使用青少年暴力风险结构化评估工具对涉法青少年的优势进行第二次概念验证调查:项目级别基于风险的影响和相互作用

IF 1.5 1区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Calvin M. Langton, James R. Worling, Gabriela D. B. Sheinin
{"title":"使用青少年暴力风险结构化评估工具对涉法青少年的优势进行第二次概念验证调查:项目级别基于风险的影响和相互作用","authors":"Calvin M. Langton, James R. Worling, Gabriela D. B. Sheinin","doi":"10.1177/15412040241241508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite efforts to incorporate protective factors or ‘strengths’ in applied risk assessments for criminal reoffending, there has been limited progress towards a consensus regarding what is meant by such terms, what effects predictors can exert, or how to describe such effects. This proof of concept study was undertaken to address those issues. A structured professional judgment tool was used to create lower and higher historical/static risk groups with a sample of 273 justice-involved male youth with sexual offenses followed over a fixed 3-year period. Using risk and protective poles to create pairs of dichotomous variables from trichotomously rated risk and protective items, risk-based exacerbation and risk-based protective effects were found. These varied in terms of whether the effect on the outcome of a new violent (including sexual) offense was larger, smaller, or absent for youth at higher or lower historical/static risk. Some of these potentially dynamic dichotomous variables were shown to have a protective (or risk) effect after controlling for both historical/static risk and that same item’s risk (or protective) effect. Some moderated the association between historical/static risk and recidivism, strengthening or reducing it. Terms for these effects and implications of incorporating strengths in research and applied practice were considered.","PeriodicalId":47525,"journal":{"name":"Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Second Proof of Concept Investigation of Strengths Using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth Tool With Justice-Involved Youth: Item Level Risk-Based Effects and Interactions\",\"authors\":\"Calvin M. Langton, James R. Worling, Gabriela D. B. Sheinin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15412040241241508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite efforts to incorporate protective factors or ‘strengths’ in applied risk assessments for criminal reoffending, there has been limited progress towards a consensus regarding what is meant by such terms, what effects predictors can exert, or how to describe such effects. This proof of concept study was undertaken to address those issues. A structured professional judgment tool was used to create lower and higher historical/static risk groups with a sample of 273 justice-involved male youth with sexual offenses followed over a fixed 3-year period. Using risk and protective poles to create pairs of dichotomous variables from trichotomously rated risk and protective items, risk-based exacerbation and risk-based protective effects were found. These varied in terms of whether the effect on the outcome of a new violent (including sexual) offense was larger, smaller, or absent for youth at higher or lower historical/static risk. Some of these potentially dynamic dichotomous variables were shown to have a protective (or risk) effect after controlling for both historical/static risk and that same item’s risk (or protective) effect. Some moderated the association between historical/static risk and recidivism, strengthening or reducing it. Terms for these effects and implications of incorporating strengths in research and applied practice were considered.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15412040241241508\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15412040241241508","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管人们一直在努力将保护性因素或 "优势 "纳入针对重新犯罪的应用风险评估中,但在就这些术语的含义、预测因素可产生的影响或如何描述这些影响达成共识方面,进展有限。这项概念验证研究就是为了解决这些问题而开展的。我们使用结构化专业判断工具,在固定的 3 年时间内,对 273 名涉及性犯罪的男性青少年样本进行跟踪调查,以创建较低和较高的历史/静态风险组别。利用风险和保护极点,从风险和保护项目的三分法评级中创建了一对二分变量,发现了基于风险的恶化效应和基于风险的保护效应。对于历史/静态风险较高或较低的青少年来说,这些效应的不同之处在于对新的暴力(包括性)犯罪结果的影响是较大、较小还是不存在。在控制了历史/静态风险和同一项目的风险(或保护)效应之后,其中一些潜在的动态二分变量被证明具有保护(或风险)效应。有些变量调节了历史/静态风险与累犯之间的关联,加强或削弱了这种关联。会议审议了这些效应的术语以及将这些效应纳入研究和应用实践的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Second Proof of Concept Investigation of Strengths Using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth Tool With Justice-Involved Youth: Item Level Risk-Based Effects and Interactions
Despite efforts to incorporate protective factors or ‘strengths’ in applied risk assessments for criminal reoffending, there has been limited progress towards a consensus regarding what is meant by such terms, what effects predictors can exert, or how to describe such effects. This proof of concept study was undertaken to address those issues. A structured professional judgment tool was used to create lower and higher historical/static risk groups with a sample of 273 justice-involved male youth with sexual offenses followed over a fixed 3-year period. Using risk and protective poles to create pairs of dichotomous variables from trichotomously rated risk and protective items, risk-based exacerbation and risk-based protective effects were found. These varied in terms of whether the effect on the outcome of a new violent (including sexual) offense was larger, smaller, or absent for youth at higher or lower historical/static risk. Some of these potentially dynamic dichotomous variables were shown to have a protective (or risk) effect after controlling for both historical/static risk and that same item’s risk (or protective) effect. Some moderated the association between historical/static risk and recidivism, strengthening or reducing it. Terms for these effects and implications of incorporating strengths in research and applied practice were considered.
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
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
10.50%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice: An Interdisciplinary Journal provides academics and practitioners in juvenile justice and related fields with a resource for publishing current empirical research on programs, policies, and practices in the areas of youth violence and juvenile justice. Emphasis is placed on such topics as serious and violent juvenile offenders, juvenile offender recidivism, institutional violence, and other relevant topics to youth violence and juvenile justice such as risk assessment, psychopathy, self-control, and gang membership, among others. Decided emphasis is placed on empirical research with specific implications relevant to juvenile justice process, policy, and administration. Interdisciplinary in scope, Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice serves a diverse audience of academics and practitioners in the fields of criminal justice, education, psychology, social work, behavior analysis, sociology, law, counseling, public health, and all others with an interest in youth violence and juvenile justice.
×
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