Five-County Validation of the Indiana Risk Assessment System – Pretrial Assessment Tool (IRAS-PAT) using a Local Validation Approach

Abstract

Her research interests include strategies to reduce offending and improve behavioral health outcomes among justice-involved adults, with special focus on risk assessment and diversion programs. Her research has been published in outlets including Law and Human Behavior, Criminal

Use of Risk Assessments in Pretrial Supervision Decision-Making and Associated Outcomes

“…Our findings are aligned with the understanding that risk assessments serve to inform, not make, pretrial release and supervision decisions (Desmarais & Lowder, 2019). More broadly, prior studies have found that risk assessments have stronger effects on release decisions (Lowder et al, 2020a) and risk management (Viljoen et al, 2018) when decisions align with structured guidelines. Conversely, our findings suggest that deviations from structured guidelines, at least in a supervision decision-making context, do not adversely affect the risk management of pretrial defendants.…”

“…To date, there are a growing number of studies focused on evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of pretrial risk assessments as an alternative to money bail (Desmarais et al, 2020;Lowder et al, 2020a;Stevenson, 2018). However, there are fewer contemporary studies examining the use of risk assessment-informed pretrial supervision, despite nearly half of local jurisdictions reporting use of pretrial supervision and a similar proportion reporting use of pretrial risk assessments (Lattimore et al, 2020).…”

Bail Reform in the United States: The What, Why, and How of Third Wave Efforts

“…Empirical research suggests that pretrial risk assessment instruments can predict pretrial outcomes with fair to excellent predictive validity (Desmarais et al, 2020;Lowder et al, 2020b) and that their use is associated with reduced rates of pretrial detention (Anderson et al, 2019;Brooker, 2017;Lowderet al, 2020a;Redcross et al, 2019;Viljoen et al, 2019). Legal scholars, advocates, and others have expressed concerns that they may further exacerbate racial/ethnic disparities (Pretrial Justice Institute, 2020; Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, 2018).…”

“…These concerns must be rigorously examined; yet, studies that have examined racial bias in predictive validity show mixed results and emphasize differences across instruments and jurisdictions (see Desmarais et al, 2020 for a systematic review of the research). Further, existing research associated with implementing pretrial risk assessment instruments shows a decrease in pretrial detention across groups defined by race or ethnicity (Lowder et al, 2020b;Redcross et al, 2019;Viljoen et al, 2019). When research has revealed disparities in pretrial detention rates, the bias could be attributed to judicial decision-makers' interpretation of or deviation from risk scores (Cohen et al, 2020;Lowder et al, 2020b;Schaefer & Hughes, 2019;Stevenson, 2018).…”

“…Further, existing research associated with implementing pretrial risk assessment instruments shows a decrease in pretrial detention across groups defined by race or ethnicity (Lowder et al, 2020b;Redcross et al, 2019;Viljoen et al, 2019). When research has revealed disparities in pretrial detention rates, the bias could be attributed to judicial decision-makers' interpretation of or deviation from risk scores (Cohen et al, 2020;Lowder et al, 2020b;Schaefer & Hughes, 2019;Stevenson, 2018). Thus, disproportionate rates of pretrial detention may be indicative of system rather than instrument bias (Mayson, 2019;Menefee, 2018;Schaefer & Hughes, 2019;Vincent & Viljoen, 2020).…”