Prediction of adolescent sexual reoffending: a meta-analysis of the J-SOAP-II, ERASOR, J-SORRAT-II, and Static-99.

Several risk assessment tools, including the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II (Prentky & Righthand, 2003), the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (Worling & Curwen, 2001), the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II (Epperson, Ralston, Fowers, DeWitt, & Gore, 2006), and the Static-99 (Hanson & Thornton, 1999), have been used to assess reoffense risk among adolescents who have committed sexual offenses. Given that research on these tools has yielded somewhat mixed results, we empirically synthesized 33 published and unpublished studies involving 6,196 male adolescents who had committed a sexual offense. We conducted two separate meta-analyses, first with correlations and then with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs). Total scores on each of the tools significantly predicted sexual reoffending, with aggregated correlations ranging from .12 to .20 and aggregated AUC scores ranging from .64 to .67. However, in many cases heterogeneity across studies was moderate to high. There were no significant differences between tools, and although the Static-99 was developed for adults, it achieved similar results as the adolescent tools. Results are compared to other meta-analyses of risk tools used in the area of violence risk assessment and in other fields.

Assessment of Multiple Risk Outcomes, Strengths, and Change with the START:AV: A Short-Term Prospective Study with Adolescent Offenders.

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START:AV; Nicholls, Viljoen, Cruise, Desmarais, & Webster, 2010; Viljoen, Cruise, Nicholls, Desmarais, & Webster, in preparation) is a clinical guide designed to assist in the assessment and management of adolescents' risk for adverse events (e.g., violence, general offending, suicide, victimization). In this initial validation study, START:AV assessments were conducted on 90 adolescent offenders (62 male, 28 female), who were prospectively followed for a 3-month period. START:AV assessments had good to excellent inter-rater reliability and strong concurrent validity with Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth assessments (SAVRY; Borum, Bartel, & Forth, 2006). START:AV risk estimates and Vulnerability total scores predicted multiple adverse outcomes, including violence towards others, offending, victimization, suicidal ideation, and substance abuse. In addition, Strength total scores inversely predicted violence, offending, and street drug use. During the 3-month follow-up, risk estimates changed in at least one domain for 92% of youth, and 27% of youth showed reliable changes in Strength and/or Vulnerability total scores (reliable change index, 90% confidence interval; Jacobsen & Truax, 1991). While these findings are promising, a strong need exists for further research on the START:AV, the measurement of change, and on the role of strengths in risk assessment and treatment-planning.

Just tell me what to do: bringing back experimenter control in active contingency tasks with the command-performance procedure and finding cue density effects along the way.

Active contingency tasks, such as those used to explore judgments of control, suffer from variability in the actual values of critical variables. The authors debut a new, easily implemented procedure that restores control over these variables to the experimenter simply by telling participants when to respond, and when to withhold responding. This command-performance procedure not only restores control over critical variables such as actual contingency, it also allows response frequency to be manipulated independently of contingency or outcome frequency. This yields the first demonstration, to our knowledge, of the equivalent of a cue density effect in an active contingency task. Judgments of control are biased by response frequency outcome frequency, just as they are also biased by outcome frequency.