Fanniff and Letourneau concluded that neither their review of the published literature nor their own investigation supported the use of Scale 1 of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol–II (J-SOAP-II). I argue that empirical findings on Scale 1 are mixed and that there is more support in the literature than one might conclude from reading Fanniff and Letourneau. Their negative conclusions about Scale 1 are based on a flawed literature review as well as problematic methods in their own investigation.
AebiM.PlattnerB.SteinhausenH.-C.BesslerC. (2011). Predicting sexual and non-sexual recidivism in a consecutive sample of juveniles convicted of sexual offenses. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 456-473.
2.
ChuC. M.NgK.FongJ.TeohJ. (2012). Assessing youth who sexually offended: Predictive validity of the ERASOR, J-SOAP-II, and the YLS/CMI in nonwestern context. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 24, 153-174.
3.
FanniffA. M.LetourneauE. J. (2012). Another piece of the puzzle: Psychometric properties of the J-SOAP-II. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 24, 378-408. doi:10.1177/1079063211431842
4.
FriedrichW. M.LysneM.SimL.ShamosS. (2004). Assessing sexual behavior in high risk adolescents with the Adolescent Clinical Sexual Behavior Inventory (ACSBI). Child Maltreatment, 9, 239-250. doi:10.1177/1077559504266907
5.
HoenigJ. M.HeisyD. M. (2001). The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. The American Statistician, 55, 1-6.
6.
MartinezR.FloresJ.RosenfeldB. (2007). Validity of the Juvenile Sex Offender Protocol–II (J-SOAP-II) in a sample of urban minority youth. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1284-1295. doi:10.1177/0093854807301791
7.
ParksG. A.BardD. E. (2006). Risk factors for adolescent sex offender recidivism: Evaluation of predictive factors and comparison of three groups based upon victim type. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 18, 319-342. doi:10.1177/107906320601800402
8.
Powers-SawyerA. B.MinerM. H. (2009). Actuarial prediction of juvenile recidivism: The static variables of the Juvenile Sex Offender Protocol–II (J-SOAP-II). Sexual Offender Treatment, 4(2), 1-11.
9.
PrentkyR. A.Li.N.-C.RighthandS.SchulerA.LeeA. F. (2010). Assessing risk of sexually abusive behavior among youth in a child welfare sample. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 24-45. doi:10.1002/bsl.920
10.
PrentkyR. A.RighthandS. (2003). Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol–II (J-SOAP-II) manual. Bridgewater, MA: Justice Resource Institute.
11.
RajlicG.GrettonH. M. (2010). An examination of two sexual recidivism risk measures in adolescent offenders: The moderating effect of offender type. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 1066-1085. doi:10.1177/0093854810376354
12.
ViljoenJ. L.MordellS.BeneteauJ. L. (2012). Prediction of adolescent sexual reoffending: A meta-analysis of J-SOAP-II, ERASOR, J-SORRAT-II and Static-99. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 423-438. doi:10.1037/h0093938
13.
Viljoen.J. L.ScaloraM.CuadraL.BaderS.ChavezV. N.UllmanD.. (2008). Assessing risk for violence in adolescents who have sexually offended: A comparison of the J-SOAP-II, J-SORRAT-II, and SAVRY. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 5-23. doi:10.1177/0093854807307521
14.
YangY.GreenS. B. (2011). Coefficient alpha: A reliability coefficient for the 21st century?Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 377-392. doi:10.1177/0734282911406668
