Criterion Validity of the Antisocial and Antilegal Subscales of the Adult Substance
Use Survey-Revised
Damon Mitchell, Central Connecticut State University
Jake Villeneuve, The Connection, Inc
Stephen M. Cox, Central Connecticut State University

Introduction
Method
Overview of the ASUS-R
Participants
The Adult Substance Use Survey - Revised (ASUS-R; Wanberg,
2004) is a self-report screening tool intended to:
 identify offenders who may have a substance use disorder,
 Identify other relevant concerns such as mood problems and
antisocial behaviors and attitudes,
 provide referral suggestions ,
 assess changes due to treatment.


The ASUS-R is employed by a variety of community corrections
agencies.
Unfortunately, there are no reports in the peer reviewed
literature concerning the validity of the survey.
Content of the ASUS-R


The ASUS-R does not yield a single score. Instead, it consists of
a series of 15 subscales focused on:
 substance use and its associated consequences,
 psychological distress,
 antisocial attitudes/behavior ,
 defensiveness/reluctance to acknowledge problems .

The subscales focused on antisocial attitudes/behavior are the
 1) Antisocial subscale, which measures anti-authority attitudes
and juvenile conduct problems;
 2) Antilegal subscale, which measures degree of lifetime
involvement with the criminal justice system;
 3) Antilegal Last 6 Months subscale, which measures degree
of involvement with the criminal justice system in the past 6
months. This subscales was not of interest in the present study
because its information is subsumed within the Antilegal
subscale.
Criminal Thinking
 Criminogenic Thinking Profile (CTP; Mitchell &
Tafrate, 2011): This self-report measure of criminal
thinking was also administered to clients at intake.
The CTP yields a Total Score as well as scores on 8
subscales, each reflecting a different thinking
pattern (see Table 1).

Table 1
The Antisocial subscale was significantly correlated with
 number of tickets while incarcerated,
 LSI Total Score,
 CTP Total Score,
 five of the 8 CTP subscales
Table 3
An all male, 30 bed, post incarceration facility located in an
urban setting. The facility utilizes a case management service
model to develop individualized service plans that address
clients risks and needs. Services include: vocational
counseling, housing/transitional Planning, cognitive skills and
daily living skills training, substance Abuse education, GED
classes, & AA/NA meetings.
A typical course of stay is 90 to 120 days. Clients are
assigned a case manager who works with them to complete
their assessments and identify key risk/need factors. The
intake process includes assessment of the client’s criminal
history, substance abuse use, emotional stability, employment
concerns, and other risks/needs. After the intake process has
been completed, the clients complete five days of orientation
during which time they are not allowed to leave the facility.
After orientation, clients are allowed out of the facility to
work, job search, address basic needs, and attend mental
health substance abuse treatment, or church. Clients attend a
job search group at least twice a week . While at the facility,
clients are assigned to one or more group interventions
addressing criminal and addictive thinking, relapse
prevention, and community reentry challenges. When the
clients are nearing their end of stay, their case manager will
complete a discharge plan with the client.
Procedure
Purpose of the Present Study
The present study sought to explore the criterion validity of the
Antisocial and Antilegal subscales by examining their correlation
with official criminal history data and measures of criminal risk
and criminal thinking.
 We hypothesized that
 1) both subscales would be correlated with criminal
history, criminal risk, and criminal thinking,
 2) the Antilegal scale would be more strongly correlated
with criminal history than criminal thinking,
 3) the Antisocial subscale would be more strongly
correlated with criminal thinking than criminal history.
146 male offenders on parole or work-release consecutively
admitted to a halfway house.

Average age of 33 (SD = 9)

52% Black, 30% White, 17% Latino

Average of 10 arrests (SD= 10), 4 incarcerations (SD =
3)
ASUS-R
CTP
The present study was conducted through analysis of an
existing database that contained demographic, criminal
history, intake assessment, program, and outcome data on all
clients discharged from the halfway house over a 2.5 year
period (N = 146).


We studied the following hypothesized correlates of the
ASUS-R Antisocial and Antilegal subscales
Criminal History
 Number of arrests as an adult
 Number of incarcerations as an adult
 Number of tickets for institutional misconduct
 Number of disciplinary reports at the halfway house
Criminal Risk Assessment
 Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R; Andrews &
Bonta, 1994): This interview based criminal risk/need
instrument was administered to clients at intake.
.30**
Emotionally Disengaged
.16
.09
.31**
.09
.15
.04
.19*
.12
.09
.03
.08
.15
.21*
-.01
.24**
.27**
Parasitic/
Exploitive
Justifying
Grandiosity
Disregard for Others
CTP Total
*p < .05, **p <. 01
Correlations Between the Antilegal Subscale and
Criminal History, Criminal Risk Assessment, and Criminal
Thinking (see Tables 2 & 3)
The Antilegal subscale was significantly correlated with:
 number of arrests,
 number of incarcerations,
 number of tickets while incarcerated,
 LSI Total Score,
 Inability to Cope subscales of the CTP.
Table 2
Measures

.20*
Poor Judgment
Results
Conclusions




ASUS-R
Variable
Arrests
Incarcerations
Institutional Misconduct
Halfway House Misconduct
LSI Total
*p < .05, **p <. 01
Antilegal Antisocial
.50**
.47**
.22**
-.01
.53**
Antilegal Antisocial
Inability to Cope
Demand for Excitement




Correlations Between the Antisocial Subscale and Criminal
History, Criminal Risk Assessment, and Criminal Thinking
(Tables 2 & 3)
Halfway House


Measures (continued)
.04
.07
.17*
.15
.28**

Results provide preliminary support for the validity of the
ASUS-R subscales under investigation.
Both the Antilegal and Antisocial subscales were correlated
with criminal history, criminal risk, and criminal thinking.
As hypothesized, the Antilegal subscale was more strongly
correlated with criminal history than criminal thinking, while the
Antisocial subscale was more strongly correlated with criminal
thinking than criminal history.
The strongest correlates of the Antilegal subscale were the
number of arrests and LSI Total Score, while the strongest
correlates of the Antisocial subscale were thinking patterns
reflecting passive/ ineffective coping strategies and avoidance
of emotional expressions that lead to intimacy with others.
Future validation research should:
 examine the predictive validity of the Antilegal and
Antisocial subscales with respect to probationer and parolee
outcomes,
 examine the construct validity of the subscales with a
measures of personality disorders and psychopathy.