Predictive bias in pretrial risk assessment: Application of the Public Safety Assessment in a Native American population.

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Samantha A Zottola, Kamiya Stewart, Violette Cloud, Liz Hassett, Sarah L Desmarais
{"title":"Predictive bias in pretrial risk assessment: Application of the Public Safety Assessment in a Native American population.","authors":"Samantha A Zottola, Kamiya Stewart, Violette Cloud, Liz Hassett, Sarah L Desmarais","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Native Americans are vastly overrepresented in U.S. jails and people in rural communities face unique barriers (e.g., limited public transportation and services) that may impact how well pretrial risk assessments predict outcomes. Yet, these populations are understudied in the literature examining the predictive validity and, more importantly, the potential predictive bias of pretrial risk assessments. We sought to address these gaps.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We had three aims: (a) examine the validity of Public Safety Assessment (PSA) scores in predicting pretrial outcomes in a county with a high degree of rurality, (b) compare predictive validity and test for predictive bias among Native American and White people, and (c) compare predictive validity and test for predictive bias among men and women.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Our sample comprised 4,570 closed cases involving people released on personal recognizance bonds over a 3.5-year period. About two thirds were Native American and men. The PSA was completed and outcome data were collected as part of routine pretrial practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In slightly more than one third of cases, people failed to appear or were rearrested during the pretrial period. In the full sample, PSA scores demonstrated poor validity in predicting failure to appear but fair validity in predicting new arrest. Further analyses revealed predictive bias as a function of both race and sex in the prediction of failure to appear. In contrast, we did not find evidence of bias in the prediction of new criminal arrest, although predictive validity was slightly better for White people and men.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings raise concerns regarding the use of PSA scores to inform pretrial decisions related to risk for failure to appear in rural communities and among Native American people. They also highlight concerns regarding reliance on static factors as well as the need for research on the validity of pretrial risk assessments in these populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000562","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Native Americans are vastly overrepresented in U.S. jails and people in rural communities face unique barriers (e.g., limited public transportation and services) that may impact how well pretrial risk assessments predict outcomes. Yet, these populations are understudied in the literature examining the predictive validity and, more importantly, the potential predictive bias of pretrial risk assessments. We sought to address these gaps.

Hypotheses: We had three aims: (a) examine the validity of Public Safety Assessment (PSA) scores in predicting pretrial outcomes in a county with a high degree of rurality, (b) compare predictive validity and test for predictive bias among Native American and White people, and (c) compare predictive validity and test for predictive bias among men and women.

Method: Our sample comprised 4,570 closed cases involving people released on personal recognizance bonds over a 3.5-year period. About two thirds were Native American and men. The PSA was completed and outcome data were collected as part of routine pretrial practice.

Results: In slightly more than one third of cases, people failed to appear or were rearrested during the pretrial period. In the full sample, PSA scores demonstrated poor validity in predicting failure to appear but fair validity in predicting new arrest. Further analyses revealed predictive bias as a function of both race and sex in the prediction of failure to appear. In contrast, we did not find evidence of bias in the prediction of new criminal arrest, although predictive validity was slightly better for White people and men.

Conclusion: Our findings raise concerns regarding the use of PSA scores to inform pretrial decisions related to risk for failure to appear in rural communities and among Native American people. They also highlight concerns regarding reliance on static factors as well as the need for research on the validity of pretrial risk assessments in these populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

审前风险评估中的预测偏差:公共安全评估在美国原住民中的应用。
目标:美国原住民在美国监狱中所占比例过高,农村社区的人们面临着独特的障碍(如有限的公共交通和服务),这可能会影响审前风险评估对结果的预测。然而,在研究审前风险评估的预测有效性以及更重要的潜在预测偏差的文献中,对这些人群的研究不足。我们试图填补这些空白:我们有三个目标:(a)研究公共安全评估(PSA)分数在预测一个乡村化程度较高的县的审前结果方面的有效性;(b)比较美国原住民和白人的预测有效性并检验预测偏差;(c)比较男性和女性的预测有效性并检验预测偏差:我们的样本包括 4,570 起已结案的案件,涉及在 3.5 年内以个人担保金获释的人员。其中约三分之二为美国原住民和男性。作为常规审前实践的一部分,我们完成了 PSA 并收集了结果数据:在略高于三分之一的案件中,当事人在审前期间未能出庭或再次被捕。在全部样本中,PSA 分数在预测未出庭方面的有效性较差,但在预测再次被捕方面的有效性尚可。进一步的分析表明,在预测未出庭方面,种族和性别都存在预测偏差。相比之下,我们没有发现在预测新的刑事逮捕方面存在偏差的证据,尽管白人和男性的预测有效性稍好一些:我们的研究结果引起了人们对使用 PSA 分数为审前决定提供信息的关注,这些信息与农村社区和美国原住民的失败出庭风险有关。研究结果还强调了对依赖静态因素的担忧,以及对这些人群审前风险评估有效性进行研究的必要性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, is a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussions of issues arising out of the relationships between human behavior and the law, our legal system, and the legal process. This journal publishes original research, reviews of past research, and theoretical studies from professionals in criminal justice, law, psychology, sociology, psychiatry, political science, education, communication, and other areas germane to the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信