Is a 7-Item Combination from the YLS/CMI an Effective Screening Strategy for Risk to Reoffend? Findings from a Cross-National Study

Abstract

Several brief screening measures for youth risk to reoffend have been developed; however, these measures have been tested primarily in high-income English-speaking countries and their predictive validity is limited. A recent study proposed a screening strategy using a combination of seven items from the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). Predictive validity for this strategy was better than that reported in studies of previously developed screening tools. In the current study, the predictive validity of this strategy was examined across samples of justice-involved youth from two countries: Canada (N = 196) and Portugal (N = 2,348). The full version of the YLS/CMI was completed and recidivism data were collected over a 2-year period. Results support the predictive validity of this strategy, with area under the curve (AUC) values (.69–.74) very similar to those found in the full version in each country, both in the full samples, and for both genders.

Keywords

YLS/CMI screening assessment cross-cultural recidivism justice-involved youth

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andrews

D. A.

Bonta

Wormith

J. S.

(2011). The Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Model. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 735–755. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854811406356

Basto-Pereira

Ribeiro

Maia

(2018). Needs and achievements of the juvenile justice system: Insights from two empirical studies with Portuguese young adults. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(7), 1787–1805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306624X17690450

Beaton

D. E.

Bombardier

Guillemin

Ferraz

M. B.

(2002). Recommendations for the cross-cultural adaptation of health status measures. American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons.

Bonta

Andrews

D. A.

(2017). The psychology of criminal conduct (6th ed.). Routledge.

Campbell

Onifade

Barnes

Peterson

Anderson

Davidson

Gordon

(2014). Screening offenders: The exploration of a Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory: (YLS/CMI) brief screener. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(1), 19–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2013.861314

Campbell

Papp

Barnes

Onifade

Anderson

(2018). Risk assessment and juvenile justice: An interaction between risk, race, and gender. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(3), 525–545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12377

Cartuyvels

Bailleau

(2010). Youth criminal justice in Europe. In Bailleau

Cartuyvels

(Eds.), The criminalisation of youth: Juvenile justice in Europe, Turkey and Canada (pp. 263–284). VUB Press.

Chu

C. M.

Lee

Zeng

(2014). The utility of the YLS/CMI-SV for assessing youth offenders in Singapore. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(12), 1437–1457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854814537626

Clarke

M. C.

Peterson-Badali

Skilling

T. A.

(2017). The relationship between changes in dynamic risk factors and the predictive validity of risk assessments among youth offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44(10), 1340–1355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817719915

10.

Cuervo

Villanueva

(2015). Analysis of risk and protective factors for recidivism in Spanish youth offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59(11), 1149–1165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X14557917

11.

DeLisi

(2009). Psychopathy is the unified theory of crime. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7(3), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204009333834

12.

Farrington

D. P.

McGee

T. R.

(2017). The Integrated Cognitive Antisocial Potential (ICAP) theory: Empirical testing. In Blokland

A. A. J.

Van Der Geest

V. R.

, (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of life-course criminology (pp. 11–28). Routledge.

13.

Farrington

D. P.

Ttofi

M. M.

Piquero

A. R.

(2016). Risk, promotive, and protective factors in youth offending: Results from the Cambridge study in delinquent development. Journal of Criminal Justice, 45(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.02.014

14.

Ferguson

C. J.

(2009). Is psychological research really as good as medical research? Effect size comparisons between psychology and medicine. Review of General Psychology, 13(2), 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015103

15.

Fonseca

Quintas

Serra

Coelho

Pimentel

(2010). YLS/CMI. Tradução Portuguesa [Portuguese translation]. Unpublished document. Department of Psychology, University of Coimbra, Portugal.

16.

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.

17.

Hanley

J. A.

McNeil

B. J.

(1983). A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839–843.

18.

Hofstede

(1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. SAGE.

19.

Hofstede

G. J.

Minkov

(2010). Cultures and organizations (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

20.

Hoge

R. D.

Andrews

D. A.

(2002). Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory: YLS/CMI interview guide. Multi-Health Systems.

21.

Hoge

R. D.

Andrews

D. A.

(2009). Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory–Screening Version. Multi-Health Systems.

22.

Lockwood

Peterson-Badali

Schmidt

(2018). The relationship between risk, criminogenic need, and recidivism for Indigenous justice-involved youth. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(11), 1688–1708. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818785404

23.

Minkov

(2018). A revision of Hofstede’s model of national culture: Old evidence and new data from 56 countries. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 25(2), 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-03-2017-0033

24.

Minkov

Hofstede

(2011). The evolution of Hofstede’s doctrine. Cross Cultural Management, 181(1), 10–20.

25.

Mossman

M. J.

(1993). Toward a comprehensive legal aid program in Canada: Exploring the issues. The Windsor Review of Legal and Social Issues, 4, 1–90.

26.

Muncie

(2001). Policy transfers and “what works”: Some reflections on comparative youth justice. Youth Justice, 1(3), 27–35.

27.

Olver

M. E.

Stockdale

K. C.

Wormith

J. S.

(2014). Thirty years of research on the level of service scales: A meta-analytic examination of predictive accuracy and sources of variability. Psychological Assessment, 26, 156–176. http://doi.org/:10.1037/a0035080

28.

Pimentel

Quintas

(2015). The Portuguese version of the YLS/CMI. Preliminary data. In da Agra

Cardoso

de Maillard

O’Reily

Ponsaers

Shapland

(Eds.), Criminology, security and justice. Methodological and epistemological issues (pp. 151–168). Maklu.

29.

Pimentel

Quintas

Fonseca

Serra

(2017). Inventário de avaliação do risco de reincidência e de gestão de caso para jovens [The Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory]. In Simões

Almeida

Gonçalves

(Eds.), Psicologia Forense. Instrumentos de Avaliação [Forensic Psychology: Assessment tools] (pp. 179–194). Pactor.

30.

Piquero

Farrington

D. P.

Blumstein

(2007). New analyses of the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. Cambridge University Press.

31.

Pusch

Holtfreter

(2018). Gender and risk assessment in juvenile offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(1), 56–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817721720

32.

Rice

M. E.

Harris

G. T.

(2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC area, Cohen’s d, and r. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 615–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-6832-7

33.

Rogers

(2000). The uncritical acceptance of risk assessment in forensic practice. Law and Human Behavior, 24(5), 595–605.

34.

Sampson

R. J.

Laub

J. H.

(2005). Seductions of method: Rejoinder to Nagin and Tremblay’s “developmental trajectory groups: Fact or fiction?” Criminology, 43(4), 905–913.

35.

Schmidt

Campbell

M. A.

Houlding

(2011). Comparative analyses of the YLS/CMI, SAVRY, and PCL: YV in adolescent offenders: A 10-year follow-up into adulthood. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 9(1), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204010371793

36.

Schmidt

Heffernan

Ward

(2020). Why we cannot explain cross-cultural differences in risk assessment. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 50, 101346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2019.101346

37.

Schmidt

van der Meer

Tydecks

Bliesener

(2018). How culture and migration affect risk assessment. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 10(2), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2018a7

38.

Scott

Brown

Skilling

T. A.

(2019). Predictive and convergent validity of the Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument in a sample of male and female justice-involved youth. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46 6, 466(6), 811–831. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854819842585

39.

Shepherd

S. M.

Lewis-Fernandez

(2016). Forensic risk assessment and cultural diversity: Contemporary challenges and future directions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22(4), 427–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000102

40.

Shepherd

S. M.

Singh

J. P.

Fullam

(2015). Does the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory generalize across ethnicity? International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 14(3), 193–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2015.1086450

41.

Takahashi

Mori

Kroner

D. G.

(2013). A cross-validation of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) among Japanese juvenile offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 37(6), 389–400. https://doi.org/:10.1037/lhb0000029

42.

Viljoen

J. L.

Bhanwer

A. K.

Shaffer

C. S.

Douglas

K. S.

(2020). Assessing protective factors for adolescent offending: A conceptually informed examination of the SAVRY and YLS/CMI. Assessment, 27(5), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118768435

43.

Viljoen

J. L.

Jonnson

M. R.

Cochrane

D. M.

Vargen

L. M.

Vincent

G. M.

(2019). Impact of risk assessment instruments on rates of pretrial detention, postconviction placements, and release: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 43(5), 397–420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000344

44.

Villanueva

Basto-Pereira

Cuervo

(2020). How to improve the YLS/CMI? Exploring a particularly predictive combination of items. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 649(9), 922–937. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19881926

45.

Villanueva

Valero-Moreno

Cuervo

Prado-Gascó

V. J.

(2019a). Sociodemographic variables, risk factors, and protective factors contributing to youth recidivism. Psicothema, 31(2), 128–133. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.257

46.

Villanueva

Gomis-Pomares

Adrián

J. E.

(2019b). Predictive validity of the YLS/CMI in a sample of Spanish young offenders of Arab descent. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 6310(10), 1914–1930. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19834403