Disorder

AbstractDecision-making has many different definitions and is measured in varied ways using neuropsychological tasks. Offenders with mental disorder habitually make disadvantageous decisions, but no study has systematically appraised the literature. This review aimed to clarify the field by bringing together different neuropsychological measures of decision-making, and using meta-analysis and systematic review to explore the performance of offenders with mental disorders on neuropsychological tasks of decision-making. A structured search of PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Medline, Cinahl was conducted with additional hand searching and grey literature consulted. Controlled studies of decision-making in offenders with evidence of any mental disorder, including a validated measure of decision-making were included. Total score on each relevant decision-making task was collated. Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria (nā€‰=ā€‰1820), and 10 studies (with 15 experiments) were entered into the meta-analysis (nā€‰=ā€‰841). All studies included in the meta-analysis used the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) to measure decision-making. Systematic review findings from individual studies showed violent offenders made poorer decisions than matched offender groups or controls. An omnibus meta-analysis was computed to ex amine performance on IGT in offenders with mental disorder compared with controls. Additionally, two sub-group meta-analyses were computed for studies involving offenders with person...
Source: Neuropsychology Review - Category: Neuroscience Source Type: research
More News: Brain | Men | Neurology | Neuroscience | Study