Factors Predicting Desistance From Reoffending: A Validation Study of the SAPROF in Sexual Offenders

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 697-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dahlnym Yoon ◽  
Daniel Turner ◽  
Verena Klein ◽  
Martin Rettenberger ◽  
Reinhard Eher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Sexual Offenders ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Limited Extent ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

The present study aims at validating the German version of the Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors (SAPROF) for violence risk in a representative sample of incarcerated adult male sexual offenders. Sexual offenders ( n = 450) were rated retrospectively with the SAPROF using the database of the Federal Evaluation Centre for Violent and Sexual Offenders (FECVSO) in the Austrian Prison System. Interrater reliability and predictive validity of the SAPROF scores concerning desistance from recidivism were calculated. Concurrent and incremental validity were tested using the combination of the SAPROF and the Sexual Violence Risk–20 (SVR-20). Interrater reliability was moderate to excellent, and predictive accuracy for various types of recidivism was rather small to moderate. There was a clear negative relationship between the SAPROF and the SVR-20 risk factors. Whereas the SAPROF revealed itself as a significant predictor for various recidivism categories, it did not add any predictive value beyond the SVR-20. Although the SAPROF itself can predict desistance from recidivism, it seems to contribute to the risk assessment in convicted sexual offenders only to a limited extent, once customary risk assessment tools have been applied. Implications for clinical use and further studies are discussed.

Are Protective Factors Valid Constructs? Interrater Reliability And Construct Validity Of Proposed Protective Factors Against Sexual Reoffending

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (11) ◽  
pp. 1448-1467
Author(s):  
Gwenda M. Willis ◽  
Sharon M. Kelley ◽  
David Thornton
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Sexual Offence ◽  
Sexual Recidivism ◽  
Dynamic Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

Most sexual recidivism risk assessment tools focus primarily on risk factors and deficits without consideration for strengths or protective factors which might mitigate reoffense risk. The current study is the first in a research program designed to develop and validate the Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors for violence risk—Sexual Offence version (SAPROF-SO), a measure of protective factors against sexual reoffending. The study aimed to test interrater reliability and construct validity of the SAPROF-SO with a high-risk ( n = 40) and routine ( n = 40) sample. Interrater reliability between three independent raters was generally good to excellent for the SAPROF-SO domain and Total scores across both samples and compared favorably with validated measures of dynamic risk. Moreover, the SAPROF-SO demonstrated construct validity and was moderately independent of existing measures of risk. Findings open the door for a more balanced, strengths-based, and accurate approach to recidivism risk assessment.

scholarly journals Risk assessment tools in criminal justice and forensic psychiatry: The need for better data

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 134-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Douglas ◽  
J. Pugh ◽  
I. Singh ◽  
J. Savulescu ◽  
S. Fazel
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Forensic Psychiatry ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Demographic Variables ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Violence Risk Assessment ◽  
Assessment Scores ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

AbstractViolence risk assessment tools are increasingly used within criminal justice and forensic psychiatry, however there is little relevant, reliable and unbiased data regarding their predictive accuracy. We argue that such data are needed to (i) prevent excessive reliance on risk assessment scores, (ii) allow matching of different risk assessment tools to different contexts of application, (iii) protect against problematic forms of discrimination and stigmatisation, and (iv) ensure that contentious demographic variables are not prematurely removed from risk assessment tools.

scholarly journals Risk, Actuarialism, and Punishment

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hazel Kemshall
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Insurance Industry ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Practices ◽  
High Crime

Risk is a pervasive feature of contemporary life, and has become a key feature of penal policy, systems of punishment, and criminal justice services across a number of the Anglophone jurisdictions. Risk as an approach to calculating the probability of “danger” or “hazard” has its roots in the mercantile trade of the 16th century, growing in significance over the intervening centuries until it pervades both the social and economic spheres of everyday life. Actuarialism, that is the method of statistically calculating and aggregating risk data, has similar roots, steeped in the probability calculations of the insurance industry with 20th-century extension into the arenas of social welfare and penality. Within criminal justice one of the first risk assessment tools was the parole predictor designed by Burgess in 1928. Since then we have seen a burgeoning of risk assessment tools and actuarial risk practices across the penal realm, although the extent to which penality is totally risk based is disputed. Claims for a New Penology centered on risk have been much debated, and empirical evidence would tend toward more cautious claims for such a significant paradigm shift. Prevention and responsibilization are often seen as core themes within risk-focused penality. Risk assessment is used not only to assess and predict future offending of current criminals, but also to enable early identification of future criminals, “high crime” areas, and those in need of early interventions. The ethics, accuracy, and moral justification for such preventive strategies have been extensively debated, with concerns expressed about negative and discriminatory profiling; net-widening; over targeting of minority groups especially for selective incarceration; and more recently criticisms of risk-based pre-emption or “pre-crime” targeting, particularly of ethnic minorities. Responsibilization refers to the techniques of actuarial practices used to make persons responsible for their own risk management, and for their own risk decisions throughout the life course. In respect of offenders this is best expressed through corrective programs focused on “right thinking” and re-moralizing offenders toward more desirable social ends. Those offenders who are “ripe for re-moralization” and who present a level of risk that can be managed within the community can avoid custody or extended sentencing. Those who are not, and who present the highest levels of risk, are justifiably selected for risk-based custodial sentences. Such decision-making not only requires high levels of predictive accuracy, but is also fraught with severe ethical challenges and moral choices, not least about the desired balance between risks, rights, and freedoms.

scholarly journals Good (or bad) vibrations: clinical intuition in violence risk assessment

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 447-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Analytic Thinking ◽  
Assessment Task ◽  
Intuitive Thinking ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Managing Risk ◽  
Modes Of Thought

SummaryAssessment and management of the risk of violence in psychiatry inevitably and appropriately draws on emotionally laden ‘intuitive’ modes of thought, as well as deliberative analytic thinking. This article discusses the concept of ‘intuition’ and proposes a brief set of guidelines, derived from work by the cognitive psychologist Robin Hogarth, by which intuitive thinking may be applied by clinicians when undertaking risk assessment work. The guidelines are: consider the learning structure relevant to the risk assessment task; use your own emotions as a source of data; impose ‘circuit breakers' such as cost–benefit analyses and validated structured risk assessment tools; and use a narrative approach to develop formulations. The guidelines are intended to provide a framework for ongoing reflective practice in assessing and managing risk.

Risk assessment of online child abuse material (CAM) offenders: a review of existing tools

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Garrington ◽  
Peter Chamberlain ◽  
Debra Rickwood ◽  
Douglas P. Boer
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Sexual Offenders ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Dynamic Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Online Searches ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Child Abuse Material

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to summarise the available risk and assessment tools for child abuse material (CAM) offenders. Noting the rise of internet-based offences surrounding CAM, it has been proposed that there may be substantial differences between internet only (IO) offenders, contact only and mixed profile sexual offenders. Design/methodology/approach Through online searches, risk assessment tools for sexual offenders were identified. Scoring manuals were consulted for applicability to IO offenders. Findings Nine risk assessment tools for sexual offenders were included. Risk assessment tools for sexual offenders use cautionary language regarding the application of sexual offence risk assessment tools to IO offenders. An additional five tools were identified specifically addressing IO offenders. Three of these tools address risk assessment and two assess cognitions and behaviours. Research limitations/implications Limitations include the identification of static and dynamic risk factors and the application of structured professional judgement. Practical implications By drawing together existing tools and recommendations for use with the IO offender population, a gap is identified for CAM specific risk assessment tools. Originality/value Appropriate risk assessment, case planning and treatment will contribute to the appropriate management and treatment of the IO offender population.

A twist in Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Tools: Gauging the contribution of exogenous and historical variables

2021 ◽  
pp. 107586
Author(s):  
Lara Quijano-Sánchez ◽  
Federico Liberatore ◽  
Guillermo Rodríguez-Lorenzo ◽  
Rosa E. Lillo ◽  
José L. González-Álvarez
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Violence Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

scholarly journals Improving risk assessment in schizophrenia: epidemiological investigation of criminal history factors

2015 ◽  
Vol 206 (5) ◽  
pp. 424-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina Witt ◽  
Paul Lichtenstein ◽  
Seena Fazel
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Violent Offence ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Incremental Predictive Validity

BackgroundViolence risk assessment in schizophrenia relies heavily on criminal history factors.AimsTo investigate which criminal history factors are most strongly associated with violent crime in schizophrenia.MethodA total of 13 806 individuals (8891 men and 4915 women) with two or more hospital admissions for schizophrenia were followed up for violent convictions. Multivariate hazard ratios for 15 criminal history factors included in different risk assessment tools were calculated. The incremental predictive validity of these factors was estimated using tests of discrimination, calibration and reclassification.ResultsOver a mean follow-up of 12.0 years, 17.3% of men (n=1535) and 5.7% of women (n=281) were convicted of a violent offence. Criminal history factors most strongly associated with subsequent violence for both men and women were a previous conviction for a violent offence; for assault, illegal threats and/or intimidation; and imprisonment. However, only a previous conviction for a violent offence was associated with incremental predictive validity in both genders following adjustment for young age and comorbid substance use disorder.ConclusionsClinical and actuarial approaches to assess violence risk can be improved if included risk factors are tested using multiple measures of performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document