Deliberate Firesetting Research Articles

What does the evidence tell us about adults with low intellectual functioning who deliberately set fires? A systematic review

Objective:The purpose of this paper was to systematically examine and integrate existing evidence to determine what is known about deliberate firesetting by adults with low intellectual functioning.Method:A set of specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined and a comprehensive search strategy of electronic databases was conducted.Results: Twelve studies met the specified inclusion criteria. Seven studies reported psychosocial characteristics of firesetters and five studies investigated the outcomes of firesetter treatment interventions. Quality assessment indicated the included studies provided low quality research evidence with a high to moderate risk of bias.Conclusions: The existing evidence provides limited understanding of firesetters with low intellectual functioning and it remains unclear whether epidemiological factors, assessment and treatment needs differ to firesetters with average or above intelligence. The extent to which modified assessment and intervention is effective with this group remains uncertain. Further high quality research endeavours are required before robust conclusions about deliberate firesetting by adults with low intellectual functioning can be delineated.

Keynote lecture: Deliberate firesetting: Developments in theory, research, and practice. Professor Teresa Gannon, University of Kent.

Keynote lecture: Deliberate firesetting: Developments in theory, research, and practice. Professor Teresa Gannon, University of Kent.

Copycat Firesetting

Deliberate firesetting costs our community in destruction to property and lives. Public concern heightens when similar fires occur in a series, raising the specter of copycat firesetting. Difficulties associated with researching copycat crimes in general mean that not a lot is known about copycat firesetting. As an initial step toward filling this research gap, we explore connections between research on copycat crime and research into deliberate firesetting. The intention is to extract salient features from what is known about the phenomena of deliberate firesetting and copycat crime, map them together, and point out shared and unique characteristics. It is argued that a “copycat firesetter” is likely to exist as a distinct subgroup and potentially requiring targeted interventions.

Social Marketing as Transformational Marketing in Public Services

This article presents a case study of a social marketing intervention, developed as an innovative action research project for a Fire Service, to tackle the public service challenge of reducing the incidence of deliberate countryside fire-setting in certain communities. The case demonstrates the effectiveness of a social marketing approach to tackling an anti-social behaviour that had become a local social norm which conventional education-based campaigns had failed to change. The case also explores unexpected impacts that applying a social marketing approach had on the sponsoring Fire Service, acting to transform certain aspects of its operations and culture.

Young people and caregivers’ perceptions of an intervention program for children who deliberately light fires

A significant number of children and adolescents engage in deliberate fire setting, beyond the scope of curiosity and experimentation. Interventions developed to respond to the needs of such fire setters generally involve educational and/or psychosocial approaches. Research evaluating the effectiveness of these interventions is dominated by outcome studies which rely on recidivism rates determined by either official records or parent reports. There has however, been no process evaluation studies published. This study presents a process analysis which aimed to identify the strengths and weaknesses of a Fire Awareness and Intervention Program in New Zealand, from the perspectives of program consumers. Qualitative research methods were employed, with data being derived from in-depth interviews with young people and their parents/caregivers. The analysis indicated that (a) the FAIP was generally regarded as a positive experience, (b) practitioners’ qualities of empathy and understanding are important for developing rapport with the young people and their parents, (c) education-based intervention tailored to the young person's age and developmental level is important, (d) educational resources need to be updated and used flexibly to respond appropriately to the age and developmental level of the young person, and (e) inter-agency and intra-agency relationships need to be developed and maintained, with formal arrangements for reciprocal referral systems developed in order to respond to the needs of the clients. The resulting implications for service providers, along with future research are discussed.

“If He Had 40 Cents He’d Buy Matches Instead of Lollies”

Motivation has been proposed as an important factor in both the causality and subsequent treatment of juveniles who deliberately light fires. Thus, a wide range of research has previously been completed, investigating such motives. This research has resulted in the creation of classifications of firesetting motives and behaviours, all of which fit upon a continuum of motivational categories-ranging from curiosity or match play, through to deliberate delinquent acts. This current study aimed to gain insight into how both firesetters and their caregivers perceived firesetting motivation. A total of 18 male youths, who had engaged in deliberate firesetting, and 13 parents were interviewed. Qualitative analysis gathered from interviews with adolescent participants reported personality and individual characteristic themes, the most frequent of these being anger, experimenting, peer pressure, and boredom. Parents on the other hand initially cited family historical factors as being a cause for their son's firesetting. This study showed the difficulties in attempting to classify firesetters. It became clear that there were often multiple motivations involved in adolescent firesetting, meanwhile a variation of motivations were reported by parents and firesetters. The differences between and ambiguities inherent in existing motivational typologies also became evident. The study produced strong evidence for the effectiveness of utilising multiple sources to gain a comprehensive understanding as to why children deliberately light fires.

Risk Factors for Recidivistic Arson in Adult Offenders

This article reviews the current literature on known risk factors for recidivistic arson, with a particular focus on factors that could be used to differentiate serial from “one-off” arson offenders. The relevance of risk factors for general reoffending to recidivistic arson is discussed, including the role of criminal history, mental illness, and sociodemographic factors. The specific roles of offence-related affect, cognitions, and the offender's interest in fire are considered, with recommendations for how theories from other areas of forensic psychology, such as the sex offender assessment and treatment literature, might be applied to the issue of deliberate fire-setting. Finally, protective factors are briefly discussed and the need for a structured risk assessment tool for deliberate firsetters is canvassed. Given that research into risk and recidivism in fire-setting is underdeveloped, suggestions are made throughout the review for the focus of future research into risk factors for serial arson.

Firesetting in the general population: The development and validation of the Fire Setting and Fire Proclivity Scales

Purpose. The main aims of the present study were to examine the prevalence of self‐reported deliberate firesetting in the community, and to develop two separate measures – the Fire Setting Scale and the Fire Proclivity Scale – to assess, respectively, the antisocial and fire interest factors associated with firesetters and the propensity of firesetters to be attracted to, aroused by, behaviourally inclined, and antisocially motivated to light fires.Method. At Time 1, 158 participants were asked to indicate – confidentially – whether they had ever intentionally set a fire. Participants also completed the newly developed Fire Setting Scale and Fire Proclivity Scale. Around 2 weeks later, 150 of the 158 participants returned at Time 2 to complete the Fire Setting Scale and Fire Proclivity Scale again. Participants' responses at Time 1 were used to gather basic descriptive information on the newly developed measures. Participants' repeated testing at Time 2 was used to measure the reliability of the measures over time.Results. Of participants, 11 per cent (n= 18) self‐reported setting a deliberate fire. These participants were similar to non‐firesetters on basic demographics although firesetters reported more behavioural problems and previous convictions for vandalism‐associated offences. Both the Fire Setting Scale and Fire Proclivity Scale showed good psychometric properties and discriminated clearly between self‐reported firesetters and non‐firesetters. However, only one subscale from the Fire Proclivity Scale – the behavioural propensity index – entered significantly into a Discriminant Function Analysis which correctly classified participants at an overall rate of 91%.Conclusions. The two new scales developed show promise for detecting factors associated with firesetting and may be useful for (1) detecting individuals in the community who require preventative firesetting work, and (2) measuring clinical need and intervention impact associated with firesetters in secure settings.

Intrapsychic Dynamics, Behavioral Manifestations, and Related Interventions With Youthful Fire Setters

Fire setting in youth has often been overlooked and misunderstood as a coping skill for expressing rage. The act of deliberate fire setting, if uninterrupted, may continue throughout an individual's lifetime. Forensic examiners, mental health care providers, and criminal justice professionals can help guide referral and treatment through better understanding of behaviors and intrapsychic dynamics.

Pyromania: Fact or Fiction?

The issue of deliberate firesetting is a growing concern in Australia. Every hour of every day in Australia at least one arson fire is lit and this type of criminal behaviour is costing the country over $157m annually in property losses alone. Although much has been written on the subject of arson there remains substantial confusion about the nature and extent of pyromania within the arsonist population. This paper explores some of the common misperceptions that exist in the literature and attempts to clarify the true magnitude of pyromania in Australia's arsonist population.

Criminal Behavioral Assessment of Arsonists, Pyromaniacs, and Multiple Firesetters

Historically, human beings have had a long and intense fascination with fire. Once it was realized that the powers of this phenomenon could be harnessed and manipulated to suit the needs of the individual who wished to control it, a new and deadly category of criminal activity arose, the act of arson. Deliberate firesetting, or incendiarism, is one of the most malevolent and potent forms of maladaptive behavior that is spawned by the criminal mind. It is also one of the least understood and infrequently studied behaviors because of problems such as design complications, biased sampling, unreliable subjects, and reporting errors and inconsistencies. However, data gathered over the previous years have significantly increased our knowledge surrounding various aspects of the arsonist, and yielded several hypotheses that explain why an individual engages in willful firesetting activities. This article will provide a comprehensive review of the literature surrounding arson in an attempt to better understand those whose obsession with fire ceases to be extinguished.