The psychometric properties of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ) are assessed in a sample of drug dealing offenders. Findings indicate the SAQ demonstrated adequate concurrent validity; however, the SAQ fails to predict recidivism. Furthermore, SAQ total scores exhibit high levels of reliability, yet half of the SAQ subscales exhibit substandard levels of reliability and all but one of the subscales are multidimensional. A comparative analysis reveals that two measures already commonly available to criminal agencies, age and number of prior arrests, predict recidivism more effectively than the SAQ.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory–Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
2.
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.
3.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4.
Ebel, R. L. (1965). Measuring educational achievement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5.
Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works!Criminology, 34, 575-607.
6.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
7.
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
8.
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.
9.
Hare, R. D. (1990). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist–Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
10.
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, 315-335.
11.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting errors and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12.
Kanyongo, G. Y., & Brooks, G. P. (2003, October). A Monte Carlo study of the influence of reliability on four rules for determining the number of components to retain from a principal components analysis. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Columbus, OH.
13.
Kelley, T. L. (1939). Selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 17-24.
14.
Knol, D. L., & Berger, M. P. F. (1991). Empirical comparison between factor analysis and multidimensional item response models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 457-477.
15.
Kroner, D. G., & Loza, W. (2001). Evidence for the efficacy of self-report in predicting nonviolent and violent criminal recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 168-177.
16.
Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70. Boston: Harvard University Press.
17.
Loza, W. (1996). Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ): A measure for assessing violent and non-violent recidivism. Unpublished manuscript.
18.
Loza, W., Conley, M., & Warren, B. (2004). Concurrent cross-validation of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire: A tool for assessing violent and nonviolent recidivism and institutional adjustment on a sample of North Carolina offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, 85-95.
19.
Loza, W., Cumbleton, A., Neo, L. H., Evans, M., Conley, M., & Summers, R. (2004). Crossvalidation of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1172-1190.
20.
Loza, W., Dhaliwal, G., Kroner, D. G., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2000). Reliability, construct, and concurrent validities of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 356-374.
21.
Loza, W., & Green, K. (2003). A self-report measure for predicting recidivism versus clinicianadministered measures: A 5-year follow-up study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 781-797.
22.
Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2000). Predictive validity of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 1183-1191.
23.
Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2001). The effectiveness of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire in predicting offenders' postrelease outcome: A comparison study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 105-121.
24.
Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2003). More evidence for the validity of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire for predicting violent and nonviolent recidivism: A 5-year follow-up study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 709-721.
25.
Loza, W., Neo, L. H., Shanifar, A., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2005). Cross-validation of the Self Appraisal Questionnaire: A tool for assessing violent and nonviolent recidivism with female offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49, 547-560.
26.
McLeod, L. D., Swygert, K., & Thissen, D. (2001). Factor analysis for items scored in two categories. In D. Thissen & H. Wainer (Eds.), Test scoring (pp. 189-216). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
Mislevy, R. (1986). Recent developments in the factor analysis of categorical variables. Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 3-31.
28.
Mitchell, O., MacKenzie, D. L., & Perez, D. (2005). A randomized evaluation of the Maryland correctional boot camp for adults: Effects on offender anti-social attitudes and cognitions. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 40, 71-86.
29.
Muthén, B. O. (1989). Dichotomous factor analysis of symptom data. Sociological Methods & Research, 18, 19-65.
30.
Nagin, D. S., & Paternoster, R. (2000). Population heterogeneity and state dependence: State of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16, 117-144.
31.
Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
32.
Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., & Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In R. D. Goffin, & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (pp. 41-71). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
33.
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Factors influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.
