1986
DOI: 10.1177/0093854886013002001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing Juvenile Sexual Offenders' Risk for Reoffending

Abstract: The purpose of this research was to investigate how best to identify juvenile sexual offenders who are likely to reoffend. The juvenile justice records of 112 male juvenile sexual offenders were examined. Information obtained during evaluation at a specialized, community-based program was compared with records of subsequent sexual and nonsexual reoffending. Certain characteristics of the referral offense and aspects of the offender's clinical presentation were found to be reliably related to reoffending; on se… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
90
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 152 publications
(94 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
3
90
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Further, a number of risk factors classified by Worling and Långström as unlikely were found to be predictive in the meta-analysis by McCann and Lussier. Similar inconsistencies are reflected in the findings of individual studies (e.g., Rasmussen, 1999;Smith & Monastersky, 1986), which, as noted above, are also characterized by problems such as brief follow-up periods (e.g., Kahn & Chambers, 1991;Prentky et al, 2000), small sample sizes (e.g., Boyd, 1994;Miner, 2002), unclear reliability (e.g., Allan et al, 2003;Smith & Monastersky, 1986), and the absence of a systematic, theoretically and empirically-based framework to inform the selection of risk factors (e.g., Nisbet et al, 2004;Rasmussen, 1999).…”
Section: Risk Factors For Recidivismmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Further, a number of risk factors classified by Worling and Långström as unlikely were found to be predictive in the meta-analysis by McCann and Lussier. Similar inconsistencies are reflected in the findings of individual studies (e.g., Rasmussen, 1999;Smith & Monastersky, 1986), which, as noted above, are also characterized by problems such as brief follow-up periods (e.g., Kahn & Chambers, 1991;Prentky et al, 2000), small sample sizes (e.g., Boyd, 1994;Miner, 2002), unclear reliability (e.g., Allan et al, 2003;Smith & Monastersky, 1986), and the absence of a systematic, theoretically and empirically-based framework to inform the selection of risk factors (e.g., Nisbet et al, 2004;Rasmussen, 1999).…”
Section: Risk Factors For Recidivismmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Also, in a study of 2,029 juvenile offenders released from secured custody, including 249 sex offenders, Caldwell (2007) reported a significantly lower violent recidivism rate among the sex offenders as compared to the non-sex offending delinquents. Several studies have failed to find a link between the level of force used to sexually offend and the risk of future sexual offending (Auslander, unpublished doctoral dissertation; Boyd, unpublished doctoral dissertation; Schram & Milloy, 1995;Smith & Monastersky, 1986). The finding that the JSOAP-II Sexual Drive/Sexual Preoccupation (Scale 1) (which taps into the characteristics of sexual offenses specifically) was inversely related to future offense rates adds to these earlier findings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Studies reported quantitative data on the relationship between childhood abuse and adolescent sexual re-offending, such that an effect size could be computed. Because our hypotheses differentiated between sexual and physical abuse, we excluded studies that grouped these forms of abuse together (e.g., Smith and Monastersky 1986).…”
Section: Eligibility Criteriamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beyond the scarcity of research in this area, several studies that examined abuse unfortunately did not report the data required to code effect sizes and thus could not be included in the metaanalysis. For instance, in Smith and Monastersky (1986), physical and sexual abuse were grouped together rather than examined separately. In addition, in some studies there was insufficient information to code all of the relevant effect sizes (e.g., Kahn and Chambers 1991).…”
Section: Limitations and Future Research Needsmentioning
confidence: 99%