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

Learn More →

The Accuracy of Recidivism Risk Assessments for Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of 118 Prediction Studies

The Accuracy of Recidivism Risk Assessments for Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of 118... This review compared the accuracy of various approaches to the prediction of recidivism among sexual offenders. On the basis of a meta-analysis of 536 findings drawn from 118 distinct samples (45,398 sexual offenders, 16 countries), empirically derived actuarial measures were more accurate than unstructured professional judgment for all outcomes (sexual, violent, or any recidivism). The accuracy of structured professional judgment was intermediate between the accuracy found for the actuarial measures and for unstructured professional judgment. The effect sizes for the actuarial measures were moderate to large by conventional standards (average d values of 0.67–0.97); however, the utility of the actuarial measures will vary according to the referral question and samples assessed. Further research should identify the psychologically meaningfully factors that contribute to risk for reoffending. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Psychological Assessment American Psychological Association

The Accuracy of Recidivism Risk Assessments for Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of 118 Prediction Studies

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/the-accuracy-of-recidivism-risk-assessments-for-sexual-offenders-a-Oa95dhr9Bi

References (181)

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Public Safety Canada
ISSN
1040-3590
eISSN
1939-134X
DOI
10.1037/a0014421
pmid
19290762
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This review compared the accuracy of various approaches to the prediction of recidivism among sexual offenders. On the basis of a meta-analysis of 536 findings drawn from 118 distinct samples (45,398 sexual offenders, 16 countries), empirically derived actuarial measures were more accurate than unstructured professional judgment for all outcomes (sexual, violent, or any recidivism). The accuracy of structured professional judgment was intermediate between the accuracy found for the actuarial measures and for unstructured professional judgment. The effect sizes for the actuarial measures were moderate to large by conventional standards (average d values of 0.67–0.97); however, the utility of the actuarial measures will vary according to the referral question and samples assessed. Further research should identify the psychologically meaningfully factors that contribute to risk for reoffending.

Journal

Psychological AssessmentAmerican Psychological Association

Published: Mar 1, 2009

There are no references for this article.