Differences in the Predictive Validity of Actuarial Risk Assessments in Relation to Sex Offender Type

Abstract

This study seeks to expand on the previously reported validity of the Static-99, RRASOR, MnSOST-R, and SORAG in predicting sexual recidivism utilizing a regional sample of offenders. The predictive validity of each test was determined utilizing subgroups of the sample based on each offender's known offense history. The effectiveness of each instrument varied depending on offender type. The Static-99 and SORAG were both significantly predictive of sexual, violent, and any recidivism for extra-familial child molesters, and all four tests were predictive of violent or any recidivism in this subgroup. For incest offenders, all four tests were at least moderately predictive of sexual recidivism, whereas the Static-99 and the SORAG were highly predictive of violent or any recidivism. None of the four tests established consistent predictive validity across recidivism categories in regard to rapists or hands-off offenders, however, the Static-99 and the SORAG were significant in terms of sexual recidivism.

Accuracy of the Static-99 in Predicting Recidivism in Switzerland

“…In most of the studies, the area under the curve (AUC) ranged from .70 to .80 (Barbaree, Seto, Langton, & Peacock, 2001;Beech, Friendship, Erikson, & Hanson, 2002;Hood, Shute, Feilzer, & Wilcox, 2002;McGrath, Cumming, Livingstone, & Hoke, 2000;Nunes, Firestone, Bradford, Greenberg, & Broom, 2002;Sjöstedt & Langström, 2001), which reflects a satisfactory to good prognostic accuracy. Bartosh, Garby, Lewis, and Gray (2003) compared the results of four actuarial prognosis instruments-the Static-99, the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sex Offence Recidivism, the Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool, and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide-on groups of sex offenders. The prognostic accuracy of the instruments depended on the kind of sex offense committed.…”

Adjusted actuarial assessment of sex offenders: the impact of clinical overrides on predictive accuracy

“…The MnSOST-R, along with several other tools, was also successfully validated with a sample of 599 sexual offenders referred to the Massachusetts Treatment Center for evaluation for possible civil commitment (Knight & Thornton, 2007 (Epperson et al, 2003, Langton et al, 2007, Barbaree et al, 2001, Knight & Thornton, 2007, & Bartosh, et al, 2003 also assessed other sex offender risk assessment tools in addition to the MnSOST-R, including the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sexual Offense Recidivism (RRASOR) and the Static-99, and none of the studies identified significant differences between the three tools.…”

Évaluation de la validité prédictive de neuf instruments chez les agresseurs sexuels adultes

“…Pour la récidive sexuelle, Epperson et al, 1998) et leurs résultats ne répliquaient pas ceux obtenus avec l'échantillon initial. En effet, les résultats de Bartosh et al (2003) et Barbaree et al (2001) indiquent que le MnSOST-R prédit significativement la récidive géné-rale (aires sous la courbe respectives de 0,66 et 0,65), alors qu 'Epperson et al (2000) rapportent des aires sous la courbe de 0,77 et de 0,76 avec un échantillon de contre-validation pour la récidive sexuelle. Seulement une étude (Langton, Barbaree, Seto et al, 2007) a eu recours à la Statique-2002(Hanson et Thornton, 2003, et ses résultats concordent avec ceux obtenus grâce à l'échantillon initial (aires sous la courbe variant de 0,71 à 0,72).…”