Pedro J. Horcajo-Gil, Víctor Dujo-López, José Manuel Andreu-Rodríguez, Marta Marín-Rullán
{"title":"Valoración y Gestión del Riesgo de Reincidencia Delictiva en Menores Infractores: una Revisión de Instrumentos","authors":"Pedro J. Horcajo-Gil, Víctor Dujo-López, José Manuel Andreu-Rodríguez, Marta Marín-Rullán","doi":"10.5093/APJ2018A15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both theoretical and methodological approaches were gathered based on the risk assessment and management of criminal recidivism among young offenders. A systematic review of the instruments most often used to assess and manage the risk of recidivism was carried out. PsycINFO and Google Scholar were used as s. The instruments chosen were based on adequate levels of predictive validity and those whose aspects were relevant. Fifteen instruments were found: three actuarial scales –JSORRAT-II, Static-99, and PCL-YV– and twelve structured clinical judgment measures –YLS/CMI, SAVRY, SIED-AJ, EARL-20B, EARL-21G, J-SOAP-II, ERASOR 2.0, MEGA, Asset, ARMIDILO-S, DASH-13, and PREVI-A. There is a great variability in the results found in terms of predictive validity when different studies with the same tool are compared. The adequacy of an instrument to the judicial context must be based on values of predictive validity (AUC) between .70-.75.","PeriodicalId":44109,"journal":{"name":"Anuario De Psicologia Juridica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anuario De Psicologia Juridica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5093/APJ2018A15","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
Both theoretical and methodological approaches were gathered based on the risk assessment and management of criminal recidivism among young offenders. A systematic review of the instruments most often used to assess and manage the risk of recidivism was carried out. PsycINFO and Google Scholar were used as s. The instruments chosen were based on adequate levels of predictive validity and those whose aspects were relevant. Fifteen instruments were found: three actuarial scales –JSORRAT-II, Static-99, and PCL-YV– and twelve structured clinical judgment measures –YLS/CMI, SAVRY, SIED-AJ, EARL-20B, EARL-21G, J-SOAP-II, ERASOR 2.0, MEGA, Asset, ARMIDILO-S, DASH-13, and PREVI-A. There is a great variability in the results found in terms of predictive validity when different studies with the same tool are compared. The adequacy of an instrument to the judicial context must be based on values of predictive validity (AUC) between .70-.75.