The Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision (LSI-OR) is the most recent edition of a popular risk/need assessment tool designed to predict recidivism among offenders. The current investigation (N = 630) examined the predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision, its various subscales, and a Specific Risk/Need section designed to predict violent recidivism. Inmates scored significantly higher on all scales and were more likely to recidivate than probationers during a 31-month follow-up. The General Risk/Need score correlated highly with general recidivism and, to a lesser extent, with violent recidivism. It also produced similar predictive correlations among subgroups of sexual offenders, domestic violence offenders, and offenders with mental health problems. The Specific Risk/Need scale produced a slightly higher correlation with violent recidivism. The theoretical implications of these findings and practical value of this modified instrument are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andrews, D. A. (1982). The Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI): The first follow-up (Report). Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Service.
2.
Andrews, D. A. (1995a). Review of the LSI project (Report). Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services.
3.
Andrews, D. A. (1995b). Summary of the LSI research (Report). Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services.
4.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised: User manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
5.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1998). The psychology of criminal conduct (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
6.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (1995). Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision (LSI-OR): Interview and scoring guide. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services.
7.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (in press). Manual for the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
8.
Andrews, D. A., Kiessling, J. J., Mickus, S. G., & Robinson, D. (1986). The construct validity of interview-based risk assessment in corrections. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 18, 460-470.
9.
Andrews, D. A., & Robinson, D. (1984). The Level of Supervision Inventory: The second report (Report). Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
10.
Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
11.
Baird, C. S. (1981). Probation and parole classification: The Wisconsin model. Corrections Today, 43, 36-41.
12.
Barbaree, H. E., Seto, M. C., Langton, C. M., & Peacock, E. J. (2001). Evaluating the predictive accuracy of six risk assessment instruments for adult sex offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 490-521.
13.
Bonta, J., Law, M., & Hanson, K. (1998). The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 123-142.
14.
Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1985). Utilization of an interview-based classification instrument. A study of correctional halfway houses. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12, 333-352.
15.
Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1987). The diversion of incarcerated offenders to correctional halfway houses. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 24, 302-323.
16.
Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1990). Classification to halfway houses: A quasi-experimental evaluation. Criminology, 28, 497-506.
17.
Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1992). Inmate classification. Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 343-353.
18.
Coulson, G., Ilacqua, G., Nutbrown, V., Guilekas, D., & Cudjoe, F. (1996). Predictive utility of the LSI for incarcerated female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 427-439.
19.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2002). Is the PCL-R really the “unparalleled” measure of offender risk? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 397-426.
20.
Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works! Criminology, 34, 401-433.
21.
Girard, L. (1999). The Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision: Risk/need assessment and recidivism. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
22.
Grove, W. M., Zald, B. S., Lebow, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19-30.
23.
Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982). The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143, 29-36.
24.
Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
25.
Harpur, T. J., Hare, R. D., & Hakstian, A. R. (1989). Two-factor conceptualization of psychopathy: Construct validity and assessment implications. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1, 6-17.
26.
Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1993). Violent recidivism of mentally disordered offenders: The development of a statistical prediction instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 315-325.
27.
Hathaway, S. R., & McKinnely, J. C. (1967). MMPI manual (rev. ed.). New York: Psychological Corporation.
28.
Hoffman, P. B. (1983). Screening for risk: A revised salient factor score (SFS81). Journal of Criminal Justice, 11, 539-547.
29.
Hoge, R. D., & Andrews, D. A. (2002). Manual for the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
30.
Jung, S., & Rawana, E. P. (1999). Risk and need assessment in juvenile offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26, 69-90.
31.
Kroner, D. G., & Mills, J. F. (2001). The accuracy of five risk appraisal instruments in predicting institutional misconduct and new convictions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 471-489.
32.
Krupp, P. R., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Eaves, D. (2000). Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide (SARA). Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
33.
Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2001). The effectiveness of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire in predicting offenders’ postrelease outcome. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 105-121.
34.
Loza, W., & Simourd, D. (1994). Psychometric evaluation of the Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI) among male Canadian federal offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 21, 468-480.
35.
Motiuk, L. L. (1991). Antecedents and consequences of prison adjustment: A systemic assessment and reassessment approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
36.
Motiuk, L. L., Bonta, J., & Andrews, D. A. (1986). Classification in correctional halfway houses: The relative and incremental predictive criterion validities of the Megargee-MMPI and LSI systems. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 13, 33-46.
37.
Norusis, M. J. (1993). SPSS for Windows, base system user’s guide, Release 6.0. Chicago: SPSS.
38.
Quinsey, V. L., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (1998). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
39.
Rettinger, J. (1998). A recidivism follow-up study to investigate risk and need within a sample of provincially sentenced women. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
40.
Rowe, R. C. (1999, November). The utilization of an interview-based classification instrument for parole board decision-making. Paper presented at the 51st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
41.
Schmidt, F. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
42.
Serin, R. C. (1996). Violent recidivism in criminal psychopaths. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 207-217.
43.
Shields, I. (1990). Young Offender-Level of Supervision Inventory (YO-LSI), Manual and norms. Ottawa, Canada: Ottawa-Carleton Detention Centre.
44.
Shields, I., & Simourd, D. J. (1991). Predicting predatory behavior in a population of incarcerated young offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 180-194.
45.
Simourd, D. J. (in press). Use of dynamic risk/needs assessment instruments among long term incarcerated offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior.
46.
Simourd, D. J., & Hoge, R. D. (2000). Criminal psychopathy: A risk and need perspective. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 256-272.
47.
Stasiuk, E., Winter, K., & Nixon, B. (1996). Awaiting trial: Accused persons remanded to custody. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
48.
Stevenson, H. E., & Wormith, J. S. (1987). Psychopathy and the level of supervision (User Report No. 1987-25). Ottawa, Canada: Solicitor General Canada.
49.
Webster, C. D., Eaves, D., Douglas, K. S., & Wintrup, A. (1995). The HCR-20 scheme: The assessment of dangerous and risk. Vancouver, Canada: Simon Fraser University and the British Columbia Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission.
50.
Wormith, J. S. (1997, January). Research to practice: Applying risk/needs assessment to offender classification. Forum on Corrections Research, 9, 26-31.
51.
Wormith, J. S. (2001, July). Assessing offender assessment: Contributing to effective correctional treatment. ICCA Journal on Community Corrections, 12-22.
52.
Wormith, J. S., & Goldstone, C. S. (1984). The clinical and statistical prediction of recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 11, 3-34.
53.
Wormith, J. S., & McKeague, F. (1996). A mental health survey of community correctional clients in Canada. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 6, 49-72.
