[Answer] Question 4: Compare and contrast approaches used in assessing violent and sexual offenders [Full Top-Grade Answer]

[Order Customised Solution Starting from just USD 11 per page. Compare and contrast Our Support on Whatsapp Now!]

Annotated Bibliography

Different approaches are used to assess violent and sexual offenders. Some approaches emphasise quantitative, objective measurements (actuarial risk assessment instruments), Compare and contrast while others rely on qualitative professional judgment (clinical risk assessments). The predictive accuracy of these approaches remains an important focus of scholarly inquiry in this area. This annotated bibliography documents six scholarly articles that compare the usefulness and predictive validity of various offender risk assessment instruments. Given the multiplicity of offender risk assessment instruments, the articles are valuable in comparing and contrasting different instruments. 

Hanson, R & Thornton, D 2000, ‘Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: a comparison of three actuarial scales’, Law and Human Behaviour, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 119-136.

The aim of this study was to compare the predictive accuracy of three actuarial scales in measuring recidivism among sex and violent offenders: the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sex Offense Recidivism (RRASOR), the Structured Anchored Clinical Judgment (SACJ), and Static-99 (a combination of RRASOR and SACJ). Using a sample of 1,301 offenders drawn from the UK and Canada Compare and contrast , the study found that the RRASOR and SACJ had roughly the same predictive accuracy. The study further established that Static-99 had greater predictive accuracy than either RRASOR or SACJ.

This suggests that combining RRASOR and SACJ provides a more accurate assessment of sex and violent offenders. Thus, it is more prudent for the criminal justice system to use more than one actuarial scale when measuring the risk of recidivism. The large sample used is one of the major strengths of the study in terms of generalisability.   

Bonta, J 2002, ‘Offender risk assessment: guidelines for selection and use’, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 355-379.  

Bonta provides evidence-based guidelines for offender risk assessment. The author focuses on several aspects of offender risk assessment but a key focus of the article is whether correctional personnel should use clinical or actuarial measures of risk. Drawing from several studies, the author argues that actuarial measures are more effective than clinical measures in assessing recidivism risk in both sex and violent offenders. In particular, Bonta demonstrates that though clinical tools such as the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) have been validated for use, correctional psychologists do not use them regularly Compare and contrast.

Compared to clinical tools, actuarial tools are structured, provide quantitative measures of offender risk, and offer greater predictive validity. Additionally, actuarial measures focus on factors that are more relevant to corrections, such as prison violence, escape attempts, suicide, and recidivism. Whereas Bonta demonstrates the superiority of actuarial tools over clinical tools Compare and contrast, he provides little or no information about the most effective actuarial scale.   

Craig, L, Browne, K & Stringer, I 2004, ‘Comparing sex offender risk assessment measures on a UK sample’, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 7-27.Compare and contrast

This study compared five offender risk assessment instruments using a sample of 139 sex offenders in the UK: RRASOR, SACJ, Static-99, Risk Matrix 2000-Sexual/Violent (RM2000-S/V), and Sexual Violence Risk-20 (SVR-20). The researchers aimed to compare scores for sex offenders with child victims and those with adult victims. It was found that offenders with adult victims scored substantially higher on SACJ and RM2000-S/V compared to offenders with child victims. Sex offenders with child victims scored substantially higher on RRASOR. Compare and contrast

The researchers concluded that though actuarial risk assessment tools provide greater predictive accuracy and a more objective assessment of sex offense recidivism in comparison to clinical approaches, they have one major shortcoming: they fail to consider the broad array of sex offenders – rapists, Compare and contrast child molesters, exhibitionists, and so forth. Rather than using a generic approach, the researchers recommend that each category of sex offense should have its own specific instrument. The sample used in this study is fairly small, but it provides a valuable lesson in terms of treating each type of sex offense distinctively when it comes to assessing the risk of recidivism.

Rettenberger, M, Rice, M, Harris, G & Eher, R 2017, ‘Actuarial risk assessment of sexual offenders: the psychometric properties of the Sex Offender Appraisal Guide (SORAG)’, Psychological Assessment, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 624-638.

Rettenberger and his colleagues used a sample of 1,104 sex offenders in Austria to examine the predictive validity of the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG), another commonly used actuarial risk assessment instrument. The longitudinal study, which tracked released rapists and child molesters for approximately six and a half years, found that predictive validity was slightly higher for violent offense recidivism than for sex offense recidivism. Additionally, the researchers found that child molesters had higher scores for recidivism risk than rapists Compare and contrast.

The study also found the SORAG to have greater predictive validity that the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) and the PCL-R. The findings of Rettenberger et al. are somewhat in line with those of Craig, Browne and Stringer (2004) that actuarial risk assessment instruments produce different results across different sex and violent offense categories. Accordingly, Rettenberger et al.’s study further justifies the importance of offense-specific instruments as opposed to generic instruments Compare and contrast.  

Thornton, D & D’Orazio, D 2016, ‘Advancing the evolution of sexual offender risk assessment’, in D. P. Boer (ed.), The Wiley handbook on the theories, assessment, and treatment of sexual offending, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, pp. 667-693.

This article offers a historical documentation of sex offender risk assessment. It documents the evolution of risk assessment instruments from unstructured clinical judgment in the 1970s and before to evidence-based instruments in the 1990s. The shift from unstructured clinical judgment to evidence-based instruments was informed by the major shortcoming of the former: little predictive accuracy. A core focus of the article is the distinction between the two types of evidence-based instruments: statistical (actuarial) approaches and structured professional judgement (SPJ) Compare and contrast.

Statistical instruments (e.g., Static-99 and RM2000-S/V) assess recidivism risk using quantitative techniques that consider indicators of risk such as previous sexual offenses and general deviance. SPJ approaches (e.g., SVR-20) on the other hand are qualitative, non-numerical instruments that measure recidivism risk based on professional judgment. The effectiveness of the each category of instruments over the other is still a matter of contention. This article is useful as it gives the reader a clear understanding of the differences between quantitative and qualitative risk assessment instruments Compare and contrast.

Sjostedt, G & Langstrom, N 2001, ‘Actuarial assessment of sex offender recidivism risk: a cross-validation of the RRASOR and the Static-99 in Sweden’, Law and Human Behaviour, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 629-645.

The aim of this study was to compare the validity of the RRASOR and Static-99 in predicting recidivism risk among sex offenders. To achieve this, the researchers followed up 1,400 released sex offenders in Sweden for a period of 3.69 years on average. The results revealed that both instruments had the same moderate accuracy in predicting sex offense recidivism Compare and contrast.

In terms of violent offense recidivism, the results showed that Static-99 had a considerably higher predictive accuracy than the RRASOR. This suggests that different actuarial risk assessment instruments may produce different results for sex and violent offenses. Thus, in line with other studies (Craig, Browne & Stringer 2004; Rettenberger et al. 2017), there is need for offense-specific risk assessment instruments. All the same, the study provides further empirical evidence for the usefulness of actuarial approaches in measuring the risk of recidivism among sex and violent offenders Compare and contrast.

Go Home