Despite the increasing interest in the accuracy of youth risk assessment tools, the amount of research with ethnic minorities remains relatively modest. For this reason, the main goal of this study was to assess the predictive validity and disparate impact of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) in a Spanish ethnic minority. The participants consisted of 88 Roma youth offenders and 135 non-Roma youth offenders, aged between 14 and 17 years old. Their risk of recidivism was assessed by means of the YLS/CMI Inventory and their recidivism rate was obtained from the Juvenile Justice Department. Results showed that the Inventory presented slightly lower predictive validity for the Roma group. Moreover, Roma juveniles presented higher risk scores and lower strength scores than non-Roma juveniles. These results supported the idea that professionals must therefore be aware of these cultural differences in predictive validity and the existent potentiality for disparate impact.
AndersenS. N.SkardhamarT. (2017). Pick a number: Mapping recidivism measures and their consequences. Crime & Delinquency, 63(5), 613–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128715570629
2.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). LexisNexis.
3.
Basto-PereiraM.VillanuevaL.Peterson-BadaliM.PimentelA.QuintasJ.CuervoK.HogeR.D.SkillingT. A. (2021). Is a 7-item combination from the YLS/CMI an effective screening strategy for risk to reoffend? Findings from a cross-national study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(5), 655–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854821995866.
4.
BarnesA. R.CampbellN. A.AndersonV. R.CampbellC. A.OnifadeE.DavidsonW. S. (2016). Validity of initial, exit, and dynamic juvenile risk assessment: An examination across gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 55(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2015.1107004
BerkR.HeidariH.JabbariS.KearnsM.RothA. (2018). Fairness in criminal justice risk assessments: The state of the art. Sociological Methods & Research, 27, 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118782533
7.
CampbellC.PappJ.BarnesA.OnifadeE.AndersonV. (2018). Risk assessment and juvenile justice: An interaction between risk, race, and gender. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(3), 525–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12377
CuervoK.VillanuevaL. (2015). Analysis of risk and protective factors for recidivism in Spanish youth offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59, 1149–1165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X14557917
10.
CuervoK.VillanuevaL.Prado-GascóV. (2017). Predicción de la reincidencia juvenil mediante el inventario YLS/CMI y baremos para su valoración [Youth recidivism prediction using the YLS/CMI and norms for assessment]. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 34, 24–36.
11.
FarringtonD. P.DaviesD. T. (2007). Repeated contacts with the criminal justice system and offender outcomes (Final Report to Statistics Canada). Statistics Canada.
12.
FloresA. W.HolsingerA. M.LowenkampC. T.CohenT. H. (2017). Time-free effects in predicting recidivism using both fixed and variable follow-up periods: Do different methods produce different results. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44, 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854816678649
FrizeM.KennyD.LenningsC. (2008). The relationship between intellectual disability, indigenous status and risk of reoffending in juvenile offenders on community orders. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 52(6), 510–519. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01058.x
15.
GarridoV.LópezE.SilvaT.LópezM. J.MolinaP. (2006). El modelo de la competencia social de la ley de menores[The social competence model in the minors law]. Tirant Lo Blanc.
16.
Gómez BerrocalM. D. C.PorrasC.MataS. (2020). The role of group identification in the well-being of Spaniards with gypsy ethnicity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 160(2), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1634504
17.
GuayJ. P.ParentG. (2018). Broken legs, clinical overrides, and recidivism risk: An analysis of decisions to adjust risk levels with the LS/CMI. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(1), 82–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817719482
18.
HartS. D. (2016). Culture and violence risk assessment: The case of Ewert v. Canada. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, 3(2), 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000068
19.
HogeR. D.AndrewsD. A. (2002). Youth level of service/case management inventory (YLS/CMI) user’s manual. Multi-Health Systems.
20.
JanevicT.JankovicJ.BradleyE. (2012). Socioeconomic position, gender, and inequalities in self-rated health between Roma and non-Roma in Serbia. International Journal of Public Health, 57, 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-011-0277-1
21.
LaparraM. (2011). Diagnóstico social de la comunidad gitana en España. Un análisis contrastado de la Encuesta del CIS a hogares de población gitana 2007[Social diagnosis of Roma community in Spain. A contrasted analysis from CIS survey in Roma homes 2007]. Ministerio de Sanidad, Política Social e Igualdad.
22.
La ParraD.Gil-GonzálezD.JiménezA. (2013). Los procesos de exclusión social y la salud del pueblo gitano en España [Social exclusion processes and health of Roma population in Spain]. Gaceta Sanitaria, 27, 385–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2013.05.001
23.
LiddellM.BlakeM.SinghS. (2016). Over-represented and misunderstood: Pacific young people and juvenile justice in NSW. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 50(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865816666614
24.
LowderE. M.MorrisonM. M.KronerD. G.DesmaraisS. L. (2019). Racial bias and LSI-R assessments in probation sentencing and outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(2), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818789977
OlverM. E.StockdaleK. C.WormithJ. S. (2009). Risk assessment with young offenders: A meta-analysis of three assessment measures. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809331457
27.
OlverM. E.StockdaleK. C.WormithJ. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035080
28.
OnifadeE.DavidsonW.CampbellC. (2009). Risk assessment: The predictive validity of the Youth Level of Service Case Management Inventory with African Americans and girls. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 7, 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377930903143544
29.
Ortega-CamposE.García-GarcíaJ.De la Fuente-SánchezL.Zaldívar-BasurtoF. (2020). Predicting risk of recidivism in Spanish young offenders: Comparative analysis of the SAVRY and YLS/CMI. Psicothema, 32(2), 221–228. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2019.275
RubinoL. L.AndersonV. R.CampbellC. A. (2020). An examination of racial/ethnic disparities in truancy court. Crime & Delinquency, 66(1), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128719847456
32.
SantaolallaI. (2002). Ethnic and racial configurations in contemporary Spanish culture. In LabanyiJ. (Ed.), Constructing identity in contemporary Spain: Theoretical debates and cultural practice (pp. 55–71). Oxford University Press.
ShepherdS. M.Lewis-FernandezR. (2016). Forensic risk assessment and cultural diversity: Contemporary challenges and future directions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22, 427–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000102
35.
ShepherdS. M.LuebbersS.FergusonM.OgloffJ. R.DolanM. (2014). The utility of the SAVRY across ethnicity in Australian young offenders. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033972
36.
ShepherdS. M.SinghJ. P.FullamR. (2015). Does the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory generalize across ethnicity?International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 14, 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2015.1086450
37.
ShepherdS. M.SpivakB. L. (2020). Finding colour in conformity part II—Reflections on structured professional judgement and cross-cultural risk assessment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 65(1), 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20928025
38.
SchmidtS.HeffernanR.WardT. (2020). Why we cannot explain cross-cultural differences in risk assessment. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 50, 101346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2019.101346
39.
SchmidtS.van der MeerE.TydecksS.BliesenerT. (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
40.
SkeemJ. L.LowenkampC. T. (2016). Risk, race, and recidivism: Predictive bias and disparate impact. Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 54(4), 680–712. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12123
41.
StarrS. B. (2014). Evidence-based sentencing and the scientific rationalization of discrimination. Stanford Law Review, 66, 803–872.
42.
Threadcraft-WalkerW.ThreadcraftM. M.HendersonH.RembertD. (2018). Gender, race/ethnicity and prediction: Risk in behavioral assessment. Journal of Criminal Justice, 54, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.11.001
43.
Uceda-MazaF. X.AlonsoJ. D. (2017). Vinculación entre la vulnerabilidad y la exclusión social y las trayectorias delictivas. Un estudio de asociación[Link between vulnerability and social exclusion and criminal trajectories. An association study]. Psychosocial Intervention, 26, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psi.2016.07.003
44.
VazsonyiA. T.JiskrovaG. K.KsinanA. J.BlatnýM. (2016). An empirical test of self-control theory in Roma adolescents. Journal of Criminal Justice, 44, 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2015.12.004
45.
VennerS.SivasubramaniamD.LuebbersS.ShepherdS. M. (2020). Cross-cultural reliability and rater bias in forensic risk assessment: A review of the literature. Psychology, Crime & Law, 27(2), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2020.1775829
46.
ViljoenJ. L.BhanwerA. K.ShafferC. S.DouglasK. 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
47.
VillanuevaL.Basto-PereiraM.CuervoK. (2020). How to improve the YLS/CMI? Exploring a particularly predictive combination of items. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 64(9), 922–937. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19881926
48.
VillanuevaL.Gomis-PomaresA.AdriánJ. E. (2019). Predictive validity of the YLS/CMI in a sample of Spanish young offenders of Arab descent. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63(10), 1914–1930. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19834403
49.
WeermanF.HoeveM. (2012). Peers and delinquency among girls and boys: Are sex differences in delinquency explained by peer factors?European Journal of Criminology, 9, 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370811435736
50.
WormithS. J.BontaJ. (2018). The level of service (LS) instruments. In JayP.SinghJ. P.KronerD. G.WormithJ. S.DesmaraisS. L.HamiltonZ. (Eds.), Handbook of recidivism risk/needs assessment tools (pp. 117–145). John Wiley & Sons.
