风险、种族和再犯:预测偏差和差异影响

Jennifer L Skeem, Christopher T. Lowenkamp
{"title":"风险、种族和再犯:预测偏差和差异影响","authors":"Jennifer L Skeem, Christopher T. Lowenkamp","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2687339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One way to unwind mass incarceration without compromising public safety is to use risk assessment instruments in sentencing and corrections. Although these instruments figure prominently in current reforms, critics argue that benefits in crime control will be offset by an adverse effect on racial minorities. Based on a sample of 34,794 federal offenders, we examine the relationships among race, risk assessment (the Post Conviction Risk Assessment [PCRA]), and future arrest. First, application of well-established principles of psychological science revealed little evidence of test bias for the PCRA — the instrument strongly predicts arrest for both Black and White offenders and a given score has essentially the same meaning — i.e., same probability of recidivism — across groups. Second, Black offenders obtain higher average PCRA scores than White offenders (d= 0.34; 13.5% non-overlap in groups’ scores), so some applications could create disparate impact. Third, most (66%) of the racial difference in PCRA scores is attributable to criminal history — which is already embedded in sentencing guidelines. Finally, criminal history is not a proxy for race, but instead mediates the relationship between race and future arrest . Data are more helpful than rhetoric, if the goal is to improve practice at this opportune moment in history.","PeriodicalId":369466,"journal":{"name":"Political Economy: Structure & Scope of Government eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"63","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk, Race, & Recidivism: Predictive Bias and Disparate Impact\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer L Skeem, Christopher T. Lowenkamp\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2687339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One way to unwind mass incarceration without compromising public safety is to use risk assessment instruments in sentencing and corrections. Although these instruments figure prominently in current reforms, critics argue that benefits in crime control will be offset by an adverse effect on racial minorities. Based on a sample of 34,794 federal offenders, we examine the relationships among race, risk assessment (the Post Conviction Risk Assessment [PCRA]), and future arrest. First, application of well-established principles of psychological science revealed little evidence of test bias for the PCRA — the instrument strongly predicts arrest for both Black and White offenders and a given score has essentially the same meaning — i.e., same probability of recidivism — across groups. Second, Black offenders obtain higher average PCRA scores than White offenders (d= 0.34; 13.5% non-overlap in groups’ scores), so some applications could create disparate impact. Third, most (66%) of the racial difference in PCRA scores is attributable to criminal history — which is already embedded in sentencing guidelines. Finally, criminal history is not a proxy for race, but instead mediates the relationship between race and future arrest . Data are more helpful than rhetoric, if the goal is to improve practice at this opportune moment in history.\",\"PeriodicalId\":369466,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Economy: Structure & Scope of Government eJournal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"63\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Economy: Structure & Scope of Government eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2687339\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Economy: Structure & Scope of Government eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2687339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 63

摘要

在不影响公共安全的情况下解除大规模监禁的一种方法是在量刑和矫正中使用风险评估工具。尽管这些手段在当前的改革中占有重要地位,但批评人士认为,对少数族裔的不利影响将抵消控制犯罪的好处。基于34,794名联邦罪犯的样本,我们研究了种族、风险评估(定罪后风险评估[PCRA])和未来被捕之间的关系。首先,运用公认的心理科学原理,几乎没有证据表明PCRA测试存在偏见——该工具对黑人和白人罪犯的逮捕都有很强的预测能力,给定的分数在不同群体中基本上具有相同的含义——即相同的再犯概率。第二,黑人罪犯的平均PCRA得分高于白人罪犯(d= 0.34;13.5%的小组得分不重叠),所以一些应用程序可能会产生不同的影响。第三,大多数(66%)PCRA分数的种族差异可归因于犯罪历史——这已经嵌入到量刑指南中。最后,犯罪历史不是种族的代表,而是种族和未来被捕之间的中介关系。如果目标是在历史上这个合适的时刻改进实践,那么数据比言辞更有帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk, Race, & Recidivism: Predictive Bias and Disparate Impact
One way to unwind mass incarceration without compromising public safety is to use risk assessment instruments in sentencing and corrections. Although these instruments figure prominently in current reforms, critics argue that benefits in crime control will be offset by an adverse effect on racial minorities. Based on a sample of 34,794 federal offenders, we examine the relationships among race, risk assessment (the Post Conviction Risk Assessment [PCRA]), and future arrest. First, application of well-established principles of psychological science revealed little evidence of test bias for the PCRA — the instrument strongly predicts arrest for both Black and White offenders and a given score has essentially the same meaning — i.e., same probability of recidivism — across groups. Second, Black offenders obtain higher average PCRA scores than White offenders (d= 0.34; 13.5% non-overlap in groups’ scores), so some applications could create disparate impact. Third, most (66%) of the racial difference in PCRA scores is attributable to criminal history — which is already embedded in sentencing guidelines. Finally, criminal history is not a proxy for race, but instead mediates the relationship between race and future arrest . Data are more helpful than rhetoric, if the goal is to improve practice at this opportune moment in history.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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