Accuracy of self‐reported arrests among a forensic SPMI population

Abstract

Self-reports are prone to response error even in the most structured and standardized environment, but the highly stigmatizing nature of illegal behavior and the possible cognitive problems inherent to the SPMI population increase the likelihood of such error. Using administrative data as the gold standard, the validity of self-reported arrests was examined among 85 mentally ill substance-abusing individuals with justice involvement. The overall accuracy of self-reported arrests during a three-month recall period was 84.7%. Validity was higher among individuals who at the time of the follow-up interview were either in a jail diversion program or incarcerated. Individuals with a mood disorder appeared to be somewhat less accurate in their self-reports than subjects with schizophrenia, despite the implication of cognitive distortion accompanying this latter diagnostic category. Further research on issues such as the accuracy of self-reports over longer recall periods, or the accuracy of self-reported frequency of arrest, is necessary, given the reliance on self-report methodology in outcome studies.

Ethnoracial Disparities in Sexual Assault Among Asian Americans and Native Hawaiians/Other Pacific Islanders

“…Third, important information may have been lost or masked when we collapsed people of different ethnoracial backgrounds into three categories. Fourth, self-reports about threatening topics are subject to errors beyond mere faulty recall (26). The low rate of reported sexual assault experiences among Asian-Americans may be a cultural artifact in that men’s violence toward women is regarded as a private, embarrassing, or shameful matter (27–31).…”

Association between Psychological Integration and Permanent Supportive Housing: An Exploratory Study with a Focus on Ethnicity

“…In addition, conclusions regarding association were put forth with caution because of the reliance on self-report data. However, the accuracy of selfreported data is more questionable when respondents are asked to report about events that may be highly sensitive (e.g., experiences with trauma) or behaviors that may be perceived as unfavorable (e.g., substance use), which was not the case in our study (Crisanti et al 2003(Crisanti et al , 2005Fowler et al 2010). While predictor and control variables were selected based on clinical relevance and the literature, the variables included in our models were limited to those where data were available.…”

The validity of criminal justice contacts reported by inmates: A comparison of self-reported data with official prison records

“…Thus, the following measures of correspondence between data sources are reported: 1) an overall kappa statistic that is calculated by treating the observations as independent, 2) a range of kappa statistics for monthly arrest analysis where a kappa was calculated for each of the thirty-five months independently with the highest and lowest reported, and 3) the percentage of cases in which there was identical reporting in self-report and official data. While this measure is not perfect, it is commonly used in concordance studies that are comparing nominal data (see for example, Crisanti, Laygo, Claypoole, & Junginger, 2005;Roberts et al, 2005). 3…”