This study examines the predictive validity of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI) on a sample of sexual offenders extracted from a large cohort of offenders and compares predictive validities with nonsexual offenders from the same cohort. The LS/CMI predicted sex offenders’ general recidivism, which occurred at a rate of 44.1%, with about the same accuracy as less frequently occurring violent (12.34%) and sexual recidivism (3.73%; AUC = .77, .74, and .74, respectively) and with nonsexual offenders. The study revealed that allowing assessors to override the numerically derived risk level with their professional judgment, a practice that increased risk level much more often than it decreased it, reduced the predictive validity of the scale and did so particularly for sex offenders by increasing risk excessively. An exploration of factors related to these adjustments revealed that non-risk-related characteristics were used in judgments to modify risk ratings. Implications for policy and practice are considered.
AbbottB. R. (2011). Throwing the baby out with the bath water: Is it time for clinical judgment to supplement actuarial risk assessment?Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 39, 222-230.
2.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (1995). LSI-R: The Level of Service Inventory–Revised. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
3.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (1998). The Level of Service Inventory–Revised: Screening Version. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
4.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.
5.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.HogeR. G. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19-52.
6.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.WormithJ. S. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory: Ontario Revision. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
7.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.WormithJ. S. (2004). The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
8.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.WormithJ. S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk/need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7-27.
9.
AndrewsD. A.GuzzoL.RaynorP.RoweR. C.RettingerL. J.BrewsA.WormithJ. S. (2012). Are the major risk/need factors predictive of both female and male reoffending? A test with the eight domains of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56, 113-133.
10.
BarbareeH. E.LangtonC.PeacockE. J. (2006). Different actuarial risk measures produce different risk rankings for sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 18, 423-440.
11.
BlanchetteK.BrownS. L. (2006). The assessment and treatment of women offenders. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
12.
BoerD. P.HartS. D.KroppP. R.WebsterC. D. (1997). Manual for the Sexual Violence Risk–20: Professional guidelines for assessing risk of sexual violence. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute.
13.
BontaJ.YessineA. K. (2005). The National Flagging System: Identifying and responding to high-risk, violent offenders (User Report 2005-03). Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada. Retrieved from https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/2005-04-flg-sysm-eng.aspx
CaldwellM. F.DickinsonC. (2009). Sex offender registration and recidivism risk in juvenile sexual offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 27, 941-956.
16.
CampbellT. W. (2003). Sex offenders and actuarial risk assessments: Ethical considerations. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 269-279.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19.
CraigL. A.BrowneK. D.StringerI. (2004). Comparing sex offender risk assessment measures on a UK sample. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, 7-27.
20.
CronbachL. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
21.
DempsterR. J. (1998). Prediction of sexually violent recidivism: A comparison of risk assessment instruments (Unpublished master’s thesis). Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
22.
DorenD. M. (2002). Evaluating sex offenders: A manual for civil commitments and beyond. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
DouglasK. S.CoxD. N.WebsterC. D. (1999). Violence risk assessment: Science and practice. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 4, 149-184.
24.
EherR.RetternbergerM.MatthesA.SchillingF. (2010). Stable dynamic risk factors in child sexual abusers: The incremental predictive power of narcissistic personality traits beyond the STATIC-99/STABLE-2007 priority categories on sexual reoffense. Sexual Offender Treatment, 5, 1-12.
25.
EppersonD. L.KaulJ. D.HuotS. J. (1995, October). Predicting risk of recidivism for incarcerated sex offenders: Updated development on the Sex Offender Screening Tool (SOST). Poster session presented at the 14th Annual Research and Treatment Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, New Orleans, LA.
26.
GarbH. N. (1997). Race bias, social class bias, and gender bias in clinical judgment. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 4, 99-120.
27.
GentryA. L.DulmusC. N.TheriotM. T. (2005). Comparing sex offender risk classification using the STATIC-99 and LSI-R assessment instruments. Research on Social Work Practice, 15, 557-563.
28.
GirardL.WormithJ. (2004). The predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory–Ontario Revision on general and violent recidivism among various offender groups. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 150-181.
29.
GrettonH. M.McBrideM.HareR. D.O’ShaughnessyR.KumkaG. (2001). Psychopathy and recidivism in adolescent sex offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 427-449.
30.
HanleyJ. A.McNeilB. J. (1982). The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143, 29-36.
31.
HanleyJ. A.McNeilB. J. (1983). A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839-843.
HansonR. K. (1998). What do we know about sex offender risk assessment?Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 4, 50-72.
34.
HansonR. K. (2009). The psychological assessment of risk for crime and violence. Canadian Psychology, 50, 172-180.
35.
HansonR. K.BussièreM. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348-362.
36.
HansonR. K.HarrisA. (2000a). The Sex Offender Need Assessment Rating (SONAR): A method for measuring change in risk levels. Ottawa: Corrections Research, Department of the Solicitor General of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/sonar-eebds-eng.aspx
37.
HansonR. K.HarrisA. J. R. (2000b). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sex offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35.
HansonR. K.Morton-BourgonK. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154-1163.
40.
HansonR. K.Morton-BourgonK. E. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychological Assessment, 21, 1-21.
HansonR. K.ThorntonD. (2000). Improving risk assessment for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 119-136.
43.
HareR. D. (1991). The Psychopathy Checklist–Revised. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
HarrisG. T.RiceM. E.QuinseyV. L.LalumièreM. L.BoerD.LangC. (2003). A multi-site comparison of actuarial risk instruments for sex offenders. Psychological Assessment, 15, 413-425.
46.
HartS. D. (2008, July). The Structured Professional Judgment approach to violence risk assessment: Core principles of SPJ. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Association of Forensic Mental Health Services, Vienna, Austria.
47.
HartS. D.KroppP. R.LawsD. R.KlaverJ.LoganC.WattK. A. (2003). The Risk for Sexual Violence Protocol (RSVP). Burnaby, Canada: Simon Fraser University, Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute.
48.
HelmusL.HansonR. K.ThorntonD. (2009). Reporting STATIC-99 in light of new research on recidivism norms. The Forum, 21, 38-45.
49.
HogeR. D.AndrewsD. A. (2002). Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory: User’s manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
KroppP. R.HartS. D. (2000). The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA)Guide: Reliability and validity in adult male offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 101-118.
53.
KroppP. R.HartS. D. (2004). The development of the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER): A tool for criminal justice professionals. Ottawa: Research and Statistics Division, Justice Canada. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/rs/rep-rap/2005/rr05_fv1-rr05_vf1/p5.html
LanaganP. A.SchmittE. L.DuroseM. R. (2003). Recidivism of sex offenders release from prison in 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsorp94.pdf
56.
LoomanJ.AbracenJ. (2010). Comparison of measures of recidivism in sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 791-807.
57.
MaletzkyB. (1991). Treating the sexual offender. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
58.
MortonK. E. (2003). Psychometric properties of four risk assessment measures with male adolescent sexual offenders. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 1833.
59.
NuffieldJ. (1982). Parole decision making in Canada. Ottawa: Solicitor General of Canada.
60.
OlverM. E.WongS. C. P.NicholaichukT. P.GordonA. (2007). The validity and reliability of the Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offender version: Assessing sex offender risk and evaluating therapeutic change. Psychological Assessments, 19, 318-329.
61.
Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services, Research Services Division. (1983). Offences leading to incarceration. Correctional facts (No. 83-1).
62.
ParentG.GuayJ. P.KnightR. A. (2011). An assessment of long-term risk of recidivism by adult sex offenders: One size doesn’t fit all. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 188-209.
63.
PetrilaJ.OttoR. K. (2001). Admissibility of expert testimony in sexually violent predator proceedings. In SchlankA. (Ed.), The sexual predator: Legal issues, clinical issues, special populations (Vol. 2, pp.). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute.
64.
PrentkyR. A.LeeA. F. S.KnightR. A.CerceD. (1997). Recidivism rates among child molesters and rapists: A methodological analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 635-659.
RiceM. E.HarrisG. T. (2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC area, Cohen’sd, and r. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 615-620.
70.
RosenthalR. (1994). Parametric measures of effective size. In CooperH. M.HedgesL. V. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
71.
RosseggerA.LaubacherA.MoskvitinK.VillmarT.PalermoG. B.EndrassJ. (2011). Risk assessment instruments in repeat offending: The usefulness of FOTRES. International Journal Offender Therapy Comparative Criminology, 55, 716-731.
72.
RoweR. 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.
73.
SimourdD. J.MalcolmB. (1998). Reliability and validity of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised among federally incarcerated sex offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 261-274.
74.
SkowronC. (2004, December). Differentiation and predictive factors in adolescent sexual offending (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
75.
SreenivasanS.WeinbergerL. E.FrancesA.Cusworth-WalkerS. (2010). Alice in actuarial-land: Through the looking glass of changing STATIC-99 norms. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 38, 400-406.
76.
StasiukE.WinterK.NixonB. (1996). Awaiting trial: Accused persons remanded to custody. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
77.
ThorntonD. (1997). Structured anchor clinical judgment risk assessment (SACJ): Proceedings of the NOTA Conference. Brighton, United Kingdom.
78.
ThorntonD.MannR.WebsterS.BludL.TraversR.FriendshipC.EriksonM. (2003). Distinguishing and combining risks for sexual and Washington state violent recidivism. In PrentkyR. A.JanusE. S.SetoM. C. (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Vol. 989. Sexually coercive behavior: Understanding and management (pp. 225-235). New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2001). Juveniles who have sexually offended: A review of the professional literature report. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org/
81.
Van VoorhisP.WrightE. M.SalisburyE.BaumanA. (2010). Women’s risk factors and their contributions to existing risk/needs assessment: The current status of a gender-responsive supplement. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 261-288.
82.
VranaG. C.SrogaM.GuzzoL. (2008). Predictive validity of the LSI–OR among a sample of adult male sexual assaulters. Unpublished manuscript, Nipissing University, North Bay, Canada.
83.
Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2005). Involuntary commitment of sexually violent predators: Comparing state laws. Olympia: Author. Retrieved from http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/05-03-1101.pdf
84.
Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2006). Sex offender sentencing in Washington State: Predicting recidivism based on the LSI-R. Olympia: Author. Retrieved from http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/06-02-1201.pdf
85.
WebsterC. D.DouglasK. S.EavesD.HartS. D. (1997). HCR-20: Assessing the risk for violence (Version 2). Vancouver, Canada: Simon Fraser University, Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute.
86.
WorlingJ. R.CurwenT. (2001). Estimates of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR) Version 2.0. Toronto, Canada: SAFE-T Program, Thistletown Regional Centre.
87.
WormithJ. S. (1997). Research to practice: Applying risk/needs assessment to offender classification. Forum on Corrections Research, 9, 26-31.
88.
WormithJ. S. (2011). The legacy of D. A. Andrews in the field of criminal justice: How theory and research can change policy and practice. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 10, 78-82.
89.
WormithJ. S.HoggS.GuzzoL. (2011, December). The predictive validity of sexual offender recidivism with a general risk/needs assessment inventory. Saskatoon, Canada: University of Saskatchewan.
90.
WormithJ. S.OlverM. E.StevensonH. E.GirardL. (2007). The long-term prediction of offender recidivism using diagnostic, personality, and risk/need approaches to offender assessment. Psychological Services, 4, 287-305.
91.
YangM.WongS. C. P.CoidJ. (2010). The efficacy of violence prediction: A meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment tools. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 740-767.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
