Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Analyzing the Performance of Risk Assessment Instruments: A Response to Vrieze and Grove (2007)

Analyzing the Performance of Risk Assessment Instruments: A Response to Vrieze and Grove (2007) In a recent article, Vrieze and Grove (Law Hum Behav, doi:doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9092-x, 2007) argue that, because of low recidivism base rates and limited predictive accuracy, an actuarial risk assessment instrument (ARAI) may produce decisions about sex offenders that are worse than simply predicting that no one will commit another sex offense. This article examines: (1) the construction and potential overfitting of ARAIs; (2) the meaning, value, and limitations of ROC areas; and (3) the relationship between the operating point that maximizes an ARAI’s correct classifications and the legal criterion—“likely to reoffend”—used for sex offender designations. Contrary to what Vrieze and Grove suggest, ARAIs of modest accuracy yield probabilistic information that is more relevant to legal decision-making than just “betting the base rate.” http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior American Psychological Association

Analyzing the Performance of Risk Assessment Instruments: A Response to Vrieze and Grove (2007)

Law and Human Behavior , Volume 32 (3): 13 – Jun 1, 2008

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/analyzing-the-performance-of-risk-assessment-instruments-a-response-to-T59TswiOxN

References (55)

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 American Psychological Association
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1007/s10979-007-9123-7
pmid
18060487
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In a recent article, Vrieze and Grove (Law Hum Behav, doi:doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9092-x, 2007) argue that, because of low recidivism base rates and limited predictive accuracy, an actuarial risk assessment instrument (ARAI) may produce decisions about sex offenders that are worse than simply predicting that no one will commit another sex offense. This article examines: (1) the construction and potential overfitting of ARAIs; (2) the meaning, value, and limitations of ROC areas; and (3) the relationship between the operating point that maximizes an ARAI’s correct classifications and the legal criterion—“likely to reoffend”—used for sex offender designations. Contrary to what Vrieze and Grove suggest, ARAIs of modest accuracy yield probabilistic information that is more relevant to legal decision-making than just “betting the base rate.”

Journal

Law and Human BehaviorAmerican Psychological Association

Published: Jun 1, 2008

There are no references for this article.