动态风险和不同的缓刑影响:检查年龄,种族和性别作为反应性因素。

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Ashlee R Barnes-Lee, Marva V Goodson, Nordia A Scott
{"title":"动态风险和不同的缓刑影响:检查年龄,种族和性别作为反应性因素。","authors":"Ashlee R Barnes-Lee,&nbsp;Marva V Goodson,&nbsp;Nordia A Scott","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Juvenile courts that apply the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model should periodically reassess youths and observe reductions in risk. There is a gap in knowledge concerning the reliable implementation of the <i>specific responsivity principle</i> of the RNR model, which emphasizes considering youths' unique characteristics to support rehabilitation success. In the present study, we aimed to identify whether specific responsivity factors (i.e., age, gender, and race/ethnicity) and supervision experiences (i.e., time under supervision and participation in judicial programs) effect changes in risk scores.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We anticipated that (a) time under supervision would be negatively associated with dynamic risk, (b) participation in judicial programs would be positively associated with dynamic risk, and (c) race/ethnicity (not age or gender) would moderate the relationship between supervision experiences and dynamic risk.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample consisted of 360 youths who served probation in a midwestern court. We tested multilevel models to determine differential impacts of supervision experiences on dynamic risk across responsivity factors, controlling for initial risk scores and offense seriousness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Partially confirming our hypotheses, results showed that spending longer periods on probation and being referred to judicial programs were both associated with negative changes in risk scores (i.e., risk scores increased over time). There was no effect of age or gender; however, race/ethnicity predicted dynamic risk. The average change in risk score was 1.81 units lower for historically marginalized youths (<i>b</i> = -1.82, <i>SE</i> = 0.68, <i>p</i> = .01), and the magnitude of the effect was significantly driven by multiracial youths. As expected, race/ethnicity moderated the relationship between time on probation and changes in risk scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings indicate that improper application of the specific responsivity principle of the RNR model may diminish desired rehabilitation outcomes. Closing this theory-to-practice gap would improve court supervision experiences for all youths. In future studies, researchers should continue investigating specific responsivity factors and the dynamic validity of risk assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"47 4","pages":"526-537"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dynamic risk and differential impacts of probation: Examining age, race, and gender as responsivity factors.\",\"authors\":\"Ashlee R Barnes-Lee,&nbsp;Marva V Goodson,&nbsp;Nordia A Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/lhb0000534\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Juvenile courts that apply the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model should periodically reassess youths and observe reductions in risk. There is a gap in knowledge concerning the reliable implementation of the <i>specific responsivity principle</i> of the RNR model, which emphasizes considering youths' unique characteristics to support rehabilitation success. In the present study, we aimed to identify whether specific responsivity factors (i.e., age, gender, and race/ethnicity) and supervision experiences (i.e., time under supervision and participation in judicial programs) effect changes in risk scores.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We anticipated that (a) time under supervision would be negatively associated with dynamic risk, (b) participation in judicial programs would be positively associated with dynamic risk, and (c) race/ethnicity (not age or gender) would moderate the relationship between supervision experiences and dynamic risk.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample consisted of 360 youths who served probation in a midwestern court. We tested multilevel models to determine differential impacts of supervision experiences on dynamic risk across responsivity factors, controlling for initial risk scores and offense seriousness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Partially confirming our hypotheses, results showed that spending longer periods on probation and being referred to judicial programs were both associated with negative changes in risk scores (i.e., risk scores increased over time). There was no effect of age or gender; however, race/ethnicity predicted dynamic risk. The average change in risk score was 1.81 units lower for historically marginalized youths (<i>b</i> = -1.82, <i>SE</i> = 0.68, <i>p</i> = .01), and the magnitude of the effect was significantly driven by multiracial youths. As expected, race/ethnicity moderated the relationship between time on probation and changes in risk scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings indicate that improper application of the specific responsivity principle of the RNR model may diminish desired rehabilitation outcomes. Closing this theory-to-practice gap would improve court supervision experiences for all youths. In future studies, researchers should continue investigating specific responsivity factors and the dynamic validity of risk assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"47 4\",\"pages\":\"526-537\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"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/lhb0000534\",\"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/lhb0000534","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

摘要

目的:应用风险-需求-反应(RNR)模型的少年法院应定期重新评估青少年并观察风险的降低。关于RNR模型的具体响应原则的可靠实施存在知识空白,该模型强调考虑青少年的独特特征以支持康复成功。在本研究中,我们旨在确定特定的反应性因素(如年龄、性别和种族/民族)和监督经历(如被监督的时间和参与司法项目)是否会影响风险评分的变化。假设:我们预计(a)监管时间与动态风险负相关,(b)参与司法项目与动态风险正相关,(c)种族/民族(不是年龄或性别)会调节监管经历与动态风险之间的关系。方法:样本包括360名在中西部法院服缓刑的青少年。在控制初始风险评分和犯罪严重程度的情况下,我们测试了多层模型来确定监管经历对动态风险的不同影响。结果:部分证实了我们的假设,结果表明,在缓刑期间花费更长的时间和被提交司法程序都与风险评分的负变化相关(即风险评分随着时间的推移而增加)。没有年龄和性别的影响;然而,种族/民族预测动态风险。历史边缘化青年的风险评分平均变化低1.81个单位(b = -1.82, SE = 0.68, p = 0.01),且多种族青年的影响程度显著提高。正如预期的那样,种族/民族调节了缓刑时间和风险分数变化之间的关系。结论:研究结果表明,RNR模型的特异反应性原则应用不当可能会降低预期的康复效果。缩小这种理论到实践的差距将改善所有青少年的法庭监督经验。在未来的研究中,研究者应继续研究具体的反应性因素和风险评估的动态效度。(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。
Dynamic risk and differential impacts of probation: Examining age, race, and gender as responsivity factors.

Objective: Juvenile courts that apply the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model should periodically reassess youths and observe reductions in risk. There is a gap in knowledge concerning the reliable implementation of the specific responsivity principle of the RNR model, which emphasizes considering youths' unique characteristics to support rehabilitation success. In the present study, we aimed to identify whether specific responsivity factors (i.e., age, gender, and race/ethnicity) and supervision experiences (i.e., time under supervision and participation in judicial programs) effect changes in risk scores.

Hypotheses: We anticipated that (a) time under supervision would be negatively associated with dynamic risk, (b) participation in judicial programs would be positively associated with dynamic risk, and (c) race/ethnicity (not age or gender) would moderate the relationship between supervision experiences and dynamic risk.

Method: The sample consisted of 360 youths who served probation in a midwestern court. We tested multilevel models to determine differential impacts of supervision experiences on dynamic risk across responsivity factors, controlling for initial risk scores and offense seriousness.

Results: Partially confirming our hypotheses, results showed that spending longer periods on probation and being referred to judicial programs were both associated with negative changes in risk scores (i.e., risk scores increased over time). There was no effect of age or gender; however, race/ethnicity predicted dynamic risk. The average change in risk score was 1.81 units lower for historically marginalized youths (b = -1.82, SE = 0.68, p = .01), and the magnitude of the effect was significantly driven by multiracial youths. As expected, race/ethnicity moderated the relationship between time on probation and changes in risk scores.

Conclusions: Findings indicate that improper application of the specific responsivity principle of the RNR model may diminish desired rehabilitation outcomes. Closing this theory-to-practice gap would improve court supervision experiences for all youths. In future studies, researchers should continue investigating specific responsivity factors and the dynamic validity of risk assessment. (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