Static-99R在不同种族/民族群体中的预测准确性:一项荟萃分析。

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Simran Ahmed, Seung C Lee, L Maaike Helmus
{"title":"Static-99R在不同种族/民族群体中的预测准确性:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Simran Ahmed,&nbsp;Seung C Lee,&nbsp;L Maaike Helmus","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The overrepresentation of numerous racial/ethnic groups in the criminal legal system warrants examination of the cross-cultural applicability of risk assessment tools. Static-99R is a tool used in diverse countries to assess sexual recidivism risk. We conducted a meta-analysis on the predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>No hypotheses were made regarding discrimination, given that past research could support hypotheses of differential or equivalent accuracy. We hypothesized that Indigenous individuals would score higher on Static-99R than non-Indigenous or White individuals.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Our search identified 18 eligible documents (from 17 distinct studies) with 41 nonoverlapping effect sizes. These 17 studies examined the predictive accuracy of Static-99R with racially/ethnically diverse men charged with or convicted of sexually motivated offenses. We report analyses using both fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Indigenous and Black individuals scored significantly higher on Static-99R than their non-Indigenous or White counterparts, with small effect sizes. For discrimination, area under the curve (AUC) values were generally moderate-to-large and statistically significant for all groups in both fixed-effect and random-effects analyses. Within-study subgroup analyses indicated significantly lower accuracy for Indigenous and Hispanic individuals compared with White/non-Indigenous samples (though for Hispanic individuals, this finding was significant only in the fixed-effect analyses). No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between White and Black individuals. Static-99R significantly predicted recidivism with large effect sizes across two samples of Asian individuals. Two studies supported calibration across Black, White, and Hispanic individuals. Two studies examining calibration of Static-99R for Indigenous individuals had mixed findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given a small number of studies and limitations with both the fixed- and random-effects analyses, readers should interpret findings regarding Hispanic individuals with caution. The analyses clearly found significant but lower accuracy for Static-99R with Indigenous individuals. Potential reasons for this differential accuracy are discussed, along with limitations of the meta-analysis and suggestions for research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"47 1","pages":"275-291"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups: A meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Simran Ahmed,&nbsp;Seung C Lee,&nbsp;L Maaike Helmus\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/lhb0000517\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The overrepresentation of numerous racial/ethnic groups in the criminal legal system warrants examination of the cross-cultural applicability of risk assessment tools. Static-99R is a tool used in diverse countries to assess sexual recidivism risk. We conducted a meta-analysis on the predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>No hypotheses were made regarding discrimination, given that past research could support hypotheses of differential or equivalent accuracy. We hypothesized that Indigenous individuals would score higher on Static-99R than non-Indigenous or White individuals.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Our search identified 18 eligible documents (from 17 distinct studies) with 41 nonoverlapping effect sizes. These 17 studies examined the predictive accuracy of Static-99R with racially/ethnically diverse men charged with or convicted of sexually motivated offenses. We report analyses using both fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Indigenous and Black individuals scored significantly higher on Static-99R than their non-Indigenous or White counterparts, with small effect sizes. For discrimination, area under the curve (AUC) values were generally moderate-to-large and statistically significant for all groups in both fixed-effect and random-effects analyses. Within-study subgroup analyses indicated significantly lower accuracy for Indigenous and Hispanic individuals compared with White/non-Indigenous samples (though for Hispanic individuals, this finding was significant only in the fixed-effect analyses). No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between White and Black individuals. Static-99R significantly predicted recidivism with large effect sizes across two samples of Asian individuals. Two studies supported calibration across Black, White, and Hispanic individuals. Two studies examining calibration of Static-99R for Indigenous individuals had mixed findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given a small number of studies and limitations with both the fixed- and random-effects analyses, readers should interpret findings regarding Hispanic individuals with caution. The analyses clearly found significant but lower accuracy for Static-99R with Indigenous individuals. Potential reasons for this differential accuracy are discussed, along with limitations of the meta-analysis and suggestions for research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"275-291\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000517\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000517","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: 2

摘要

目的:在刑事法律体系中,众多种族/民族群体的过度代表性要求对风险评估工具的跨文化适用性进行审查。Static-99R是许多国家用来评估性再犯风险的工具。我们对Static-99R在不同种族/民族群体中的预测准确性进行了荟萃分析。假设:没有关于歧视的假设,因为过去的研究可以支持差分或等效精度的假设。我们假设土著个体在Static-99R上的得分高于非土著个体或白人个体。方法:我们的搜索确定了18个符合条件的文献(来自17个不同的研究),41个不重叠的效应量。这17项研究检验了Static-99R对被指控或被判有性犯罪的不同种族/民族男性的预测准确性。我们报告了固定效应和随机效应的meta分析。结果:土著和黑人个体的Static-99R得分显著高于非土著和白人个体,但效应量较小。对于判别,在固定效应和随机效应分析中,所有组的曲线下面积(AUC)值一般为中等到较大,且具有统计学意义。研究内亚组分析表明,与白人/非土著样本相比,土著和西班牙裔个体的准确性显着降低(尽管对于西班牙裔个体,这一发现仅在固定效应分析中显着)。在白人和黑人个体之间,准确率没有统计学上的显著差异。Static-99R在两个亚洲个体样本中显著预测再犯,且具有较大的效应量。两项研究支持黑人、白人和西班牙裔个体之间的校准。两项研究检验了土著人的Static-99R校准,结果好坏参半。结论:考虑到少量的研究和固定效应和随机效应分析的局限性,读者应该谨慎解释有关西班牙裔个体的研究结果。分析清楚地发现,Static-99R在土著个体中的准确性显著但较低。本文讨论了造成这种准确性差异的潜在原因,以及元分析的局限性和对研究和实践的建议。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 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。
Predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups: A meta-analysis.

Objective: The overrepresentation of numerous racial/ethnic groups in the criminal legal system warrants examination of the cross-cultural applicability of risk assessment tools. Static-99R is a tool used in diverse countries to assess sexual recidivism risk. We conducted a meta-analysis on the predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups.

Hypotheses: No hypotheses were made regarding discrimination, given that past research could support hypotheses of differential or equivalent accuracy. We hypothesized that Indigenous individuals would score higher on Static-99R than non-Indigenous or White individuals.

Method: Our search identified 18 eligible documents (from 17 distinct studies) with 41 nonoverlapping effect sizes. These 17 studies examined the predictive accuracy of Static-99R with racially/ethnically diverse men charged with or convicted of sexually motivated offenses. We report analyses using both fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis.

Results: Indigenous and Black individuals scored significantly higher on Static-99R than their non-Indigenous or White counterparts, with small effect sizes. For discrimination, area under the curve (AUC) values were generally moderate-to-large and statistically significant for all groups in both fixed-effect and random-effects analyses. Within-study subgroup analyses indicated significantly lower accuracy for Indigenous and Hispanic individuals compared with White/non-Indigenous samples (though for Hispanic individuals, this finding was significant only in the fixed-effect analyses). No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between White and Black individuals. Static-99R significantly predicted recidivism with large effect sizes across two samples of Asian individuals. Two studies supported calibration across Black, White, and Hispanic individuals. Two studies examining calibration of Static-99R for Indigenous individuals had mixed findings.

Conclusions: Given a small number of studies and limitations with both the fixed- and random-effects analyses, readers should interpret findings regarding Hispanic individuals with caution. The analyses clearly found significant but lower accuracy for Static-99R with Indigenous individuals. Potential reasons for this differential accuracy are discussed, along with limitations of the meta-analysis and suggestions for research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 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
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