Risk assessment practices have evolved considerably over the past three decades. Structured assessments of recidivism risk allow for the proper identification of criminogenic needs, which in turn, allow decision makers to make informed recommendations regarding criminal justice interventions and measures. Although actuarial assessments are common practice, situations exist where evaluators may call into doubt the risk assessment’s conclusions, and may exercise their discretionary professional judgment to adjust the risk rating. Despite being common practice, clinical overrides have been the subject of very little empirical work. The aim of the current study is to examine the impact of clinical overrides on a large sample of individuals (N = 3,646) who were assessed using the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). Findings demonstrate that upward overrides produce different results than downward overrides. The practical and theoretical implications of these results are discussed.
AbbottB. R. (2011). Throwing the baby out with the bathwater: Is it time for clinical judgment to supplement actuarial risk assessment?Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 39, 222-230.
2.
ÆgisdóttirS.WhiteM. J.SpenglerP. M.MaughermanA. S.AndersonL. A.CookR. S.. . . RushJ. D. (2006). The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 341-382.
3.
AndersonD.HansonR. K. (2010). Static-99: An actuarial tool to assess risk of sexual and violent recidivism among sexual offenders. In OttoR. K.DouglasK. S. (Eds.), Handbook of violence risk assessment (pp. 251-267). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
4.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.
5.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.WormithJ. S. (2004). The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
6.
AnsbroM. (2010). The nuts and bolts of risk assessment: When the clinical and actuarial conflict. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 49, 252-268.
7.
ArcherR. P.Buffington-VollumJ. K.StrednyR. V.HandelR. W. (2006). A survey of psychological test use patterns among forensic psychologists. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 84-94.
8.
BontaJ.BourgonG.RuggeT.ScottT. L.YessineA. K.GutierrezL.. . . LiJ. (2011). An experimental demonstration of training probation officers in evidence-based community supervision. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 1127-1148.
9.
BrewsA. L. (2009). The Level of Service Inventory and female offenders: Addressing issues of reliability and predictive validity (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
10.
ChartonT.Couture-PoulinJ.-F.GuayJ. P. (2011). L’évaluation de la validité prédictive du LS/CMI dans la prédiction des incidents disciplinaires [Predicting prison misconducts with the LS/CMI]. Criminologie, 44, 279-303.
11.
CohenJ.CohenP. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
DeLongE. R.DeLongD. M.Clarke-PearsonD. L. (1988). Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics, 44, 837-845.
13.
de VogelV.de RuiterC.BoumanY.de Vries RobbéM. (2009). SAPROF: Guidelines for the assessment of protective factors for violence risk (English version). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Forum Educatief.
14.
de VogelV.de RuiterC.BoumanY.de Vries RobbéM. (2011). SAPROF: Guide d’évaluation des facteurs de protection pour le risque de violence [SAPROF: Guidelines by Jean-Pierre Guay and Tiziana Costi]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Forum Educatief. (in French)
15.
de Vries RobbéM.de VogelV.de SpaE. (2011). Protective factors for violence risk in forensic psychiatric patients: A retrospective validation study of the SAPROF. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 10, 178-186.
16.
EherR.RettenbergerM.SchillingF. (2010). Psychiatrische diagnosen von sexualstraftätern - eine empirische untersuchung von 807 inhaftierten Kindesmissbrauchstätern und Vergewaltigern [Psychiatric diagnoses in sexual offenders: An investigation of 807 incarcerated child molesters and rapists]. Zeitschrift Für Sexualforschung, 23, 23-35.
17.
EppersonD. L.GoreK. S. (2004, October). Investigation of clinical overrides of the MnSOST-R and the resulting impact on predictive accuracy. Paper presented at the 23rd Research and Treatment Convention of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Albuquerque, NM.
18.
EppersonD. L.KaulJ. D.HuotS.GoldmanR.AlexanderW. (2003). Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool–Revised (MnSOST-R) Technical paper: Development, validation, and recommended risk level cut scores. Retrieved from https://rsoresearch.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/ia-state-study.pdf
19.
FitzpatrickK. M. (1997). Fighting among America’s youth: A risk and protective factors approach. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 131-148.
20.
GentryA. L.DulmusC. N.TheriotM. T. (2005). Comparing sex offender risk classification using the Static-99 and LSI-R assessment instruments. Research on Social Work Practice, 15, 557-563.
21.
GirardL. (1999). The Level of Supervision Inventory–Ontario Revision: Risk/need assessment and recidivisms (Doctoral dissertation). University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
22.
GirardL.WormithJ. S. (2004). The predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory–Ontario Revision on general and violent recidivism among various offender groups. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 150-181.
23.
GlassG. V. (1965). A ranking variable analogue of biserial correlation: Implications for short-cut item analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 2, 91-95.
24.
GoreK. S. (2007). Adjusted actuarial assessment of sex offenders: The impact of clinical overrides on predictive accuracy (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from PsycINFO Database Record. (Accession No. 2008-99020-166)
25.
GroveW. M.MeehlP. E. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 293-323.
26.
GrubinD. (1997). Inferring predictors of risk: Sex offenders. International Review of Psychiatry, 9, 225-231.
27.
GuayJ. P. (2016). L’évaluation du risque et des besoins criminogènes à la lumière des données probantes : une étude de validation de la version française de l’Inventaire de niveau de service et de gestion des cas -LS/CMI, [French validation of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory- LS/CMI]. European Review of Applied Psychology, 66, 199-210.
28.
Hajian-TilakiK. (2013). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for medical diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian Journal of Internal Medicine, 4, 627-635.
29.
HanleyJ. A. (1989). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology: The state of the art. Critical Review in Diagnostic Imaging, 29, 307-335.
30.
HanleyJ. A.McNeilB. J. (1982). The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143, 29-36.
31.
HanleyJ. A.McNeilB. J. (1983). A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839-843.
32.
HansonR. K. (2007, March). How should risk assessments for sexual offenders be conducted?Paper presented at the Fourth Annual Forensic Psychiatry Conference, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
33.
HansonR. K.HarrisA. J. R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sex offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35.
34.
HansonR. K.Morton-BourgonK. (2004). Predictors of sexual recidivism: An updated meta-analysis (Corrections User Report No. 2004-02). Ottawa, Ontario: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
35.
HansonR. K.Morton-BourgonK. E. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychological Assessment, 21, 1-21.
36.
HansonR. K.ThorntonD. (1999). STATIC-99: Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders (User Report 1999-02). Ottawa, Ontario: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
37.
HarrisA. J. R.HansonR. K. (2004). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question (Vol. 3). Ottawa, Ontario: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
38.
HelmusL.HansonR. K.ThorntonD. (2009). Reporting Static-99 in light of new research on recidivism norms. The Forum, 21, 38-45.
39.
HogeR. D.AndrewsD. A. (2006). Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI): User’s manual. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
40.
KraussD. A. (2004). Adjusting risk of recidivism: Do judicial departures worsen or improve recidivism prediction under the federal sentencing guidelines?Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 731-750.
41.
LeeI. A.PreacherK. J. (2013). Calculation for the test of the difference between two dependent correlations with one variable in common [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org
42.
LowryR. (2016). Significance of the difference between the areas under two independent ROC curves [Computer software]. Available from http://vassarstats.net/index.html
43.
LyleC. G.GrahamE. (2000). Looks can be deceiving: Using a risk assessment instrument to evaluate the outcomes of child protection services. Children and Youth Services Review, 22, 935-949.
MeehlP. E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
46.
MillerJ.MaloneyC. (2013). Practitioner compliance with risk/needs assessment tools: A theoretical and empirical assessment. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 40, 716-736.
47.
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.
48.
PreacherK. J. (2002). Calculation for the test of the difference between two independent correlation coefficients [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org
49.
SchmidtF.SinclairS. M.ThomasdóttirS. (2016). Predictive validity of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory with youth who have committed sexual and non-sexual offenses: The utility of professional override. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 413-430.
50.
SreenivasanS.WeinbergerL. E.FrancesA.Cusworth-WalkerS. (2010). Alice in actuarial-land: Through the looking glass of changing Static-99 norms. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 38, 400-406.
51.
SteigerJ. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245-251.
52.
StoreyJ.WattK.JacksonK.HartS. (2012). Utilization and implications of the Static-99 in practice. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 24, 289-302.
53.
ViglioneJ.RudesD. S.TaxmanF. S. (2014). Misalignment in supervision implementing risk/needs assessment instruments in probation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 263-285.
54.
WormithJ. S.HoggS. M. (2011). The predictive validity of sexual offender recidivism with a general Risk/Needs Assessment Inventory (Research report). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Program Effectiveness, Statistics and Applied Research Unit, Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services of Ontario.
55.
WormithJ. S.HoggS. M.GuzzoL. (2012). The predictive validity of a general risk/needs assessment inventory on sexual offender recidivism and an exploration of the professional override. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39, 1511-1538.
56.
WormithJ. S.HoggS. M.GuzzoL. (2014). The predictive validity of the LS/CMI with aboriginal offenders in Canada. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 481-508.
