预测性再犯风险的风险评估工具:10种工具的荟萃分析比较。

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-07-13 DOI:10.1037/pas0001472
Lisa Holper, Nadja Heldner, Miriam J Hofmann, Nicole Claire Hauser, Elmar Habermeyer, Andreas Mokros
{"title":"预测性再犯风险的风险评估工具:10种工具的荟萃分析比较。","authors":"Lisa Holper, Nadja Heldner, Miriam J Hofmann, Nicole Claire Hauser, Elmar Habermeyer, Andreas Mokros","doi":"10.1037/pas0001472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Risk assessment instruments are commonly used to predict the probability of recidivism among individuals with criminal histories. This meta-analysis synthesizes evidence on the predictive validity of ten instruments for assessing sexual recidivism risk: MnSOST-R, RM2000/S, RRASOR, SORAG, Static-2002, Static-2002 R, Static-99, Static-99 R, SVR-20, and VRS-SO. It includes 162 studies involving 155,442 individuals, published from 1997 to 2024. Results suggested moderate to high predictive validity for most instruments in predicting sexual recidivism and other outcomes, such as violent, sexual-violent, general, and any recidivism. The VRS-SO showed the highest predictive value for sexual recidivism but did not differ from other tools significantly. The SORAG had the highest predictive value for sexual-violent, general, and any recidivism, significantly outperforming the Static-99. The RRASOR had a moderate predictive value for sexual recidivism, but the lowest effect size for all other outcomes. A moderator analysis revealed that mean interrater reliability and mean offender age significantly affected the instruments' predictive validity. This work represents the largest synthesis of risk assessment instruments for sexual recidivism risk to date. The findings support the viability of all instruments examined in forensic practice. Their predictive validity did, however, overlap considerably, except for the more substantial effects of the VRS-SO and the SORAG, and the weaker effect of the RRASOR. Given the overall moderate predictive validity, the instruments should be used in conjunction with other information to guide decision making within the criminal justice system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"683-703"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk assessment instruments for predicting the risk of sexual recidivism: A meta-analytic comparison of 10 instruments.\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Holper, Nadja Heldner, Miriam J Hofmann, Nicole Claire Hauser, Elmar Habermeyer, Andreas Mokros\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pas0001472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Risk assessment instruments are commonly used to predict the probability of recidivism among individuals with criminal histories. This meta-analysis synthesizes evidence on the predictive validity of ten instruments for assessing sexual recidivism risk: MnSOST-R, RM2000/S, RRASOR, SORAG, Static-2002, Static-2002 R, Static-99, Static-99 R, SVR-20, and VRS-SO. It includes 162 studies involving 155,442 individuals, published from 1997 to 2024. Results suggested moderate to high predictive validity for most instruments in predicting sexual recidivism and other outcomes, such as violent, sexual-violent, general, and any recidivism. The VRS-SO showed the highest predictive value for sexual recidivism but did not differ from other tools significantly. The SORAG had the highest predictive value for sexual-violent, general, and any recidivism, significantly outperforming the Static-99. The RRASOR had a moderate predictive value for sexual recidivism, but the lowest effect size for all other outcomes. A moderator analysis revealed that mean interrater reliability and mean offender age significantly affected the instruments' predictive validity. This work represents the largest synthesis of risk assessment instruments for sexual recidivism risk to date. The findings support the viability of all instruments examined in forensic practice. Their predictive validity did, however, overlap considerably, except for the more substantial effects of the VRS-SO and the SORAG, and the weaker effect of the RRASOR. Given the overall moderate predictive validity, the instruments should be used in conjunction with other information to guide decision making within the criminal justice system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"683-703\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001472\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/7/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001472","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

风险评估工具通常用于预测有犯罪史的个人再犯的可能性。本meta分析综合了MnSOST-R、RM2000/S、RRASOR、SORAG、Static-2002、Static-2002 R、Static-99、Static-99 R、SVR-20和VRS-SO等10种性再犯风险评估工具的预测效度证据。它包括162项研究,涉及155,442人,发表于1997年至2024年。结果表明,大多数工具在预测性再犯和其他结果(如暴力、性暴力、一般和任何再犯)方面的预测效度中等至高。VRS-SO对性累犯的预测价值最高,但与其他工具无显著差异。SORAG对性暴力、一般和任何累犯的预测价值最高,明显优于Static-99。RRASOR对性再犯有中等的预测价值,但对所有其他结果的效应值最低。调节因子分析显示,平均判读信度和平均罪犯年龄显著影响量表的预测效度。这项工作是迄今为止最大的综合性再犯风险评估工具。研究结果支持在法医实践中检查的所有工具的可行性。然而,除了VRS-SO和SORAG的效果更明显,而RRASOR的效果较弱之外,它们的预测效度确实有很大的重叠。鉴于总体上预测效度适中,这些工具应与其他信息结合使用,以指导刑事司法系统内的决策。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2026 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk assessment instruments for predicting the risk of sexual recidivism: A meta-analytic comparison of 10 instruments.

Risk assessment instruments are commonly used to predict the probability of recidivism among individuals with criminal histories. This meta-analysis synthesizes evidence on the predictive validity of ten instruments for assessing sexual recidivism risk: MnSOST-R, RM2000/S, RRASOR, SORAG, Static-2002, Static-2002 R, Static-99, Static-99 R, SVR-20, and VRS-SO. It includes 162 studies involving 155,442 individuals, published from 1997 to 2024. Results suggested moderate to high predictive validity for most instruments in predicting sexual recidivism and other outcomes, such as violent, sexual-violent, general, and any recidivism. The VRS-SO showed the highest predictive value for sexual recidivism but did not differ from other tools significantly. The SORAG had the highest predictive value for sexual-violent, general, and any recidivism, significantly outperforming the Static-99. The RRASOR had a moderate predictive value for sexual recidivism, but the lowest effect size for all other outcomes. A moderator analysis revealed that mean interrater reliability and mean offender age significantly affected the instruments' predictive validity. This work represents the largest synthesis of risk assessment instruments for sexual recidivism risk to date. The findings support the viability of all instruments examined in forensic practice. Their predictive validity did, however, overlap considerably, except for the more substantial effects of the VRS-SO and the SORAG, and the weaker effect of the RRASOR. Given the overall moderate predictive validity, the instruments should be used in conjunction with other information to guide decision making within the criminal justice system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

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
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书