gudjonsson blame attribution inventory-revised

Gudjonsson

Blame Attribution

Inventory-Revised

1

Page Number:

Introduction 2

Development 3

Standardization 5

Administration 6

Validation 7

References and publications 8

relevant to the GBAI-R

Appendix 10

GBAI-R

GBAI-R Scoring

Contents

2

The Gudjonsson Blame Attribution Inventory - Revised (GBAI-R) is a self-reported

measure of an individual’s blame attribution. Blame attribution refers to the process of

attempting to construct causal explanations for behaviours displayed by themselves

and others.

The GBAI-R is specifically designed for use with offenders and frames the statements in

relation to the attribution of their previously committed crime(s). The inventory

measures three factors: mental element attribution (i.e. blaming responsibility for the

crime on mental illness or poor self-control), external attribution (i.e. blaming the crime

on social circumstances, victims, or society), and guilt feeling attribution (i.e. feelings of

regret and remorse concerning the offence). Comparing an individual offender’s score

on each of these three factors with the appropriate normative scores allows for a

profile of their blame attribution type to be created.

Introduction

3

The Gudjonsson Blame Attribution Inventory (GBAI) was developed by Professor Gisli

Gudjonsson (1984) as an easy to administer measure that assessed offenders’

attributions for their crime. Literature and theory recognises two distinct types of

attribution, internal-external and self-control/freedom to act (Snyder, 1976), of which

both were incorporated into the development of this scale. In addition, items relating

to feelings of guilt were included as guilt and self-blame typically impact on an

individual’s attribution of blame and responsibility for a negative event. It has a ‘true’

versus ‘false’ response format.

Forty-eight items were derived from attribution theory and considered contextually

relevant for use in the GBAI. The factor structure, factor scores and reliability

coefficients of the GBAI with a sample of 224 subjects who had committed criminal

offences is reported by Gudjonsson (1984). Three major factors representing the three

theorised types of attribution emerged, each with good test-retest reliability (r = 0.73,

0.85, and 0.78 for mental element, external, and guilt attributions, respectively).

The GBAI was later revised (GBAI-R; Gudjonsson & Singh, 1989) due to two weaknesses

identified in the original scale. The original items were both specific and general, with

some relating to their most recent crime whilst others enquired about general attitudes,

limiting its use as a measure of attribution of a particular crime. In addition, two of the

factors consisted of purely positive loadings, increasing the chance of a response bias.

These weaknesses were addressed in the revised version, resulting in a 42 item measure

consisting of three factors closely resembling those of the original scale. The three

scales have satisfactory test-retest reliability and internal consistency (Cima et al., 2007;

Dolan, 1995; Fox et al. 2003). Table 1 provides a summary of the three GBAI-R factors

and the final items included in each.

Development

4

Table 1: Gudjonsson Blame Attribution Inventory - Revised factor items (* = items

endorsed as ‘false’, so scoring is reversed).

Guilt Factor – Extent to which individuals feel shame and remorse for the crime (18 items):

1) I feel very ashamed of the crime(s) I committed.

4) I am constantly troubled by my conscience for the crime(s) I committed.

5) I will never forgive myself for the crime(s) I committed.

6)* I feel no remorse or guilt for the crime(s) I committed.

8) It is definitely not in my nature to commit crimes.

13) The crime(s) I committed was very much out of character.

14) I hate myself for the crime(s) I committed.

22)* I would have been better off if I had not been caught.

23) I constantly have the urge to punish myself for the crime(s) I committed.

24) I fear that people will never accept me because of the crime(s) I committed.

27)* I have no need to feel ashamed of what I did.

28)* I feel annoyed that I was caught.

30)* There is no such thing as an innocent victim in my case.

34)* I should not punish myself for what I did.

35) I deserve to be severely punished for the crime(s) I committed.

37)* I have no serious regrets about what I did.

39) I would very much like to make amends for what I did.

40) I sometimes have nightmares about the crime(s) I committed.

External Factor – Extent to which individuals blame the victims or society for their crime (15

items):

2)* I am entirely to blame for my crime(s).

3) I did not deserve to get caught for the crime(s) I committed.

7)* I am responsible for my criminal act(s).

9) I should not blame myself for the crime(s) I committed.

12)* I should not blame other people for my crime(s).

15) Society is to blame for the crime(s) I committed.

16) I should not be punished for what I did.

18) In my case the victim(s) was largely to blame for my crime(s).

19) I would not have committed any crime(s) if I had not been seriously provoked by the

victim(s)/society.

21)* I deserved to be caught for what I did.

26)* I was in no way provoked into committing a crime.

31) Other people are to blame for my crime(s).

32) I could have avoided getting into trouble.

33) I had very good reasons for committing the crime(s) I did.

42)* I have no excuse for the crime(s) I committed.

Mental Element Factor – Extent to which individuals state they had no mental control (9

items):

10)* At the time of the crime(s) I was fully aware of what I was doing.

11) I would not have committed the crime(s) I did if I had not lost control of myself.

17)* I was feeling no different to usual at the time of the crime(s).

20) What I did was beyond my control.

25) I was very depressed when I committed the crime(s).

29) I must have been crazy to commit the crime(s) I did.

36) I would certainly not have committed the crime(s) I did if I had been mentally well.

38) I was under a great deal of stress/pressure when I committed the crime(s).

41)* I was in full control of my actions.

5

Description of the Sample

Four groups were compared based on their category of offence (Gudjonsson & Singh,

1988). The sample consisted of 176 individuals, 37 were forensic patients at the

Maudsley and Bethlem Royal Hospitals and the remaining 139 were from Grendon

Psychiatric Prison. All participants had a criminal history and were categorised into the

following four groups based on the type of offence committed prior to the current

admission to hospital or prison. The sample was predominately male with a mean age

of 29 years (SD = 7.8).

Group 1) N=49 - Violent offence (e.g. homicide, attempted homicide, grievous bodily

harm, actual bodily harm, wounding with intent)

Group 2) N=47 - Sexual offence (e.g. rape, indecent assault, buggery, unlawful sexual

intercourse)

Group 3) N=50 - Property offence (e.g. theft, burglary, robbery)

Group 4) N=25 - Other offence (e.g. drug offences, blackmail, kidnapping,

conspiracy)

Mean and Standard Deviation Scores

Table 2 displays the mean scores and standard deviations for the four groups on each

of the three GBAI-R factors. Analysis of variance was performed to compare

differences between the four groups on each of the three factors. Highly significant

differences were found for the guilt and mental element attributions. Those who had

committed a sexual or violent offence had the highest guilt scores, and those who had

committed a violent offence had the highest mental element attribution scores,

followed by those with a sexual offence.

Table 2: Mean and standard deviation blame attribution factor scores for offence

groups

Group

Type of attribution

Guilt Mental Element External

Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

Violent 11.2 4.9 7.0 2.0 3.5 3.0

Sexual 12.6 3.6 5.8 2.5 2.3 2.8

Property 08.7 4.2 4.9 3.0 2.8 3.1

Other 07.7 4.3 4.6 2.8 3.5 3.4

Standardization

6

Instructions

A copy of the 42-item GBAI-R is provided in the Appendix. It can be administered either

individually or in a group setting. The instructions are provided at the top of the GBAI-R

and read:

“Below are a number of statements related to the crime(s) you committed. Please read

each item carefully and decide whether the statement is TRUE or FALSE as it applies to

you personally. If the statement is true as applies to you then circle True; and if it is false

as applied to you then circle False.”

The participant is asked to write the type of offence they committed in the appropriate

box on the questionnaire. This would normally be the current (‘index’) offence, but may

in certain circumstances apply to a previous offence and/or cover several offences.

In cases of literacy problems, the items may need to be read out to the participant

and in some instances explained. The GBAI-R is not suitable for people with an

intellectual disability or in the case of children (i.e. those below the age of 17). It can

be used for both males and females, although the normative data and most of the

research studies have focused predominantly on males.

If participants wish to change their original response, they should be asked to place an

“X” through the original response and then tick the correct response.

Scoring

The scoring overlays for each of the three scales are provided in the Appendix. To

optimise use, these can be photocopied onto transparency film. Each item endorsed

that falls in the blank box is counted and added to make up a total score for that

scale. Higher scores represent greater attribution of blame to the respective factor.

Interpretation

For clinical purposes, the attribution style of the participant can be commented on in

terms of whether or not the scores obtained are similar to that of offence type norms

provided in Table 2. As a rule of thumb, one standard deviation below or above the

mean are worth commenting on as differing moderately from the norm.

Administration

7

Gudjonsson and Young (2007) argue that the way offenders attribute blame for their

offending is a key factor to be addressed in offence-related work. External attribution

of blame is most strongly associated with personality disorder and antisocial personality

traits (Dolan, 1995; Gudjonsson, 1997; 1999) and psychopathy (Batson et al., 2010).

Mental element attribution, in contrast, is more associated with anxiety, and feelings of

guilt with introversion and anxiety (Gudjonsson, 1997).

Gudjonsson (1990) found that among 25 imprisoned sex offenders there was a strong

relationship between external attribution and cognitive dissertations with a large effect

size. Blumenthal et al (1999) found that those sex offenders who offended against

adults had the highest level of external attribution, whereas those offending against

children had the strongest guilt feeling attribution. Mental element attribution was

associated with alcohol intoxication during the commission of the offence.

One study (Weizmann-Henelius et al., 2002) focused exclusively on violent female

offenders and found that mental element attribution was related to a ‘borderline

defence style’ and guilt feeling attribution to a ‘neurotic defence style’. External

attribution was not found to be related to any of the defence styles.

In a recent study of mentally disordered offenders, Young et al. (2015) found that

reported remorse for an index offence, as measured by the GBAI-R, was significantly

correlated with both cognitive and affective empathy on a new victim empathy

measure (VERA-2) that had nothing to do with their own index offence. This has both

theoretical and clinical relevance and suggests that the capacity for empathy is a

prerequisite to feelings of remorse. Young and her colleagues suggest that improving

capacity for empathy may increase feelings of remorse. This has implications for

empathy training and the current Government focus on restorative justice.

Validation

8

Batson, A., Gudjonsson, G., & Gray, J. (2010). Attribution of blame for criminal acts and its relationship with

psychopathy as measured by the Hare Psychopathic Checklist (PCL-SV). The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and

Psychology, 21(1), 91-101.

Blumenthal, S., Gudjonsson, G., & Burns, J. (1999). Cognitive distortions and blame attribution in sex offenders against

adults and children. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23(2), 129-143.

Carlin, P., Gudjonsson, G., & Rutter, S. (2005). Persecutory delusions and attributions for real negative events: A study

in a forensic sample. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 16(1), 139–148.

Cima, M., Merckelbach, H., Butt, C., Kremer, K., Knauer, E., & Schellbach-Matties, R. (2007). It was not me: Attribution

of blame for criminal acts in psychiatric offenders. Forensic Science International, 168(2-3), 143–147.

Crisford, H., Dare, H., & Evangeli, M. (2008). Offence-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptomatology

and guilt in mentally disordered violent and sexual offenders. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 19(1),

86-107.

Dolan, B. (1995). The attribution of blame for criminal acts: Relationship with personality disorders and mood. Criminal

Behaviour and Mental Health, 5(1), 41–51.

Fox, S., & Leicht, S. (2005). The association between the offender-victim relationship, severity of offence and

attribution of blame in mentally disordered offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11(3), 255-264.

Fox, S., De Koning, E., & Leicht, S. (2003). The relationship between attribution of blame for a violent act and EPQ-R

subscales in male offenders with mental disorder. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(8), 1467–1475.

Gudjonsson, G. H. (1984). Attribution of blame for criminal acts and its relationship with personality. Personality and

Individual Differences, 5(1), 53–58.

Gudjonsson, G. H. (1990). Cognitive distortions and blame attribution among paedophiles. Sexual and Marital

Therapy, 5(2), 183-185.

Gudjonsson, G. H. (1997). Crime and personality. In H. Nyborg (Ed.), The scientific study of human nature. Tribute to

Hans J. Eysenck at eighty (pp. 142–164). Oxford: Elsevier Science.

Gudjonsson, G. H. (1999). Feelings of guilt and reparation for criminal acts. In M. Cox (Ed.), Remorse and reparation

(pp. 83–94). London: Jessica Kingsley.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Bownes, I. (1991). The attribution of blame and type of crime committed: data for Northern

Ireland. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 2(3), 337-341.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Petursson, H. (1991). The attribution of blame and type of crime committed: Transcultural

validation. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 31(3), 349–352.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Petursson, H. (1991). Custodial interrogation: why do suspects confess and how does it relate to

their crime, attitude and personality? Personality and Individual Differences, 12(3), 295-306.

Gudjonsson, G. H., Petursson, H., Sigurdardottir, H., & Skulason, S. (1991). The personality of Icelandic prisoners: Some

normative data. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 45(2), 151–157.

References and publications

relevant to the GBAI-R

9

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2004). Motivation for offending and personality. Legal and Criminological

Psychology, 9(1), 69-81.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2007). Motivation for offending and personality. A study among young

offenders on probation. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(7), 1243-1253.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Singh, K. K. (1988). Attribution of blame for criminal acts and its relationship with type of offence.

Med Sci Law, 28(4), 301-303.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Singh, K. K. (1989). The revised Gudjonsson blame attribution inventory. Personality and

Individual Differences, 10(1), 67–70.

Gudjonsson, G. H., & Young, S. (2007). The role and scope of forensic clinical psychology in secure unit provisions. A

proposed service model for psychological therapies. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 18(4), 534-

556.

Harrison, L. A., & Abrishami, G. (2004). Dating violence attributions: Do they differ for in-group and out-group

members who have a history of dating violence. Sex Roles, 51(9-10), 543-550.

Kroner, D. G., Hemmati, T., & Mills, J. F. (2006). Measuring criminal attributions with a normative instructional set: Is

there a difference? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11(2), 219-227.

Moore, E., & Gudjonsson, G. (2002). Blame Attribution regarding index offence on admission to secure Hospital

Services. Psychology, Crime and Law, 8(2), 131-143.

Newton, L., Coles, D., & Quayle, M. (2005). A form of relapse prevention for men in a high security hospital. Criminal

Behaviour and Mental Health, 15(3), 191-203.

Peersen, M., Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2000). The relationship between general and specific attribution of

blame for a ‘serious’ act and the role of personality. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 54(1), 25–30.

Shuker, R., Falshaw, L., & Newton, M. (2007). Risk and treatment readiness: The impact of historical and psychosocial

variables on treatment completion. Issues in Forensic Psychology, 7, 87-96.

Shine, J. H. (1997). The relationship between blame attribution, age and personality characteristics in inmates

admitted to Grendon Therapeutic Prison. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(6), 943-947.

Snyder, M. (1976). Attribution and behaviour: Social perception and social causation. In J. Harvey, J. Ickes, & R. Kidd

(Eds.), New directions in Attribution Research (Vol. 1, pp. 53–72). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Weizmann-Henelius, G., Sailas, E., Viemero, V., & Eronen, M. (2002). Violent women, blame attribution, crime and

personality. Psychopathology, 35(6), 355-361.

Wood, J., & Newton, A. K. (2003). The role of personality and blame attribution in prisoners’ experience of anger.

Personality and Individual Differences, 34(8), 1453-1465.

Wright, K., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2007). The development of a scale for measuring offence-related feelings of shame

and guilt. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 18(3), 307-316.

Young, S., Sedgwick, O., Perkins, D., Lister, H., Southgate, K., Das, M., … Gudjonsson, G. H. (2015). Measuring Victim

Empathy among Mentally Disordered Offenders: Validating VERA-2. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 60(1), 156-162.

10

Appendix

Name:

Date:

Nature of the Offence:

Below are a number of statements related to the crime(s) you committed. Please read each item

carefully and decide whether the statement is TRUE or FALSE as it applies to you personally. If the

statement is true as applies to you then circle True; and if it is false as applied to you then circle False.

1. I feel very ashamed of the crime(s) I committed. True False

2. I am entirely to blame for my crime(s). True False

3. I did not deserve to get caught for the crime(s) I committed. True False

4. I am constantly troubled by my conscience for the crime(s) I

committed. True False

5. I will never forgive myself for the crime(s) I committed. True False

6. I feel no remorse or guilt for the crime(s) I committed. True False

7. I am responsible for my criminal act(s). True False

8. It is definitely not in my nature to commit crimes. True False

9. I should not blame myself for the crime(s) I committed. True False

10. At the time of the crime(s) I was fully aware of what I was doing. True False

11. I would not have committed the crime(s) I did if I had not lost

control of myself. True False

12. I should not blame other people for my crime(s). True False

13. The crime(s) I committed was very much out of character. True False

14. I hate myself for the crime(s) I committed. True False

15. Society is to blame for the crime(s) I committed. True False

16. I should not be punished for what I did. True False

17. I was feeling no different to usual at the time of the crime(s). True False

GBAI-R

18. In my case the victim(s) was largely to blame for my crime(s). True False

19. I would not have committed any crime(s) if I had not been

seriously provoked by the victim(s)/society True False

20. What I did was beyond my control. True False

21. I deserved to be caught for what I did. True False

22. I would have been better off if I had not been caught. True False

23. I constantly have the urge to punish myself for the crime(s) I

committed. True False

24. I fear that people will never accept me because of the crime(s)

I committed. True False

25. I was very depressed when I committed the crime(s). True False

26. I was in no way provoked into committing a crime. True False

27. I have no need to feel ashamed of what I did. True False

28. I feel annoyed that I was caught. True False

29. I must have been crazy to commit the crime(s) I did. True False

30. There is no such thing as an innocent victim in my case. True False

31. Other people are to blame for my crime(s). True False

32. I could have avoided getting into trouble. True False

33. I had very good reasons for committing the crime(s) I did. True False

34. I should not punish myself for what I did. True False

35. I deserve to be severely punished for the crime(s) I committed. True False

36. I would certainly not have committed the crime(s) I did if I had

been mentally well. True False

37. I have no serious regrets about what I did. True False

38. I was under a great deal of stress/pressure when I committed

the crime(s). True False

39. I would very much like to make amends for what I did. True False

40. I sometimes have nightmares about the crime(s) I committed. True False

41. I was in full control of my actions. True False

42. I have no excuse for the crime(s) I committed. True False

Scoring:

M

E G

Professor Gisli Gudjonsson www.psychology-services.uk.com

Mental Element Factor

Once overlaying the questionnaire correctly, score by

awarding 1 point for each item endorsed (circled or

ticked) that falls within the blank boxes. Place the final

Mental Element Factor score in the score box labelled

‘M’

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

GBAI-R Scoring

Page1

Page 2

www.psychology-services.uk.com

External Factor




External Factor score in the score box labelled ‘E’

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

Page1

Page 2

GBAI-R Scoring


Guilt Factor




Guilt Factor score in the score box labelled ‘G’

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

Page1

Page 2

GBAI-R Scoring


gudjonsson blame attribution inventory-revised

Documents