This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mills, J. F. Articles by Kroner, D. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

An Examination of the Generalizability of the LSI-R and Vrag Probability Bins

Bath Institution, Carleton University, millsjf{at}csc-scc.gc.ca

Michael N. Jones

Queen’s University

Daryl G. Kroner

Pittsburgh Institution

Statistics such as the Pearson’s r and Receiver Operating Characteristics are often used to test the generalization of criminal and violence prediction instruments. However, these analyses overlook potential error in the assessment of risk if the rates of offending within the initial validation samples are assumed accurate for other samples. This study examined the generalizability of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised and Violence Risk Appraisal Guide probability bins in a predominantly violent correctional sample. The findings showed that the initial bin probabilities were not transferable to our sample of predominantly violent male offenders. An empirical method of optimal binning was introduced. The discussion centered on the accurate use of bin probabilities in the communication of risk.

Key Words: violence • risk • offenders • assessment

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 5, 565-585 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854805278417


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C.-I Hsu, P. Caputi, and M. K. Byrne The Level of Service Inventory--Revised (LSI-R): A Useful Risk Assessment Measure for Australian Offenders? Criminal Justice and Behavior, July 1, 2009; 36(7): 728 - 740. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. A. Campbell, S. French, and P. Gendreau The Prediction of Violence in Adult Offenders: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Instruments and Methods of Assessment Criminal Justice and Behavior, June 1, 2009; 36(6): 567 - 590. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Underhill, H. C. Wakeling, R. E. Mann, and S. D. Webster Male Sexual Offenders' Emotional Openness With Men and Women Criminal Justice and Behavior, September 1, 2008; 35(9): 1156 - 1173. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. T. Harris and M. E. Rice Characterizing the Value of Actuarial Violence Risk Assessments Criminal Justice and Behavior, December 1, 2007; 34(12): 1638 - 1658. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Holtfreter and R. Cupp Gender and Risk Assessment: The Empirical Status of the LSI-R for Women Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, November 1, 2007; 23(4): 363 - 382. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. C. Wakeling The Psychometric Validation of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory--Revised with UK Incarcerated Sexual Offenders Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, September 1, 2007; 19(3): 217 - 236. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. F. Mills and D. G. Kroner Impression Management and Self-Report Among Violent Offenders J Interpers Violence, February 1, 2006; 21(2): 178 - 192. [Abstract] [PDF]