Suchergebnisse

This article describes the development and initial validation of the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool–II (JSORRAT-II). Potential predictor variables were extracted from case file information for an exhaustive sample of 636 juveniles in Utah who sexually offended between 1990 and 1992. Simultaneous and hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used to identify the group of variables that was most predictive of subsequent juvenile sexual recidivism. A simple categorical scoring system was applied to these variables without meaningful loss of accuracy in the development sample for any sexual (area under the curve [AUC] = .89) and sexually violent (AUC = .89) juvenile recidivism. The JSORRAT-II was cross-validated on an exhaustive sample of 566 juveniles who had sexually offended in Utah in 1996 and 1997. Reliability of scoring the tool across five coders was quite high (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = .96). Relative to the development sample, however, there was considerable shrinkage in the indices of predictive accuracy for any sexual (AUC = .65) and sexually violent (AUC = .65) juvenile recidivism. The reduced level of accuracy was not explained by severity of the index sexual offense, time at risk, or missing data. Capitalization on chance and other explanations for the possible reduction in predictive accuracy are explored, and potential uses and limitations of the tool are discussed.

Janus and Meehl (Psychology, Public Policy, and Law (1997), 3(1), 33-64) employed a sophisticated analysis to discover what is the actual standard that judges use in determining which sex offenders meet criteria for a civil commitment within the purviews of "sexual predator" laws. Their analysis relied on various assumptions, most of which were specified and explicated by the authors. They concluded that the judiciary does not even approach meeting the standards that it sets for itself when it comes to adjudicating the threshold for these types of commitments. Two of the fundamental underlying assumptions within their analysis may be seriously flawed, however. Using current information related to either of these assumptions, without changing any other aspect of the analysis, the ultimate finding concerning the judiciary standard would actually be reversed from what Janus and Meehl concluded.

The predictive validity of the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool–II (JSORRAT-II) was evaluated using an exhaustive sample of 11- to 17-year-old male juveniles who offended sexually (JSOs) between 2000 and 2006 in Iowa ( n = 529). The validity of the tool in predicting juvenile sexual recidivism was significant (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = .70, 99% confidence interval [CI] = [.60, .81], d = 0.70). Non-significant predictive validity coefficients were observed for the prediction of non-sexual forms of recidivism. Additional analyses were undertaken to test hypotheses about the tool's performance with various subsamples. The age of the JSO at the time of the index sexual offense and time at risk outside secure facility placements interacted significantly with JSORRAT-II scores to predict juvenile sexual recidivism. The implications of these findings for practice and research on the validation of risk assessment tools are discussed.

Following the implementation of sexual offender notification laws, researchers have found a drop in the rate of prosecutions and an increase in plea bargains for sexual offenses committed by male juveniles. This type of prosecutorial hesitation has implications for the predictive validity of sexual recidivism risk assessments, such as the Juvenile Sexual Offender Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool–II (JSORRAT-II), that require data from officially adjudicated offenses in the scoring of several items. The present study sought to test the impact of including data from documented but uncharged (DBU) sexual offenses in the scoring of the JSORRAT-II on its predictive validity using an exhaustive sample of 1,095 juveniles who offended sexually from the states of Iowa and Utah. Although sexual recidivists had significantly more DBU data, the inclusion of those data did not improve the predictive validity of the tool. The authors discuss additional reasons why changes in prosecutorial practice might remain confound in risk assessment studies and suggest future research to investigate those hypotheses.