Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma

ISSN: 1092-6771 (Print) 1545-083X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wamt20

Self-Compassion and Predictors of Criminal

Conduct in Adolescent Offenders

Mario Dávila Gómez, Jorge Dávila Pino & Roberto Dávila Pino

To cite this article: Mario Dávila Gómez, Jorge Dávila Pino & Roberto Dávila Pino (2020): Self-
Compassion and Predictors of Criminal Conduct in Adolescent Offenders, Journal of Aggression,
Maltreatment & Trauma, DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2019.1697778

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2019.1697778

Published online: 07 Jan 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 81

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wamt20
JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA
https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2019.1697778

Self-Compassion and Predictors of Criminal Conduct in

Adolescent Offenders
a
Mario Dávila Gómez , Jorge Dávila Pinob, and Roberto Dávila Pinoc
a
Departament of Psychology, University of Almería, Almería, Spain; bAcademic Unit of Social Sciences,
Technical University of Machala, Machala, Ecuador; cAcademic Unit of Health Sciences, National
University of Chimborazo, Riobamba, Ecuador

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

We conducted a study of self-compassion, a positive indicator of Received 9 August 2019
mental health, as a predictor of criminal conduct in adolescent Accepted 17 November 2019
offenders deprived of their liberty. There was a sample of 63 KEYWORDS
delinquent adolescents, males between 12 and 18 years of age, Criminal conduct;
who were subjected to a questionnaire of criminal conduct, self- self-compassion; self-control;
control, aggression, empathy and of self-compassion. Correlation aggressiveness; empathy
and regression analyses were used to explore the relationship
that self-compassion has with self-control, aggression and empa-
thy. The associations between the subscales of self-compassion
and self-control were also examined. According to the criminal
conduct questionnaire, 52.4% of the sample has a high level of
criminal conduct (percentile 85–99). The results of the correla-
tional analysis indicate that self-compassion is associated with the
variables self-control and empathy; the self-control variable was
revealed as a predictor. The correlations revealed that the
subscales of self-kindness and mindfulness were associated with
self-control; the simple linear regression analysis showed the
existence of a relationship between self-control (predictor
variable) and the subscales self- kindness and mindfulness
(variable to be predicted). The implications and limitations of
these results are discussed.

According to the United Nations (2017), there are 1.2 billion young people in
the world, so study their reality is transcendent for the design of integral social
policies. The adolescent, according to Diz (2013), prepares to later face adult
life and the biggest conflict is that this learning takes place away from adults,
causing serious difficulties in relationships and adaptation. Consequently, it is
not a uniform process (Gallegos, 2013), and frequently results in developing
inappropriate behaviors such as criminal conduct.
The term “criminal conduct” refers to behaviors identified and sanctioned by
the criminal law of the corresponding country (Antolín, 2011). Analogously also
called sanctionable antisocial behavior, because they are antisocial acts that trans-
gress the law and are punished (García, Zaldívar, De la Fuente, Ortega, & Sainz-
Cantero, 2012); for example; robberies, pyromania or murders, among others.

CONTACT Mario Dávila Gómez mdg522@inlumine.ual.es Departament of Psychology, University of

Almería, Sacramento Highway s/n, La Cañada de San Urbano, Almería 04120, Spain
© 2019 Taylor & Francis
2 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

Criminal behavior must be understood as a product of individual differ-

ences and life events (Laub & Sampson, 1991; Moffitt, 1993), where the
influence of age and the mechanisms of social control, as well as the type of
control, is recognized. According to López and López (2003), in the case of
criminal conduct, there is a behavioral pattern characterized particularly by
low self-control and emotional tension, unawareness of social norms, extra-
version, anxiety and independence. Per Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990), the
lack of self-control identifies criminal conduct and is defined as the inhibi-
tion of perceived alternatives of action or the interruption of a course of
action that is in conflict with the agent’s own morality” (Wikström & Treiber,
2007, 2009, p. 46), coming to consider it a skill.
The structure of the personality must be considered (Seisdedos, 1995) and
noted as a key component that would be the feature of aggressiveness
(Farrington, 1989; Redondo & Pueyo, 2007). Aggressive manifestation in
childhood and maintenance in adolescence predicts part of the antisocial,
and criminal behavior and sometimes the development of an antisocial
disorder (Huesmann, Eron, & Dubow, 2002). Within the criminal conduct,
interpersonal aggression is included (Hinshaw & Zupan, 2002). Eron (2002)
considers aggression to be the epitome of antisocial behavior. In the present
study, aggressive behavior will be considered all conduct that involves the use
of coercive means to harm others and obtain benefits according to their
interests (Torregrosa et al., 2012).
Another point of view, to understand criminal behavior in adolescents
(Gini, Pozzoli, & Bussey, 2015; Gini, Pozzoli, & Hymel, 2014; Kokkinos &
Kipritsi, 2017) is the moral disconnection that is governed by cognitive
strategies (Bandura, 2002). By allowing him to act in opposition to ethical-
moral criteria within a social system (Doyle & Bussey, 2017) and, in many
cases, they can avoid self-censorship (Giulio, Petruccelli, & Pace, 2018) and
guilt. The sense of empathy and socially positive behavior diminishes (Giulio
et al., 2018; Kokkinos & Kipritsi, 2017; Raskauskas, Gregory, Harvey,
Rifshana, & Evans, 2010). In other words, when the individual is morally
disconnected, the self-control processes related to the negative self-
evaluation of aggressive or criminal behaviors are not activated, thus avoid-
ing guilt, shame, self-censorship and the levels of empathy diminish.
It is precisely the empathetic individuals that are less aggressive because of
their emotional sensitivity and their ability to understand the potential negative
consequences for themselves and others, which can be derived from aggression.
Therefore, empathy is negatively related to aggressive behavior and positively
related to prosocial behavior. Hence the need to keep this variable in mind in
the context of the educational framework, with the purpose of favoring its social
adaptation. According to Garaigordobil and Maganto (2016), when empathy is
fostered in adolescents, violent behaviors are diminished. For Eisenberg (2005)
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 3

the ability to control emotions (self-control) in children plays a fundamental

role in promoting the development of prosocial behavior.
In this framework of analysis, self-compassion is positively related to
health and psychological well-being indexes (Akın, 2008; Hollis-Walker &
Colosimo, 2011; MacBeth & Gumley, 2012; Michalec, Keyes, & Nalkur, 2009;
Van Dam, Sheppard, Forsyth, & Earleywine, 2011; Zessin, Dickhäuser, &
Garbade, 2015) and constitutes the antithesis of criminal conduct. This has
been convincingly corroborated through research literature showing that
greater self-compassion is linked to a lower presence of psychopathological
disorders (Barnard & Curry, 2011).
Neff (2012) has pointed out that self-compassion implies being warm and
understanding with ourselves instead of criticizing ourselves when we are suffer-
ing, and when we feel we have failed or when we feel incompetent. The concept of
self-compassion has been defined as a three-dimensional structure. Each compo-
nent has two parts, the positive presence and its corresponding negation. These
three concepts are: (a) being kind and understanding toward oneself instead of
being self-judgment, (b) considering mistakes as part of the human condition and
a key element to increase experience, instead of isolating oneself, and (c) the
celebration of oneself in the midst of painful thoughts and feelings in conscious
attention instead of avoiding them or identifying with them. These components
combine and interact with each other to create a compassionate mood.
Self-kindness involves extending forgiveness, empathy, sensitivity, warmth
and patience to all aspects of oneself, including all actions, feelings, thoughts
and impulses (Gilbert & Irons, 2005). This implies that even after a grave error,
that one deserves love and affection; in contrast, people who are self-judgment
reject their own feelings, thoughts and actions (Brown, 1998).Common human-
ity implies that we forgive ourselves to be fully human by being limited and
imperfect (Neff, 2003a); forgiveness, as opposed to isolating oneself, because
many people in times of pain or frustration feel isolated from others.
Mindfulness implies knowledge, attention, and acceptance of the present
moment (Shapiro, Astin, Bishop, & Cordova, 2005; Shapiro, Brown, & Biegel,
2007). It is believed that conscious attention can help for a deeper experience
and learning of present generations without the distractions of self-assessments
or worries about the past or the future (Neff, 2003a); the opposite would be the
over-identification and avoidance. People who tend to identify themselves can
magnify mistakes (Shapiro et al., 2007). The other extreme is the avoidance of
painful experiences, thoughts and emotions (Kabat-Zinn, 2003).
In the field of psychotherapeutic application, successful interventions with
self-compassion in violent delinquents have been demonstrated. This con-
firms that future violent behavior decreases (Murphy, Stosny, & Morrel,
2005). It has been observed that empathy (Neff & Germer, 2013) and self-
control can help increase self-compassion. On one hand, the empathetic
relationship allows the patient to discuss the vulnerabilities and be accepted
4 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

by the therapist, whose model of compassion can improve the clients’ self-
compassion (Greenberg, Watson, & Goldman, 1998). While on the other
hand, the self-control of thoughts, feelings and behaviors can help clients
observe, accept and affirm one-self (Barrett-Lennard, 1997).
Stosny (1995) described self-compassion as “incompatible with antisocial
behavior” (p. 82). It has also been observed that self-compassion has a negative
relationship with anger (Neff & Vonk, 2009), and a positive relationship with
self-esteem, concern for others and social relationships (Murphy et al., 2005).
In addition, the self-compassion protects adolescents from the effects of social
stress (Bluth et al., 2015).
Another possible link between self-compassion and criminal behavior
emerges with the component of mindfulness, considered as the practice that
provides awareness and will of thoughts and actions to people in the present
moment, without judging (Grossman, Niemann, Schmidt, & Walach, 2004).
Due to the intentional awareness of mindfulness it is believed that it also
encompasses self-control (Bowlin & Baer, 2012; Masicampo & Baumeister,
2007), and increases when it is associated with the practice of meditation
(Grossman et al., 2004). In this sense, the practice of meditation has shows
that it has reduced the recidivism rate by 43% in a 15-year study at Folsom
prison (Rainforth, Alexander, & Cavanaugh, 2003).
In view of the above, the objective of this paper is to investigate the
relationship between self-compassion, self-control, empathy and aggression
among the adolescent offender population studied.

Method
Participants
The sample was selected by means of convenience and was formed by 63
adolescent offenders, between the ages of 12 and 18, who were deprived of
their liberty in two specialized centers for juvenile offenders from Guayaquil
and Machala, Ecuador. Of the selected sample, 28 were deprived of their
liberty for crimes against property, 15 for sexual crimes, 15 for crimes against
people and 5 for drug trafficking. Average age of participants was 16.68 years
(SD = 1.13), of which 6.9% were between 12 and 14 years of age, 77.9%
between 15 and 17 years, and 15.2% were 18 years of age. Educational level
corresponds to the average basic education 17 (27%), to higher basic educa-
tion 29 (46%) and to the unified general baccalaureate 17 (27%).

Design and measurement instruments

In this research an ex post-facto design has been used (Kerlinger, 1973). The
questionnaire of antisocial-criminal conduct, elaborated by Seisdedos (1995),
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 5

it is an instrument composed of two subscales, each formed by 20 items of

dichotomous response (yes or no). The task is to inform if the antisocial and
criminal acts indicated during the last year have been carried out. For the
present study, only the criminal subscale will be used, whose reliability, in
this sample, measured through the alfa de Cronbach, is 0.90.
The self-compassion scale (SCS) is a 26-item self-report questionnaire (Neff,
2003a). In the present investigation, the Spanish translation has been used
(Garcia-Campayo et al., 2014). It is designed to assess general self-compassion
(total score) and its dimensions through three conceptually distinct but theo-
retically related components: common humanity (SCS-CH), mindfulness
(SCS-M) and kindness (SCS-SK). Although the construct was defined using
all three facets (Neff, 2003b), the factorial analysis submitted six subscales,
representing positive and negative aspects of each facet. These articles were
designed to evaluate how respondents perceive their actions toward themselves
in difficult times and classify them using a Likert scale of 5 points (1 = almost
never …, 5 = almost always). The SCS has adequate reliability and validity,
even in different cultures. The reliability of the Scale of Self Compassion in the
present study, measured through the alfa de Cronbach, is 0.81 for the total of
the items and 0.65 (autoamability), 0.54 (self-judgment), 0.55 (common
humanity); 0.53 (isolation); 0.56 (mindfulness); 0.41 (over-identification).
The self-control questionnaire (Rosenbaum, 1980) Spanish version, adapted
from Capafóns and Barreto (1989) evaluates skills to control the interfering
effects of internal events (such as emotions and pain or thoughts) that affect
the performance of behavior. The questionnaire consisted of 36 items, with
respect to which the subject must indicate the degree to which they describe or
characterize it, with Likert-type responses (scores from −3, which states, “does
not characterize or describe me”, to 3, which states, “characterizes me and
describes me a lot “). Through its application you get a result on the competi-
tion learned to higher scores of a greater self-control repertoire and manage-
ment of aversive situations. The reliability of the Scale of Self-Control in the
present study, measured through the alfa de Cronbach, is 0.77.
The questionnaire of Aggression AQ (Buss & Perry, 1992), consists of 29
items, on a Likert scale with five response options (1 = completely false …,
5 = completely true), which scores between 29 and 145 points. For this study, the
Spanish version of Andreu, Peña and Graña (2002) has been used. The authors
of the questionnaire, found a structure of four dimensions: physical aggression,
verbal aggression, hostility and anger. The first two would constitute the instru-
mental component of aggressiveness, that is, the proactive element with its two
possible forms of manifestation, hostility and anger. The hostility would con-
form the cognitive component, through which the intentional processes of the
attribution of meanings are activated and then the anger would be included
6 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

within the emotional and affective component. The reliability of the question-
naire, in the present study, measured through the alpha of Cronbach, is 0.90 for
the total of the items and 0.82, 0.66, 0.61, 0.67 for the 4 aggression factors
previously noted.
The Basic Empathy Scale (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2006), consists of 9
items, on a Likert scale with five response options (1 = completely
false … ., 5 = completely true), which scores between 9 and 45 points.
For this study, the Spanish version of Oliva Delgado et al. (2011) has been
used. The items are distributed on two scales, one corresponding to
Affective Empathy, composed of items 1, 2, 3 and 6; and another corre-
sponding to Cognitive Empathy formed by items 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9. Also
offering a global score that can be considered as an indicator of the general
empathy of adolescents. The reliability of the empathy scale in the present
investigation, measured through Cronbrach’s Alpha, is 0.80. (total), 0.58
(cognitive) and 0.82 (affective).

Process
Once authorization from legal representatives of the two institutions was
received, the informed consents of the parents and the adolescents were
incorporated. The tests were applied in two centers of adolescent offenders
(1: Machala and 2: Guayaquil) in small groups and were presented in the
following order: the criminal scale, the aggression questionnaire, empathy
scale and finally the self-compassion scale. The educators accompanied the
process in the classroom and the doubts or requirements made by the
participants were resolved.

Analysis of data
A descriptive analysis was conducted (mean, standard deviation, minimum
and maximum), and the criminal profiles of the adolescents investigated were
obtained. The correlation and regression analyses were used to explore the
relationship that self-compassion has with self-control, aggression, empathy
and their interaction. The associations between the self-compassion subscales
and the self-control scale were also examined. All analyses were performed
using the statistical package SPSS version 22.

Results
The minimum and maximum scores of each of the scales, their mean and
their standard deviation were calculated (Table 1). In relation to criminal
conduct, 52.4% of the study sample had a high level of criminal conduct:
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 7

Table 1. Means, standard deviations, mínimum and máximum of the instruments included in the
study.
Mean Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum
Criminal Conduct 5.46 5.18 0 19
Self-Compassion 82.03 10.10 60 110
Self-Kindness 3.32 0.93 1,40 5
Mindfulness 3.10 0.92 1.50 5
Self-judgment 2.75 0.83 1 4.40
Isolation 3.09 0.94 1 5
Over-identification 2.94 0.86 1.25 4.50
Self-control 33.41 24.26 −24 108
Aggressiveness 85.57 21.92 40 133
Empathy 29.06 7.20 13 43

Table 2. Profiles of the criminal scale in adolescent offenders.

Adolescent Offenders % (n)
Low risk 47.6(30)
High risk 15.9(10)
Criminal profile 36.5(23)

15.9% enrolled in the high risk profile (85–90 percentile) and 36.5% in the
criminal profile (95–99 percentile); and 47.6% of the sample had a low level.
(Table 2).
We observed the Pearson correlation coefficients of the psychological
variables studied. In most cases, the observed pattern of associations was
as expected. Self-compassion showed a significant positive relationship
with self-control (R = .30, p < .05), in the same way with empathy
(R = .28, p < .05) and with aggressiveness it had no positive relationship
(R = .09 p > .05). In addition, self-control is associated with empathy
(R = .29, p < .05). The aggressiveness was not related to the other
variables. (Table 3).
A multiple regression analysis was also performed to examine to what extent
the self-compassion trait of the participants was associated with self-control,
aggression and empathy. Before applying the analysis, the data was examined
for normality by means of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; the results indicated
normality of the distribution of the scores in the current study tests. Table 4
describes the non-standardized and standardized coefficients of this regression
model.

Table 3. Correlation coefficients among the instruments included in the study.

SCS Self-Control Aggressiveness Empathy
Self-Compassion _
Self-Control 0.30* _
Aggressiveness −0.09 −0.01 _
Empathy 0.28* 0.29* −0.04 _
*p < .05, **p < .01.
8 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

Table 4. Regression coefficents for self-compassion.

Unstandardized Standardized
Self-Control .10* .24*
Aggressiveness −04 −09
Empathy .29 .21
*p < .05, **p < .01.

Table 5. Correlation coefficients among self-control and self-compassion

subscales.
Self-Control
Self-Kindness 0.37**
Common Humanity 0.19
Mindfulness 0.45**
Self-judgment 0.01
Isolation 0.19
Overidentification 0.08
*p < .05, **p < .01.

The multiple regression model with the three predictors was found to be
non-significant. However, the regression analysis showed the existence of
a relationship between the variables that is explained by the equation
Y = 77.81 + 0.126 X1, where Y is self-compassion and X1 self-control. The
coefficient of determination was 0.09.
Finding a significant association between self-compassion and self-control
scores, the Pearson correlation was performed to determine if there was an
association between the scores of the self-compassion and self-control sub-
scales. Table 5 describes the correlation coefficients between self-compassion
and self-control subscales. Self-control showed positive correlations with self-
kindness (R = .37, p < .01) and mindfulness (R = .45, p < .01). The common
humanity, as well as the self-judgment, isolation and over-identification did
not reveal themselves as correlates of self-control. The simple linear regres-
sion analysis, taking each self-compassion subscale as a dependent variable
and the self-control score as independent variable, determined that self-
control is a significant direct predictor of self-kindness (T = 3.15, p < .05)
and mindfulness (T = 3.93, p < .05) with coefficients of determination of 0.14
and 0.20 respectively. Self-control was not a significant predictor for com-
mon humanity, self-judgment, isolation and over-identification.

Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore the association between self-compassion
and the various risk factors associated with criminal conduct, including self-
control, empathy and aggression among adolescent offenders deprived of their
liberty. First, we evaluated the level of criminal conduct in the adolescent
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 9

offenders deprived of their freedom, finding a high prevalence in the sample

investigated (52.4%) compared to 25% (Chinchay Morales & Gil Ibañez, 2014)
and 5% of adolescent offenders, which are those who will continue with
a criminal career (Bechtel, Lowenkamp, & Latessa, 2007) that can be explained
through the family, school, social environments and the ontogenetic factor of the
individual; Self-control and social interaction are fundamental for the commis-
sion or not of a crime (Laub & Sampson, 1991; Moffitt, 1993).
Then, associations between self-compassion and the three predictors were
verified. In addition, these findings provide evidence of convergent validity for
the use of self-compassion to assess adolescent offenders on the basis that the
participant’s self-compassion scores were correlated with self-control and
empathy. In general, the findings support the hypothesis that self-compassion
adolescent offenders tend to have more self-control and empathy. In terms of
the magnitude of these associations, the results indicate that self-compassion
has a slight correlation with self-control and empathy. Also, the correlation
between factors determined a slight correlation with each other, except for the
variable of aggressiveness. This is not a new discovery, when considering the
association of self-compassion with self-control and empathy, as it has been
demonstrated, empathy (Murphy et al., 2005; Neff & Germer, 2013) and self-
control can help to increase self-compassion or vice versa (Kelly, Zuroff, Foa, &
Gilbert, 2010). The transcendence of our study was to analyze how these traits
behave with regards to their relationship with criminal behavior in the adoles-
cent offender population. The simple linear regression analysis confirmed that
the self-control variable positively predicted self-compassion. However, aggres-
siveness and empathy have not emerged as predictors of self-compassion.
The correlation between self-control and self-compassion subscales con-
firms the potential of self-compassion (self-kindness and mindfulness) to
increase self-control by overcoming the displeasure of self-consciousness
(Adams & Leary, 2007; Webb & Forman, 2013).
Evidence suggests that self-compassion empowers people to overcome dis-
pleasure, thus reducing the percieved lack of control. In other words, self-control
promotes self-compassion and vice versa, supporting the nonappearance of
criminal behavior, characterized by having low self-control (López & López,
2003). In terms of simple linear regression, self-control positively predicted self-
kindness and mindfulness, adaptive dimensions of self-compassion. However,
common humanity has not emerged as a significant predictor in the regression
model, nor the non-adaptive dimensions of self-compassion (self-judgment,
isolation and overidentification).These results are in line with previous studies
that show that self-control makes it possible to observe, accept and affirm one’s
self (Barrett-Lennard, 1997), greater tolerance to aversive lifestyles (Rosenbaum,
1980), and to promote prosocial life (Eisenberg, 2005).
In general terms, the results of the analysis conclude that self-compassion
is related to the predictive factors of crime (self-control and empathy) in
10 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

adolescent offenders investigated. This information can be used to provide

more precise guidance in the treatment of juvenile delinquents.
The present study is not without limitations, due to the context in which it
develops. We highlight the social desirability, which could be influencing the
answers given by adolescent offenders to the questions of the scales and
modifying the results obtained. In this same line, such highlights the need for
further research to understand how self-compassion is linked to criminal
conduct in adolescent offenders.

Disclosure of Interest
Authors Mario Dávila Gómez, Jorge & Roberto Dávila Pino, declare that they have no
conflicts to report.

Ethical Standards and Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible
committee on human experimentation [institutional and national] and with the Helsinki
Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all adolescent
offenders for being included in the study

ORCID
Mario Dávila Gómez http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0704-0879

References
Adams, C. E., & Leary, M. R. (2007). Promoting self-compassionate attitudes toward eating
among restrictive and guilty eaters. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26,
1120–1144. doi:10.1521/jscp.2007.26.10.1120
Akın, A. (2008). Scales of psychological well-being: A study of validity and reliability.
Educational Science: Theory & Practice, 8(3), 721–750.
Andreu, J., Peña, M., & Graña, J. (2002). Adaptación psicométrica de la version española del
Cuestionario de Agresión. Psicothema, 14(2), 476–482. Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.
org/articulo.oa?id=72714245
Antolín, L. (2011). La conducta antisocial en la adolescencia: unaaproximación ecológica
(Tesis Doctoral). Universidad de Sevilla, España. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/
11441/15485
Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of
Moral Education, 31(2), 101–119. doi:10.1080/0305724022014322
Barnard, L. K., & Curry, J. (2011). Self-compassion: Conceptualizations, correlates, & inter-
ventions. Review of General Psychology, 15(4), 289–303. doi:10.1037/a0025754
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 11

Barrett-Lennard, G. (1997). The recovery of empathy: Toward others and self. In A. Bohart &
L. Greenberg (Eds.), Empathy reconsidered: New directions in psychotherapy (pp. 103–121).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press. doi:10.1037/10
Bechtel, K., Lowenkamp, C., & Latessa, E. (2007). Assessing the risk of re-offending for
juvenile offenders using the youth level of service/case management inventory. Journal of
Offender Rehabilitation, 45(3–4), 85–108. doi:10.1300/J076v45n03_04
Bluth, K., Roberson, P., Gaylord, F. K., Grewen, K., Arzon, S., & Susan, G. (2015). Does
self-compassion protect adolescents from stress? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25(4),
1098–1109. doi:10.1007/s10826-015-0307-3
Bowlin, S. L., & Baer, R. A. (2012). Relationships between mindfulness, self-control, and
psychological functioning. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 411–415. doi:10.1016/
j.paid.2011.10.050
Brown, B. (1998). Soul without shame: A guide to liberating yourself from the judge within.
Boston: Shambhala Publications..
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63(3), 452–459. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/1993-00039-001
Capafóns, A., & Barreto, P. (1989). Competencia aprendida: Fiabilidad y validez de su
medida, críticas y recomendaciones. Revista Española de Terapia del comportamiento, 7,
19–39.
Chinchay Morales, J. B., & Gil Ibañez, W. D. (2014). Conductas Antisociales-Delictivas
y Estilos de Pensamiento en Estudiantes de una Institución Educativa del Distrito de
Tumàn, 2014. PAIAN, 5(2). Retrieved from http://revistas.uss.edu.pe/index.php/PAIAN/
article/view/92/91
Diz, J. (2013). Desarrollo del adolescente: aspectos físicos, psicológicos y sociales. Pediatr
Integral, 17(2), 88–93.
Doyle, F. L., & Bussey, K. (2017). Moral disengagement and children’s propensity to tell
coached lies. Journal of Moral Education, 47(1), 91–103. doi:10.1080/03057240.2017.1380611
Eisenberg, N. (2005). The development of empathy-related responding. Nebraska Symposium
on Motivation, 51, 73–118.
Eron, L. (2002). Desarrollo del comportamiento antisocial desde la perspectiva del aprendi-
zaje. In D. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. Maser (Eds.), Conducta antisocial: Causas, evaluación
y tratamiento (pp. 202–220). México, D.F., México: Oxford University Press.
Farrington, D. P. (1989). Self-reported and official offending from adolescence to adulthood.
In M. W. Klein (Ed.), Cross-national research in self-reported crime and delinquency. NATO
ASI series (Series D: Behavioural and sciences) (Vol. 50). Dordrecht: Springer. doi:10.1007/
978-94-009-1001-0_18
Gallegos, W. L. (2013). Agresión y violencia en la adolescencia: La importancia de la familia.
Avances en psicología, 21(1), 23–24. doi:10.33539/avpsicol
Garaigordobil, M., & Maganto, C. (2016). Conducta antisocial en adolescentes y jóvenes:
prevalencia en el País Vasco y diferencias en función de variables socio-demográficas.
Acción psicológica, 13(2), 57–68. doi:10.5944/ap.13.2.17826
García, J., Zaldívar, F., De la Fuente, L., Ortega, E., & Sainz-Cantero, B. (2012). El Sistema de
Justicia Juvenil de Andalucía: descripción y presentación de a través de la investigación
empírica. Edupsykhé, 11(2), 287–316.
Garcia-Campayo, J., Navarro-Gil, M., Andrés, E., Montero-Marin, J., López-Artal, L., &
Demarzo, M. M. (2014). Validation of the Spanish versions of the long (26 items) and
short (12 items) forms of the self-compassion scale (SCS). Health and Quality of Life
Outcomes, 12(1), 1. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-12-4
12 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

Gilbert, P., & Irons, C. (2005). Focused therapies and compassionate mind training for
shame and self-attacking. In P. Gilbert (Ed.), Compassion: Conceptualisations, Research
and Use in Psychotherapy (pp. 263–325). London, UK: Routledge.
Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., & Bussey, K. (2015). Moral disengagement moderates the link between
psychopathic traits and aggressive behavior among early adolescents. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 61(1), 51–67. doi:10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.61.1.0051
Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., & Hymel, S. (2014). Moral disengagement among children and youth: A
meta-analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 40(1), 56–68.
doi:10.1002/ab.21502
Giulio, D., Petruccelli, I., & Pace, U. (2018). Drug use as a risk factor of moral disengagement:
A study on drug traffickers and offenders against other persons. Psychiatry, Psychology and
Law. doi:10.1080/13218719
Gottfredson, H. G., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Greenberg, L. S., Watson, J. C., & Goldman, R. O. (1998). Process-experiential therapy of
depression. In L. S. Greenberg, J. C. Watson, & G. Lietaer (Eds.), Handbook of Experiential
Psychotherapy (pp. 227–248). New York: Guilford.
Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress
reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57(1),
35–43. doi:10.1016/S0022-3999(03)00573-7
Hinshaw, S., & Zupan, B. (2002). Evaluación del comportamiento antisocial en niños
y adolescentes. In D. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. Maser (Eds.), Conducta antisocial: Causas,
evaluación y tratamiento (pp. 36–72). México, D.F., México: Oxford University Press.
Hollis-Walker, L., & Colosimo, K. (2011). Mindfulness, self-compassion, and happiness in
non-meditators: A theoretical and empirical examination. Personality and Individual
Differences, 50, 222–227. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.033
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., & Dubow, E. F. (2002). Childhood predictors of adult
criminality: Are all risk factors reflected in childhood aggressiveness? Criminal Behaviour
and Mental Health, 12(3), 185–208. doi:10.1002/cbm.496
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. (2006). Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale.
Journal of Adolescence, 29(4), 589–611. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future.
Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, 10, 144–156. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bpg016
Kelly, A., Zuroff, D., Foa, C., & Gilbert, P. (2010). Who benefits from training in
self-compassionate self-regulation? A study of smoking reduction. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 29(7), 727–755. doi:10.1521/jscp.2010.29.7.727
Kerlinger, F. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston.
Kokkinos, C. M., & Kipritsi, E. (2017). Bullying, moral disengagement and empathy:
Exploring the links among early adolescents. Educational Psychology, 1–18. doi:10.1080/
01443410.2017.1363376
Laub, J., & Sampson, R. (1991). The SutherlandGlueck debate: On the sociology of crimin-
ological knowledge. American Journal of Sociology, 96(6), 1402–1440. doi:10.1086/229691
López, C., & López, J. R. (2003). Rasgos de personalidad y conducta antisocial delictiva.
Psicopatología clínica legal y forense, 3(2), 5–19.
MacBeth, A., & Gumley, A. (2012). Exploring compassion: A metaanalysis of the association
between self-compassion and psychopathology. Clinical Psychology Review, 32, 545–552.
doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2012.06.003
Masicampo, E. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2007). Relating mindfulness and self-regulatory
processes. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 255–258. doi:10.1080/10478400701598363
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 13

Michalec, B., Keyes, C. L., & Nalkur, S. (2009). Flourishing. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), The
encyclopedia of positive psychology (Vol. I, pp. 391–394). Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Moffitt, T. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course persistent antisocial behavior:
A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100(4), 674–701. doi:10.1037/0033-
295X.100.4.674
Murphy, C., Stosny, S., & Morrel, T. M. (2005). Change in self-esteem and physical aggres-
sion during treatment for partner violent men. Journal of Family Violence, 20, 201–210.
doi:10.1007/s10896-005-5983-0
Neff, K. (2003a). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self
and Identity, 2(3), 223–250. doi:10.1080/15298860309027
Neff, K. (2003b). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healty attitude
toward onself. Self and Identity, 2, 85–101.
Neff, K. (2012). The Science of self-compassion. In C. G. R. Siegel (Ed.), Compassion and
wisdom in psychotherapy (pp. 79–92). Nueva York, United States: Guilford Press.
Neff, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A pilot study andrandomized controlled trial of the
mindful self-compassion program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(1), 28–44. doi:10.1002/
jclp.21923
Neff, K. D., & Vonk, R. (2009). Self-compassion versus global self-esteem: Two different
ways of relating to oneself. Journal of Personality, 77, 23–50. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
6494.2008.00537.x
Oliva Delgado, A., Antolín Suárez, L., Pertegal Vega, M. A., Ríoas Bermúdez, M., Parra
Jiménez, A., Hernando Gómez, Á., & Reina Flores, M. (2011). Instrumentos para la
evaluación de la salud mental y el desarrollo positivo adolescente y los activos que lo
promueven. Sevilla, España: Junta de Andalucía. Consejería de Salud.
Rainforth, M. V., Alexander, C. N., & Cavanaugh, K. L. (2003). Effects of the transcendental
meditation program on recidivism among former inmates of Folsom Prison: Survival
analysis of 15-year follow-up data. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 36, 181–203.
doi:10.1300/J076v36n01_09
Raskauskas, J. L., Gregory, J., Harvey, S. T., Rifshana, F., & Evans, I. M. (2010). Bullying
among primary school children in New Zealand: Relationships with prosocial behaviour
and classroom climate. Educational Research, 52, 1–13. doi:10.1080/00131881003588097
Redondo, S., & Pueyo, A. (2007). La psicología de la delincuencia. Papeles del Psicólogo, 28(3),
147–156.
Rosenbaum, M. (1980). A schedule for assessing self-control behaviors: Preliminary findings.
Behavior Therapy, 11, 109–121. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(80)80040-2
Seisdedos, N. (1995). Cuestionario A-D (conductas antisociales-delictivas). Madrid, España:
TEA Ediciones.
Shapiro, S. L., Astin, J. A., Bishop, S. R., & Cordova, M. (2005). Mindfulness-based stress
reduction for health care professionals: Results from a randomized trial. International
Journal of Stress Management, 12, 164–176. doi:10.1037/1072-5245.12.2.164
Shapiro, S. L., Brown, K. W., & Biegel, G. M. (2007). Teaching self-care to caregivers:
Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on the mental health of therapists in
training. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 1, 105–115. doi:10.1037/
1931-3918.1.2.105
Stosny, S. (1995). Treating attachment abuse: A compassion approach. New York, NY:
Springer.
Torregrosa, M. S., Inglés, C. J., García-Fernández, J. M., Gázquez, J. J., Díaz-Herrero, A.,
& Bermejo, R. M. (2012). Conducta agresiva entre iguales y rendimiento académico en
una muestra de adolescentes españoles. Behavioral Psychology/Psicología Conductual,
20(2), 263–280.
14 M. DÁVILA GÓMEZ ET AL.

United Nations. (2017). The sustainable development goals report 2017 (Sales No. E.17.I.7.).
New York. Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2017/thesustainabledeve
lopmentgoalsreport2017.pdf
Van Dam, N., Sheppard, S., Forsyth, J., & Earleywine, M. (2011). Self-compassion is a better
predictor than mindfulness of symptom severity and quality of life in mixed anxiety and
depression. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 25(1), 123–130. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.08.011
Webb, J. B., & Forman, M. J. (2013). Evaluating the indirect effect of self-compassion on
binge eating severity through cognitive–Affective self-regulatory pathways. Eating
Behaviors, 14, 224–228. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2012.12.005
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Treiber, K. (2007). The role of self-control in crime causation: Beyond
Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. European Journal of Criminology, 4,
237–264. doi:10.1177/1477370807074858
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Treiber, K. (2009). Violence as situational action. Journal of Conflict
and Violence International, 3, 41–62.
Zessin, U., Dickhäuser, O., & Garbade, S. (2015). The relationship between self-compassion
and well-being: A meta-analysis. Applied Psychology: Healthand Well-Being, 7, 340–364.
doi:10.1111/aphw.12051