Overview
Having described the RNR model in the last chapter, we transition to the prediction and classification of risk. The following three questions are asked: (1) how well can criminal behavior be predicted? (2) what can we do with that knowledge in order to reduce the chances of criminal acts occurring? and (3) to what extent do the Central Eight risk/need factors apply to age, gender, and race? The reader is first introduced to some of the challenges in making valid and reliable predictions of criminal behavior (e.g., false positives, low base rates). Nevertheless, there has been progress in the development of risk/needs assessments that our presently fourth generational. Fourth generation assessments combine knowledge of the likelihood of future crime (i.e., recidivism) with knowledge of what is needed to reduce the chances of criminal behavior re-occurring.
The Central Eight looms large in the new risk/need instruments. Every third and fourth generation assessment includes the measurement of the Central Eight. Not only does the Central Eight apply to gender, age, and minorities but also to those with serious mental disorders and those who commit violent crimes.
Videos
Valid and Not-So Valid Criticisms of Acturial Risk Tools
R. Karl Hanson, Ph.D. is one of the leading researchers in the field of sexual offender risk assessment and treatment. After training as a clinical psychologist, he became a researcher and research manager with Public Safety Canada (1991-2017) in corrections and crime policy. He is the lead author on several sexual recidivism risk tools (Static 99R, Static 2002R, STABLE-2007 and ACUTE-2007) and has received awards from the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Public Safety Canada, the International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders and the Criminal Justice Section of the Canadian Psychological Association. As well as being adjunct faculty in the psychology departments of Carleton University (Ottawa) and Ryerson University (Toronto), he is president of SAARNA (Society for the Advancement of Actuarial Risk Need Assessment).
In this presentation recorded for SAARNA trainers, Dr. Hanson talks about the criticisms of actuarial risk tools, both specific and general. He covers theories of probability and provides criteria for effectively evaluating actuarial risk tools.
Discussion Questions:
- What are some of the valid criticisms that should be considered when assessing risk tools?
Theory, RNR and the LS Instruments
Part 3: Offender Assessment
In the final section of this presentation, James Bonta looks at the ways in which offender assessment has changed over time.
The full version of this video can be found on the Videos page of this website.
Discussion questions:
- Why is it important for assessments to be underpinned by theory?
- Why is it important to emphasise treatment integration with the LS instruments?
Assessment of Trauma and Risk-Need-Responsivity Principles:
Part 2: Trauma Assessment Screening Tools
In this section of his webinar, Dr. Ralph Fretz discusses the need for trauma-informed risk/needs assessment, and explores what this might look like in practice.
The full version of this video can be found on the Videos page of this website.
Discussion questions:
- Mistrust of others is a common trauma reaction. How can mistrust be navigated when working with the criminal justice population?
Assessment of Trauma and Risk-Need-Responsivity Principles:
Part 3: Case planning
In this final section, Dr. Ralph Fretz discusses how to apply trauma-informed assessment and intervention to case planning. He offers his recommendations for the sequencing of RNR Trauma-informed assessments.
The full version of this video can be found on the Videos page of this website.
Discussion Questions:
- In the third step of his sequence for trauma-informed assessments, Dr. Fretz notes that it is important to give feedback and suggest voluntary treatment services. Why are these steps important?
Worth Remembering
- Criminal behavior is predictable. Predictions of criminal behavior exceed chance levels. However, these predictions are not perfect, and to expect perfection is unrealistic. Other fields (e.g., medicine) do not have perfect prediction, but their predictive accuracies are sufficient to have practical value. The same can be said for the criminal justice field.
- Prediction is enhanced through knowledge of theory. The theory and research in PCC may be translated into valid, objective, and practical assessment instruments. The highlighting of the Central Eight and dynamic risk factors are desirable features to have in assessment.
- The principles of risk, need, and responsivity can be reflected in assessment. The principles of effective intervention suggest who may profit from treatment services (the risk principle); what should be targeted (the need principle); and how treatment is delivered (the responsivity principle).
- Fourth-generation assessments are integrated with case management plans. First-generation assessments are unstructured, clinical judgments of risk, and they perform poorly in the prediction of criminal behavior. Second-generation assessments predict well but are comprised mostly of static risk factors. Third-generation risk/needs instruments identify the criminogenic needs of offenders, while fourth-generation assessments (e.g., LS/CMI) guide the actual delivery of services targeting criminogenic needs.
- Assessment based on GPCSL has wide applicability. The evidence suggests that the correlates of criminality are much the same across differing populations (e.g., gender). The evidence also suggests that many of the factors that predict general offending also predict violent offending.
Quiz
Further Reading
Ægisdóttier, S., White, M. J., Spengler, P. M., Maugherman, A. S., Anderson, L. A., Cook, R. S., Nichols, C. N., Lampropoulos, G. K., Walker, B. S., Cohen, G., & Rush, J. D. (2006). The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction. Counseling Psychologist, 34, 341–382.
Bonta, J. (2019c). Criminogenic needs. In R. D. Morgan (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of criminal psychology (pp. 288-290). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Douglas, K. S., & Otto, R. K. (2021, Eds.), Handbook of violence risk assessment. New York: Routledge.
Douglas, K. S., & Shaffer, C. S. (2021). The science of and practice with the HCR-20 V3 (Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20, Version 3). In K. S. Douglas & R. K. Otto (Eds.), Handbook of violence risk assessment (pp. 253-293). New York: Routledge.
Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snitz, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19–30.
Wormith, S. J., & Bonta, J. (2021). Risk/Need assessment for adults and older adolescents: The Level of Service (LS) instruments. In R. K. Otto & K. Douglas (Eds.), Handbook of Violence Risk Assessment Tools (2nd ed.), (pp. 159-190). New York, NY: Routledge.