Kirk Heilbrun

The Prediction of Criminal Recidivism in Juveniles: A Meta-Analysis

A meta-analysis was conducted to identify risk factors that best predict juvenile recidivism, defined as rearrest for offending of any kind. Twenty-three published studies, representing 15,265 juveniles, met inclusion criteria. Effect sizes were calculated for 30 predictors of recidivism. Eight groups of predictors were compared: (a) demographic information, (b) offense history, (c) family and social factors, (d) educational factors, (e) intellectual and achievement scores, (f) substance use history, (g) clinical factors, and (h) formal risk assessment. The domain of offense history was the strongest predictor of reoffending. Other relatively strong predictors included family problems, ineffective use of leisure time, delinquent peers, conduct problems, and nonsevere pathology.

The role of psychological testing in forensic assessment

Despite the apparent widespread use of psychological tests in evaluations performed by psychologists to assist legal decision makers, there has been little critical but balanced examination of the appropriate parameters for the forensic use of such tests. The following discussion examines the nature of legal decision making, and concludes that the primary legal criterion for the adminissibility of psychological testing isrelevance to the immediate legal issue or to some underlying psychological construct. Assuming thataccuracy is a more consistent concern for psychologists performing such evaluations, the criticisms of various commentators are discussed. Some criticisms appear appropriate and are incorporated into a set of proposed guidelines for the use of psychological tests in forensic contexts. Other criticisms appear misplaced, however, and the call for a whole sale ban on psychological testing in the forensic context is rejected.

Principles of Forensic Mental Health Assessment

Abstract: Risk assessment with sexual offenders is generally performed for two purposes: to assist the court in deciding on a relevant legal question (in a legal context), or to plan treatment interventions (in a clinical context). Failure to make this distinction, and to accurately identify the context and purpose for which the assessment is being conducted, can result in significant problems. This chapter will begin by making this distinction. Then, focusing on evaluations done for legal decision making purposes, it will describe 29 recently derived broad principles of forensic mental health assessment and their application to evaluations done to assist legal decision making.

The practice of forensic psychology. A look toward the future in light of the past.

In a 1987 American Psychologist article, Tom Grisso summarized the state of forensic psychological assessment, noted its limitations and potential, and offered suggestions for researchers and practitioners interested in contributing to its future. Since that time, there have been many important developments in the field of forensic psychology, as well as in clinical psychology more generally, some of which were anticipated and recommended by Grisso, and some of which were not. Forensic psychology is now at a crossroads, and the specialty must make an effort to respond to current challenges if it is to aid in the administration of justice by assisting legal decision makers. The need to distinguish between and identify levels of forensic knowledge and practice, establish guidelines for practice, educate legal consumers, and devote more attention to treatment issues in forensic contexts is highlighted.

Adolescents with psychopathic characteristics in a substance abusing cohort: treatment process and outcomes.

Psychopathy is a condition with important consequences both for individuals who experience it and for the communities in which they live. Although the assessment of psychopathy among adolescents remains controversial, some evidence suggests that the affective and behavioral traits of adult psychopathy begin to emerge in childhood (B. B. Lahey & A. Kazdin, 1990) and continue across the lifespan (A. E. Forth, S. D. Hart, & R. D. Hare, 1990). The present study used the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV; A. E. Forth, S. D. Kosson, & R. D. Hare, in press) to retrospectively assess psychopathic characteristics, treatment process, and outcomes of 64 individuals referred for treatment to a substance abuse program for adjudicated adolescents. This study focused on the relationship between psychopathic characteristics and treatment process and outcome variables, including attrition rates, quality of participation, substance use throughout treatment, clinical improvement, and 12-month recidivism rates. Psychopathic characteristics were negatively related to treatment process and outcome variables, including attrition, participation, substance use, and clinical improvement. Psychopathic characteristics were positively related to the number of arrests in the 12 months following treatment completion. Implications for treatment and future research with adolescents displaying psychopathic characteristics are discussed.

Expert approaches to communicating violence risk

There has been virtually no empirical study of the way in which evaluating clinicians communicate their conclusions about the risk of violence toward others. Risk communication has become particularly important in recent years, serving as the link between empirical data from recent studies and the understanding and use of such data by evaluators and decision makers. The present study considered how psychologists and psychiatrists, identified as experts in violence risk assessment, responded to eight vignettes that systematically measured preferences for risk communication. The vignettes involved the presentation of the following factors in a 2 × 2 × 2 within-subjects design, counterbalanced for order: (1) risk model (prediction vs. management), (2) risk level (high vs. low risk of the individual being assessed), and (3) risk factors (the predominance of static vs. dynamic risk factors). A total of 71 individuals (41 psychologists, 2 sociologists, and 28 psychiatrists) responded to a survey mailed to 100 individuals, for a response rate of 71%. Participants were asked to rate the value of six forms of risk communication for each of the eight vignettes. There were few significant differences between the ratings assigned by psychologists and those assigned by psychiatrists. The most highly valued form of risk communication involved identifying risk factors applicable to the individual and specifying interventions to reduce risk. A repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance yielded a main effect for risk level and an interaction between risk level and risk factors. The implications of these findings for research and practice are discussed.

Violence risk communication: Implications for research, policy, and practice

Abstract Risk communication of violence involves information provided by an assessor to a decision-maker regarding the likelihood that a violent act will be committed by an individual who is being evaluated. It has received relatively little conceptual and empirical attention, in contrast to the increased focus on violence risk factors, outcomes and prediction accuracy seen in research during the last decade. In this article, we offer a number of theoretical and practical justifications for studying risk communication: (a) the significant demand for risk assessment, (b) the likely increase in this demand in the future, (c) the identification of risk communication as conceptually important, (d) the absence of available empirical research, (e) the importance of risk communication as a link between risk assessment and decision-making, (f), the favorable impact of good risk communication on better-informed legal decision-making, and (g) the serious consequences of risk-relevant decisions. After reviewing the ...

How “Specific” Are Gender-Specific Rehabilitation Needs? An Empirical Analysis

There has been relatively little empirical research on the distinctive characteristics and needs of female offenders that could help guide rehabilitative approaches that are gender specific. This study considered a sample of female offenders (N = 886) and male offenders (N = 1,435) who had been released from incarceration and provided with assessment services as part of the community reentry process. Comparisons were conducted using the employment, companions, and financial domains of the Level of Service Inventory (LSI-R and LS-CMI). Female offenders received significantly higher ratings in companion and financial deficits, consistent with some prior research suggesting that social and financial risk factors for offending may be more substantial in women. Implications for research and the practice of gender-specific rehabilitation approaches are discussed.

THE LSI-R AND THE COMPAS Validation Data on Two Risk-Needs Tools

Over the past two decades, the role of risk-needs assessment in the criminal justice system has increased substantially. This study provides validation data on the Level of Service Inventory—Revised (LSI-R) and the Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) using a large male cohort ( N = 975) with a substantial proportion of ethnic minority offenders. In comparing the predictive validity of these tools, the authors employed a retrospective, archival, known-groups design to study outcomes of offenders released into the community from New Jersey prisons between 1999 and 2002, with a postrelease outcome period of 12 months. The results indicate that both the LSI-R composite score and the COMPAS recidivism score have inconsistent validity when tested on different ethnic/racial populations. Furthermore, the results suggest that different ethnic/racial groups have varying risk and needs factors that predict recidivism.

Risk Factors for Juvenile Criminal Recidivism The Postrelease Community Adjustment of Juvenile Offenders

This study focused on the outcomes of juvenile delinquents (N = 140) following their conviction, commitment for residential placement, and return to the community on parole. Participants were followed for a period of 1 year postrelease. A random stratified sampling procedure was used to select participants from urban, suburban, and rural sites. Ratings of poor parole adjustment (73%), as well as observed rates of parole violation (73%) and reoffending (40%) across the entire sample reflected a substantial proportion of unfavorable outcomes during follow-up. Stepwise regression yielded significant predictive capacity for offense, school, and family variables toward parole violation (R = .30) and parole adjustment (R = .41), and a trend toward significance in the prediction of reoffending (R = .31), although the modest size of these coefficients would limit practical utility. The results are discussed in the context of intervention and risk-reduction planning throughout residential placement and postrelease community living.