Assessing the Incremental Validity of Andrews and Bonta’s “Moderate Four” Predictors of Recidivism Using a Diverse Sample of Offending and Truant Youth

Abstract

Bonta and Andrews suggest that there are eight factors that predict recidivism among offenders, which they call the “Central Eight.” They split up the Central Eight into the “Big Four” and the “Moderate Four,” with the Big Four hypothesized to be more strongly associated with recidivism than the Moderate Four. The purpose of this study was to assess the incremental validity of the Moderate Four relative to the Big Four as they are measured on the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). The sample comprised 2,436 youth between the ages of 9 and 18 (M = 14.34) in the formal probation and truancy division from a juvenile county court in the Midwest. Recidivism was measured as a new petition filed against a youth in court within 2 years of a youth’s initial offense. Results indicated that the Moderate Four predictors provided no incremental validity beyond the Big Four but did not reduce the predictive validity of the YLS/CMI.