首页 > 最新文献

Law and Human Behavior最新文献

英文 中文
What risk assessment tools can be used with men convicted of child sexual exploitation material offenses? Recommendations from a review of current research.
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000594
L Maaike Helmus, Angela W Eke, Michael C Seto

Objective: We aimed to review research on recidivism risk assessment tools with individuals convicted of child sexual exploitation material (CSEM) offenses and make recommendations for use in forensic, correctional, and legal settings.

Hypotheses: Multiple tools would be defensible to use with individuals convicted of CSEM offenses.

Method: We discuss a minimum threshold of predictive accuracy to justify using a risk tool as an improvement on the typical level of accuracy expected from unstructured professional judgment. Beyond this minimum threshold, we offer additional considerations that researchers and practitioners can use in evaluating and selecting risk tools.

Results: We identified nine risk assessment tools with predictive accuracy research on individuals convicted of CSEM offenses: Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool (CPORT), Risk Matrix 2000/Sex (RM2000/S), OASys Sexual Reoffending Predictor-Indecent Images (OSP/I), Static-99R, STABLE-2007, ACUTE-2007, Post Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA), Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision (LSI-OR), and Offender Group Reconviction Scale 3 (OGRS3).

Conclusion: The CPORT, RM2000/S, STABLE-2007, and ACUTE-2007 (in conjunction with the STABLE-2007) are all defensible tools to use for assessing risk of any sexual recidivism or CSEM recidivism, specifically. The OSP/I consists of a single risk factor and considers risk of CSEM recidivism among all individuals convicted of sexual offenses, not only among individuals convicted of CSEM offenses. There is some support for Static-99R and the OGRS3, but they are not recommended options at this time, for different reasons. The PCRA and LSI-OR general recidivism risk tools have some empirical support in predicting general recidivism among CSEM samples (and sexual recidivism for the PCRA), with limitations noted. The use of multiple tools may have value in assessing risk and structuring management in CSEM cases; however, how they are best combined for these samples is still unclear. We expect research in this area to increase rapidly. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

{"title":"What risk assessment tools can be used with men convicted of child sexual exploitation material offenses? Recommendations from a review of current research.","authors":"L Maaike Helmus, Angela W Eke, Michael C Seto","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000594","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to review research on recidivism risk assessment tools with individuals convicted of child sexual exploitation material (CSEM) offenses and make recommendations for use in forensic, correctional, and legal settings.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>Multiple tools would be defensible to use with individuals convicted of CSEM offenses.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We discuss a minimum threshold of predictive accuracy to justify using a risk tool as an improvement on the typical level of accuracy expected from unstructured professional judgment. Beyond this minimum threshold, we offer additional considerations that researchers and practitioners can use in evaluating and selecting risk tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified nine risk assessment tools with predictive accuracy research on individuals convicted of CSEM offenses: Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool (CPORT), Risk Matrix 2000/Sex (RM2000/S), OASys Sexual Reoffending Predictor-Indecent Images (OSP/I), Static-99R, STABLE-2007, ACUTE-2007, Post Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA), Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision (LSI-OR), and Offender Group Reconviction Scale 3 (OGRS3).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CPORT, RM2000/S, STABLE-2007, and ACUTE-2007 (in conjunction with the STABLE-2007) are all defensible tools to use for assessing risk of any sexual recidivism or CSEM recidivism, specifically. The OSP/I consists of a single risk factor and considers risk of CSEM recidivism among all individuals convicted of sexual offenses, not only among individuals convicted of CSEM offenses. There is some support for Static-99R and the OGRS3, but they are not recommended options at this time, for different reasons. The PCRA and LSI-OR general recidivism risk tools have some empirical support in predicting general recidivism among CSEM samples (and sexual recidivism for the PCRA), with limitations noted. The use of multiple tools may have value in assessing risk and structuring management in CSEM cases; however, how they are best combined for these samples is still unclear. We expect research in this area to increase rapidly. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143415988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Police-induced confessions, 2.0: Risk factors and recommendations.
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2025-02-10 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000593
Saul M Kassin, Hayley M D Cleary, Gisli H Gudjonsson, Richard A Leo, Christian A Meissner, Allison D Redlich, Kyle C Scherr

Wrongful conviction databases have shed light on the fact that innocent people can be induced to confess to crimes they did not commit. Drawing on police practices, core principles of psychology, and forensic studies involving multiple methodologies, this article updates the original Scientific Review Paper (Kassin et al., 2010) on the causes, consequences, and remedies for police-induced false confessions. First, we describe the situational and personal risk factors that lead innocent people to confess and the collateral consequences that follow-including the corruptive effects of confession on other evidence, the increased likelihood of conviction at trial, the increased tendency to plead guilty despite innocence, the stigma that shadows false confessors even after exoneration, and the failure of Miranda to serve as a safeguard. Next, we propose the following remedies: (1) mandate the video recording of all suspect interviews and interrogations in their entirety and from a neutral camera angle; (2) require that police have an evidence-based suspicion as a predicate for commencing interrogation; (3) impose limits on confrontational interrogations, namely with regard to detention time, presentations of false evidence, and minimization themes that imply leniency; (4) adopt a science-based model of investigative interviewing; (5) protect youthful suspects and vulnerable adults by mandating the presence of defense attorneys during interrogation, and a suitable appropriate adult where required; (6) shield lay witnesses and forensic examiners from confessions to ensure the independence of their judgments; and (7) abolish contributory clauses from compensation statutes that penalize innocent persons who were induced to confess and/or plead guilty. These recommendations should help to prevent confession-based wrongful convictions and improve the administration of justice for all concerned. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

{"title":"Police-induced confessions, 2.0: Risk factors and recommendations.","authors":"Saul M Kassin, Hayley M D Cleary, Gisli H Gudjonsson, Richard A Leo, Christian A Meissner, Allison D Redlich, Kyle C Scherr","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000593","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000593","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Wrongful conviction databases have shed light on the fact that innocent people can be induced to confess to crimes they did not commit. Drawing on police practices, core principles of psychology, and forensic studies involving multiple methodologies, this article updates the original Scientific Review Paper (Kassin et al., 2010) on the causes, consequences, and remedies for police-induced false confessions. First, we describe the situational and personal risk factors that lead innocent people to confess and the collateral consequences that follow-including the corruptive effects of confession on other evidence, the increased likelihood of conviction at trial, the increased tendency to plead guilty despite innocence, the stigma that shadows false confessors even after exoneration, and the failure of Miranda to serve as a safeguard. Next, we propose the following remedies: (1) mandate the video recording of all suspect interviews and interrogations in their entirety and from a neutral camera angle; (2) require that police have an evidence-based suspicion as a predicate for commencing interrogation; (3) impose limits on confrontational interrogations, namely with regard to detention time, presentations of false evidence, and minimization themes that imply leniency; (4) adopt a science-based model of investigative interviewing; (5) protect youthful suspects and vulnerable adults by mandating the presence of defense attorneys during interrogation, and a suitable appropriate adult where required; (6) shield lay witnesses and forensic examiners from confessions to ensure the independence of their judgments; and (7) abolish contributory clauses from compensation statutes that penalize innocent persons who were induced to confess and/or plead guilty. These recommendations should help to prevent confession-based wrongful convictions and improve the administration of justice for all concerned. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143392285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The state of open science in the field of psychology and law. 开放科学在心理学和法学领域的现状。
IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000592
Melanie B Fessinger,Bradley D McAuliff,Anthony D Perillo
OBJECTIVEWe conducted a survey to catalog the state of open science in the field of psychology and law. We addressed four major questions: (a) How do psycholegal researchers define open science? (b) How do psycholegal researchers perceive open science? (c) How often do psycholegal researchers use various open science practices? and (d) What barriers, if any, do psycholegal researchers face or expect to face when implementing open science practices?HYPOTHESESWe did not make specific hypotheses given the exploratory and descriptive nature of the study.METHODWe surveyed 740 psychology and law researchers (45% faculty, 64% doctoral degree, 66% women, and 85% White/non-Hispanic) about their perceptions of and experiences with open science using a mixed-methods design. They defined open science in their own words, described their opinion of the movement, indicated their experiences with any open science practices in their own work (i.e., preregistration, registered reports, open materials, open data, preprints, open access, and open peer review), and identified any barriers or concerns they faced in implementing open science practices.RESULTSA majority of respondents had wholly positive (60%) or mostly positive (28%) perceptions of open science. Most respondents (58%) had participated in at least one open science practice; however, fewer than half (44%) had an account on the Open Science Framework or similar repository. The most common barriers mentioned about implementing open science practices were concerns about specific practices (42%), lacking knowledge (24%), and requiring more time, effort, or resources (16%).CONCLUSIONSLike those in other disciplines, psychology and law researchers hold generally positive perceptions of open science that do not completely align with their reported use of specific practices. Overcoming perceived barriers to open science will require education, resources, open discourse, and collaborative problem solving. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
目的对心理学和法学领域开放科学现状进行调查。我们讨论了四个主要问题:(a)心理心理学研究者如何定义开放科学?(b)心理研究人员如何看待开放科学?(c)心理法学研究人员多久使用一次各种开放科学实践?(d)心理法学研究者在实施开放科学实践时面临或预期面临哪些障碍(如果有的话)?假设考虑到研究的探索性和描述性,我们没有做出具体的假设。方法采用混合方法设计,调查了740名心理学和法学研究人员(45%为教师,64%为博士学位,66%为女性,85%为白人/非西班牙裔)对开放科学的看法和经验。他们用自己的话定义了开放科学,描述了他们对这一运动的看法,表明了他们在自己的工作中使用任何开放科学实践的经验(即,预注册、注册报告、开放材料、开放数据、预印本、开放获取和开放同行评审),并确定了他们在实施开放科学实践时面临的任何障碍或担忧。结果大多数受访者对开放科学持完全肯定(60%)或大部分肯定(28%)的看法。大多数受访者(58%)至少参加过一次开放科学实践;然而,只有不到一半(44%)的人拥有开放科学框架或类似存储库的帐户。关于实施开放科学实践最常见的障碍是对具体实践的关注(42%),缺乏知识(24%),以及需要更多的时间、精力或资源(16%)。与其他学科的研究人员一样,心理学和法学研究人员对开放科学持普遍积极的看法,但这种看法与他们报告的具体实践并不完全一致。克服开放科学的障碍需要教育、资源、开放话语和协作解决问题。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"The state of open science in the field of psychology and law.","authors":"Melanie B Fessinger,Bradley D McAuliff,Anthony D Perillo","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000592","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000592","url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVEWe conducted a survey to catalog the state of open science in the field of psychology and law. We addressed four major questions: (a) How do psycholegal researchers define open science? (b) How do psycholegal researchers perceive open science? (c) How often do psycholegal researchers use various open science practices? and (d) What barriers, if any, do psycholegal researchers face or expect to face when implementing open science practices?HYPOTHESESWe did not make specific hypotheses given the exploratory and descriptive nature of the study.METHODWe surveyed 740 psychology and law researchers (45% faculty, 64% doctoral degree, 66% women, and 85% White/non-Hispanic) about their perceptions of and experiences with open science using a mixed-methods design. They defined open science in their own words, described their opinion of the movement, indicated their experiences with any open science practices in their own work (i.e., preregistration, registered reports, open materials, open data, preprints, open access, and open peer review), and identified any barriers or concerns they faced in implementing open science practices.RESULTSA majority of respondents had wholly positive (60%) or mostly positive (28%) perceptions of open science. Most respondents (58%) had participated in at least one open science practice; however, fewer than half (44%) had an account on the Open Science Framework or similar repository. The most common barriers mentioned about implementing open science practices were concerns about specific practices (42%), lacking knowledge (24%), and requiring more time, effort, or resources (16%).CONCLUSIONSLike those in other disciplines, psychology and law researchers hold generally positive perceptions of open science that do not completely align with their reported use of specific practices. Overcoming perceived barriers to open science will require education, resources, open discourse, and collaborative problem solving. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142991719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Comparing predictive validity of Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory scores in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadian youth. 比较加拿大土著青年和非土著青年的青年服务水平/案件管理清单得分的预测有效性。
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000578
Michele Peterson-Badali

Objective: There is an increasing recognition of the necessity to establish the predictive validity of risk assessment scores within specific population subgroups, particularly those (including Indigenous peoples) who are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. I compared measures of discrimination and calibration of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) in Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth probationers in Ontario, Canada.

Hypotheses: Compared with non-Indigenous youth, Indigenous youth would have higher risk scores and reoffense rates. The YLS/CMI would predict reoffending and time to reoffense significantly and comparably for Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth, but there would be group difference discrimination (sensitivity, specificity) and calibration (positive predictive value, negative predictive value).

Method: Justice ministry-supplied data on 400 Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth (330 male, 70 female) individually matched on key background variables were analyzed to provide measures of discrimination and calibration of the YLS/CMI, with 3-year recidivism as the primary outcome.

Results: Indigenous youth were assessed at significantly higher risk than non-Indigenous youth (d = .60); 70% of Indigenous youth and 46% of non-Indigenous youth reoffended (ϕ = .24). Overall measures of discrimination (area under the curve) and calibration (logistic regression) were significant and did not differ across groups. Cross-area under the curve results indicated that the YLS/CMI discriminated Indigenous recidivists from non-Indigenous nonrecidivists but differentiated Indigenous nonrecidivists from non-Indigenous recidivists at chance level. In addition, recidivism was underestimated for low-risk Indigenous youth compared with non-Indigenous youth, but specificity was also low; only 28% of Indigenous youth who did not reoffend were assessed as low risk. Results were largely consistent across male and female youth.

Conclusions: Examining subgroup predictive validity using multiple indices provides important information that should inform policy and practice discussions regarding fair use of risk assessment tools. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

目的:越来越多的人认识到,有必要确定特定人群中风险评估分数的预测有效性,特别是那些在刑事司法系统中比例过高的人(包括土著人)。我比较了加拿大安大略省土著和非土著青年缓刑犯的歧视程度和青年服务水平/案件管理量表(YLS/CMI)的校准情况:假设:与非土著青少年相比,土著青少年的风险得分和再犯罪率更高。YLS/CMI对土著青年和非土著青年的再犯罪预测和再犯罪时间预测具有显著性和可比性,但存在群体差异辨别(灵敏度、特异性)和校准(阳性预测值、阴性预测值):对司法部提供的关于 400 名土著和非土著青年(330 名男性,70 名女性)的数据进行了分析,这些数据在主要背景变量上进行了单独匹配,以提供对 YLS/CMI 的区分度和校准度,并以 3 年累犯作为主要结果:原住民青少年被评估的风险明显高于非原住民青少年(d = .60);70% 的原住民青少年和 46% 的非原住民青少年再次犯罪(j = .24)。对歧视(曲线下面积)和校准(逻辑回归)的总体测量结果非常重要,在不同群体之间没有差异。交叉曲线下面积结果表明,YLS/CMI 可以区分土著累犯和非土著非累犯,但对土著非累犯和非土著累犯的区分度仅为几率水平。此外,与非土著青年相比,低风险土著青年的累犯率被低估,但特异性也很低;只有 28% 没有再犯罪的土著青年被评估为低风险。男性和女性青少年的结果基本一致:结论:使用多种指数研究亚群体预测有效性提供了重要信息,应为有关公平使用风险评估工具的政策和实践讨论提供参考。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Comparing predictive validity of Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory scores in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadian youth.","authors":"Michele Peterson-Badali","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000578","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000578","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>There is an increasing recognition of the necessity to establish the predictive validity of risk assessment scores within specific population subgroups, particularly those (including Indigenous peoples) who are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. I compared measures of discrimination and calibration of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) in Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth probationers in Ontario, Canada.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>Compared with non-Indigenous youth, Indigenous youth would have higher risk scores and reoffense rates. The YLS/CMI would predict reoffending and time to reoffense significantly and comparably for Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth, but there would be group difference discrimination (sensitivity, specificity) and calibration (positive predictive value, negative predictive value).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Justice ministry-supplied data on 400 Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth (330 male, 70 female) individually matched on key background variables were analyzed to provide measures of discrimination and calibration of the YLS/CMI, with 3-year recidivism as the primary outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Indigenous youth were assessed at significantly higher risk than non-Indigenous youth (<i>d</i> = .60); 70% of Indigenous youth and 46% of non-Indigenous youth reoffended (ϕ = .24). Overall measures of discrimination (area under the curve) and calibration (logistic regression) were significant and did not differ across groups. Cross-area under the curve results indicated that the YLS/CMI discriminated Indigenous recidivists from non-Indigenous nonrecidivists but differentiated Indigenous nonrecidivists from non-Indigenous recidivists at chance level. In addition, recidivism was underestimated for low-risk Indigenous youth compared with non-Indigenous youth, but specificity was also low; only 28% of Indigenous youth who did not reoffend were assessed as low risk. Results were largely consistent across male and female youth.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Examining subgroup predictive validity using multiple indices provides important information that should inform policy and practice discussions regarding fair use of risk assessment tools. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142607024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Lived experiences of bias in compensation and reintegration associated with false admissions of guilt. 与虚假认罪有关的赔偿和重返社会偏见的亲身经历。
IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000588
Mary Catlin,Talley Bettens,Allison D Redlich,Kyle C Scherr
OBJECTIVESome exonerees receive compensation and aid after being exonerated of their wrongful convictions, and some do not. Looking beyond differences in state statutes, we examined possible reasons for biases in receiving compensation (via statutes or civil claims) and other reintegration services. More specifically, we examined how two unique types of false admission of guilt (i.e., false confessions and false guilty pleas) could be associated with biased outcomes in compensation procurement and reintegration outcomes.HYPOTHESESAlthough we did not have formal hypotheses for this qualitative study, based on the cumulative disadvantage framework (Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020), we anticipated that both types of false admission of guilt would negatively bias exonerees' experience post-exoneration. More specifically, we expected that exonerees whose cases involved at least one type of false admission of guilt would have a more difficult time obtaining compensation and would experience more negative post-exoneration outcomes, compared with exonerees in general.METHODWe conducted in-depth interviews with three samples: (a) exonerees (n = 19), (b) attorneys who had assisted exonerees with post-exoneration compensation claims (n = 15), and (c) innocence advocates who had worked with exonerees (n = 9).RESULTSAcross all samples, interviewees indicated that both forms of false admission of guilt are associated with biases that may influence exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts. Specifically, interviews revealed that (a) false admissions are associated with disadvantages to exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts, as predicted by the cumulative disadvantage framework; (b) under specific circumstances, false admissions are associated with advantages benefiting compensation attempts; and (c) false admissions can be nonapplicable (i.e., irrelevant) to reintegration efforts.CONCLUSIONSTogether, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the role false confessions and false guilty pleas may play post-exoneration. This understanding, derived from those individuals directly involved in the compensation and reintegration processes, is an important step in beginning to right the injustices experienced by those wrongfully convicted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
目标一些被免除冤狱的人在被免除冤狱后获得了赔偿和援助,而一些人则没有。除了各州法规的差异之外,我们还研究了在获得赔偿(通过法规或民事索赔)和其他重返社会服务方面存在偏差的可能原因。更具体地说,我们研究了两种独特的虚假认罪类型(即虚假供述和虚假认罪)如何与获得赔偿和重返社会的偏差结果相关联。假设虽然我们没有为这项定性研究提出正式的假设,但基于累积劣势框架(Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020),我们预计这两种虚假认罪类型都会对被免除刑罚者在免除刑罚后的经历产生负面影响。更具体地说,我们预计,与一般被免除刑罚者相比,其案件至少涉及一种虚假认罪类型的被免除刑罚者将更难获得赔偿,并在被免除刑罚后经历更多负面结果:(结果在所有样本中,受访者都表示,两种形式的假认罪都与可能影响被免除刑罚者的赔偿和重新融入社会工作的偏见有关。具体而言,访谈显示:(a) 正如累积劣势框架所预测的那样,虚假认罪与被免除刑罚者的赔偿和重返社会努力的劣势相关;(b) 在特定情况下,虚假认罪与有利于赔偿努力的优势相关;(c) 虚假认罪可能与重返社会努力无关(即不适用)。这种理解来自那些直接参与赔偿和重返社会过程的人,是开始纠正那些被错误定罪的人所经历的不公正的重要一步。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
{"title":"Lived experiences of bias in compensation and reintegration associated with false admissions of guilt.","authors":"Mary Catlin,Talley Bettens,Allison D Redlich,Kyle C Scherr","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000588","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000588","url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVESome exonerees receive compensation and aid after being exonerated of their wrongful convictions, and some do not. Looking beyond differences in state statutes, we examined possible reasons for biases in receiving compensation (via statutes or civil claims) and other reintegration services. More specifically, we examined how two unique types of false admission of guilt (i.e., false confessions and false guilty pleas) could be associated with biased outcomes in compensation procurement and reintegration outcomes.HYPOTHESESAlthough we did not have formal hypotheses for this qualitative study, based on the cumulative disadvantage framework (Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020), we anticipated that both types of false admission of guilt would negatively bias exonerees' experience post-exoneration. More specifically, we expected that exonerees whose cases involved at least one type of false admission of guilt would have a more difficult time obtaining compensation and would experience more negative post-exoneration outcomes, compared with exonerees in general.METHODWe conducted in-depth interviews with three samples: (a) exonerees (n = 19), (b) attorneys who had assisted exonerees with post-exoneration compensation claims (n = 15), and (c) innocence advocates who had worked with exonerees (n = 9).RESULTSAcross all samples, interviewees indicated that both forms of false admission of guilt are associated with biases that may influence exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts. Specifically, interviews revealed that (a) false admissions are associated with disadvantages to exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts, as predicted by the cumulative disadvantage framework; (b) under specific circumstances, false admissions are associated with advantages benefiting compensation attempts; and (c) false admissions can be nonapplicable (i.e., irrelevant) to reintegration efforts.CONCLUSIONSTogether, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the role false confessions and false guilty pleas may play post-exoneration. This understanding, derived from those individuals directly involved in the compensation and reintegration processes, is an important step in beginning to right the injustices experienced by those wrongfully convicted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142490930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The structured assessment of violence risk in youth demonstrates measurement invariance between Black and White justice-referred youths. 对青少年暴力风险的结构化评估表明,黑人和白人司法推荐青少年之间存在测量不变性。
IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-10-21 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000586
Jonathan R Cohn,Rachael T Perrault,David C Cicero,Gina M Vincent
OBJECTIVEIdentification and implementation of effective methods for reducing racial/ethnic bias and disparities in legal settings are paramount in the United States and other countries. One procedure originally thought to reduce bias in legal decisions is the use of risk assessment instruments, which is now being heavily scrutinized. Measurement invariance, a latent trait technique, is a robust method for assessing one form of bias. Measurement invariance involves determining whether risk items in an instrument appear to be functioning the same between racial or other groups. Thus, the present study examined measurement invariance of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) between non-Latino Black and White youths to examine racial bias.HYPOTHESESWe expected the SAVRY to be invariant (lacking measurement bias) between Black and White youths.METHODThe sample included 687 Black and 361 White youths, and the study used a large, multistate data set of SAVRYs conducted by probation officers. We conducted measurement invariance testing in a series of hierarchical steps including testing configural and scalar invariance.RESULTSThe SAVRY demonstrated scalar invariance (equal thresholds for ratings from "low" to "moderate" and "moderate" to "high") for all items except one-community disorganization.CONCLUSIONSThe findings lend further credibility to the SAVRY, and the structured professional judgment approach, as a method to assess violence risk and case planning needs among youths involved in the legal system. These findings provide more confidence that significant differences in SAVRY risk level or items between Black and White youths are not based in measurement bias, with the exception of the community disorganization item. Potential fixes discussed include eliminating or deemphasizing this item in final risk level ratings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
在美国和其他国家,确定和实施有效的方法来减少法律环境中的种族/民族偏见和差异是至关重要的。最初被认为能减少法律裁决中偏见的一种程序是使用风险评估工具,但这种方法现在正受到严格审查。测量不变性是一种潜在特征技术,是评估一种偏差的可靠方法。测量不变性是指确定工具中的风险项目在种族或其他群体之间的功能是否相同。因此,本研究检验了《青少年暴力风险结构评估》(SAVRY)在非拉丁裔黑人和白人青少年之间的测量不变性,以检验种族偏差。假设我们预计《青少年暴力风险结构评估》在黑人和白人青少年之间具有不变性(不存在测量偏差)。我们通过一系列分层步骤进行了测量不变性测试,包括测试配置不变性和标度不变性。结果SAVRY 除一个项目--社区无组织外,其他所有项目均显示出标度不变性(从 "低 "到 "中 "和从 "中 "到 "高 "的评分阈值相同)。这些发现使人们更加确信,除社区混乱项目外,黑人和白人青少年在 SAVRY 风险水平或项目上的显著差异并非基于测量偏差。所讨论的潜在补救措施包括在最终风险等级评定中取消或不再强调该项目。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
{"title":"The structured assessment of violence risk in youth demonstrates measurement invariance between Black and White justice-referred youths.","authors":"Jonathan R Cohn,Rachael T Perrault,David C Cicero,Gina M Vincent","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000586","url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVEIdentification and implementation of effective methods for reducing racial/ethnic bias and disparities in legal settings are paramount in the United States and other countries. One procedure originally thought to reduce bias in legal decisions is the use of risk assessment instruments, which is now being heavily scrutinized. Measurement invariance, a latent trait technique, is a robust method for assessing one form of bias. Measurement invariance involves determining whether risk items in an instrument appear to be functioning the same between racial or other groups. Thus, the present study examined measurement invariance of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) between non-Latino Black and White youths to examine racial bias.HYPOTHESESWe expected the SAVRY to be invariant (lacking measurement bias) between Black and White youths.METHODThe sample included 687 Black and 361 White youths, and the study used a large, multistate data set of SAVRYs conducted by probation officers. We conducted measurement invariance testing in a series of hierarchical steps including testing configural and scalar invariance.RESULTSThe SAVRY demonstrated scalar invariance (equal thresholds for ratings from \"low\" to \"moderate\" and \"moderate\" to \"high\") for all items except one-community disorganization.CONCLUSIONSThe findings lend further credibility to the SAVRY, and the structured professional judgment approach, as a method to assess violence risk and case planning needs among youths involved in the legal system. These findings provide more confidence that significant differences in SAVRY risk level or items between Black and White youths are not based in measurement bias, with the exception of the community disorganization item. Potential fixes discussed include eliminating or deemphasizing this item in final risk level ratings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142486262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Essentialism and the criminal legal system. 本质论与刑事法律制度。
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-23 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000576
Madeleine Millar, Colleen M Berryessa, Cynthia Willis-Esqueda, Jason A Cantone, Deborah Goldfarb, Melissa de Vel-Palumbo, Anthony D Perillo, Terrill O Taylor, Laurie T Becker

Objective: Existing literature has yet to conceptualize and consolidate research on psychological essentialism and its relation to the criminal legal system, particularly in terms of explaining how individuals with justice involvement have been and could be differentially impacted across contexts. This article explores essentialism in the criminal legal system, including its potential consequences for inequity.

Method: We review research on essentialism as a psychological construct, its common applications to different social categorizations, and its trickle-down effects within the criminal legal system.

Results: Empirical work suggests that biases stemming from essentialism have the potential to severely affect individuals within the criminal legal system. Beyond assigning immutable properties across social groups, essentialism can give rise to biased attributions of responsibility and blame and affect decisions and behavior within three core domains of the criminal legal system: jury decision making, sentencing decisions, and public support for punitive policies.

Conclusions: We propose future policy recommendations to mitigate the adverse effects of essentialism in the criminal legal system, focusing especially on how using and adopting person-first language (focusing on people before characteristics) across society and policy can help to combat bias across criminal legal domains. Future research is needed on how to best address the adverse effects of essentialism and its biasing effects in the criminal legal system, as well as to examine the effects of essentialism in different legal contexts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

目的:现有文献尚未对心理本质主义及其与刑事法律体系的关系进行概念化和整合研究,尤其是在解释司法参与个体在不同环境下如何受到和可能受到不同影响方面。本文探讨了刑事法律体系中的本质主义,包括其对不公平的潜在后果:我们回顾了本质主义作为一种心理结构的研究、其在不同社会分类中的常见应用,以及其在刑事法律体系中的涓滴效应:实证研究表明,本质主义产生的偏见有可能严重影响刑事法律体系中的个人。除了在不同社会群体之间分配不可改变的属性之外,本质主义还可能导致有偏见的责任和指责归因,并影响刑事法律体系三个核心领域内的决策和行为:陪审团决策、量刑决策以及公众对惩罚性政策的支持:我们提出了未来的政策建议,以减轻本质主义在刑事法律体系中的不利影响,尤其关注如何在整个社会和政策中使用和采用以人为本的语言(先关注人,后关注特征)来帮助消除刑事法律领域中的偏见。未来需要研究如何最有效地解决本质主义的负面影响及其在刑事法律体系中的偏见效应,并研究本质主义在不同法律环境中的影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
{"title":"Essentialism and the criminal legal system.","authors":"Madeleine Millar, Colleen M Berryessa, Cynthia Willis-Esqueda, Jason A Cantone, Deborah Goldfarb, Melissa de Vel-Palumbo, Anthony D Perillo, Terrill O Taylor, Laurie T Becker","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000576","DOIUrl":"10.1037/lhb0000576","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Existing literature has yet to conceptualize and consolidate research on psychological essentialism and its relation to the criminal legal system, particularly in terms of explaining how individuals with justice involvement have been and could be differentially impacted across contexts. This article explores essentialism in the criminal legal system, including its potential consequences for inequity.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We review research on essentialism as a psychological construct, its common applications to different social categorizations, and its trickle-down effects within the criminal legal system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Empirical work suggests that biases stemming from essentialism have the potential to severely affect individuals within the criminal legal system. Beyond assigning immutable properties across social groups, essentialism can give rise to biased attributions of responsibility and blame and affect decisions and behavior within three core domains of the criminal legal system: jury decision making, sentencing decisions, and public support for punitive policies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We propose future policy recommendations to mitigate the adverse effects of essentialism in the criminal legal system, focusing especially on how using and adopting person-first language (focusing on people before characteristics) across society and policy can help to combat bias across criminal legal domains. Future research is needed on how to best address the adverse effects of essentialism and its biasing effects in the criminal legal system, as well as to examine the effects of essentialism in different legal contexts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"597-612"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142298882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The structured assessment of violence risk in youth demonstrates measurement invariance between Black and White justice-referred youths. 对青少年暴力风险的结构化评估表明,黑人和白人司法推荐青少年之间存在测量不变性。
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-21 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000586
Jonathan R Cohn, Rachael T Perrault, David C Cicero, Gina M Vincent

Objective: Identification and implementation of effective methods for reducing racial/ethnic bias and disparities in legal settings are paramount in the United States and other countries. One procedure originally thought to reduce bias in legal decisions is the use of risk assessment instruments, which is now being heavily scrutinized. Measurement invariance, a latent trait technique, is a robust method for assessing one form of bias. Measurement invariance involves determining whether risk items in an instrument appear to be functioning the same between racial or other groups. Thus, the present study examined measurement invariance of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) between non-Latino Black and White youths to examine racial bias.

Hypotheses: We expected the SAVRY to be invariant (lacking measurement bias) between Black and White youths.

Method: The sample included 687 Black and 361 White youths, and the study used a large, multistate data set of SAVRYs conducted by probation officers. We conducted measurement invariance testing in a series of hierarchical steps including testing configural and scalar invariance.

Results: The SAVRY demonstrated scalar invariance (equal thresholds for ratings from "low" to "moderate" and "moderate" to "high") for all items except one-community disorganization.

Conclusions: The findings lend further credibility to the SAVRY, and the structured professional judgment approach, as a method to assess violence risk and case planning needs among youths involved in the legal system. These findings provide more confidence that significant differences in SAVRY risk level or items between Black and White youths are not based in measurement bias, with the exception of the community disorganization item. Potential fixes discussed include eliminating or deemphasizing this item in final risk level ratings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

目标:在美国和其他国家,确定和实施有效方法以减少法律环境中的种族/民族偏见和差异至关重要。最初被认为可以减少法律裁决中偏见的一种程序是使用风险评估工具,但这种方法目前正受到严格审查。测量不变性是一种潜在特征技术,是评估一种偏差的可靠方法。测量不变性包括确定工具中的风险项目在不同种族或其他群体之间的功能是否相同。因此,本研究考察了 "青少年暴力风险结构评估"(SAVRY)在非拉丁裔黑人和白人青少年之间的测量不变性,以检验种族偏见:我们预期 SAVRY 在黑人和白人青少年之间具有不变性(不存在测量偏差):样本包括 687 名黑人青年和 361 名白人青年,研究使用了缓刑监督官进行的 SAVRY 的大型多州数据集。我们通过一系列分层步骤进行了测量不变性测试,包括测试配置不变性和标度不变性:结果:SAVRY 除一个项目--社区无组织外,其他项目均表现出标度不变性(从 "低 "到 "中 "和从 "中 "到 "高 "的评分阈值相同):研究结果进一步证实了 SAVRY 和结构化专业判断方法的可信性,可作为评估涉法青少年的暴力风险和案件规划需求的方法。这些发现使人们更加确信,除社区混乱项目外,黑人和白人青少年在 SAVRY 风险水平或项目上的显著差异并非基于测量偏差。所讨论的潜在补救措施包括在最终风险等级评定中取消或不再强调该项目。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
{"title":"The structured assessment of violence risk in youth demonstrates measurement invariance between Black and White justice-referred youths.","authors":"Jonathan R Cohn, Rachael T Perrault, David C Cicero, Gina M Vincent","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000586","DOIUrl":"10.1037/lhb0000586","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Identification and implementation of effective methods for reducing racial/ethnic bias and disparities in legal settings are paramount in the United States and other countries. One procedure originally thought to reduce bias in legal decisions is the use of risk assessment instruments, which is now being heavily scrutinized. Measurement invariance, a latent trait technique, is a robust method for assessing one form of bias. Measurement invariance involves determining whether risk items in an instrument appear to be functioning the same between racial or other groups. Thus, the present study examined measurement invariance of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) between non-Latino Black and White youths to examine racial bias.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We expected the SAVRY to be invariant (lacking measurement bias) between Black and White youths.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample included 687 Black and 361 White youths, and the study used a large, multistate data set of SAVRYs conducted by probation officers. We conducted measurement invariance testing in a series of hierarchical steps including testing configural and scalar invariance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SAVRY demonstrated scalar invariance (equal thresholds for ratings from \"low\" to \"moderate\" and \"moderate\" to \"high\") for all items except one-community disorganization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings lend further credibility to the SAVRY, and the structured professional judgment approach, as a method to assess violence risk and case planning needs among youths involved in the legal system. These findings provide more confidence that significant differences in SAVRY risk level or items between Black and White youths are not based in measurement bias, with the exception of the community disorganization item. Potential fixes discussed include eliminating or deemphasizing this item in final risk level ratings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"415-426"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142477953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Do risk measure scores and diagnoses predict evaluator opinions in sexually violent predator cases? It depends on the evaluator. 风险测量评分和诊断是否能预测评估员在性暴力犯罪案件中的意见?这取决于评估者。
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-12 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000561
Marcus T Boccaccini, Daniel C Murrie, Paige B Harris

Objective: Field research increasingly reveals that forensic evaluators are not interchangeable. Instead, they tend to differ in their patterns of forensic opinions, in ways that likely reflect something about themselves, not just the persons evaluated. This study used data from sexually violent predator (SVP) evaluations to examine whether evaluator differences in making intermediate decisions (e.g., instrument scoring, assigning diagnoses) might explain their different patterns of final opinions.

Hypotheses: Although this study was generally exploratory and not strongly hypothesis driven, we expected that there might be evidence for a simple form of bias in which some evaluators would be more likely than others to consistently "find" indications of SVP status (i.e., consistently assigning higher risk scores and more SVP-relevant diagnoses) and, therefore, be more likely to find behavioral abnormality, the legal construct qualifying someone for commitment as an SVP.

Method: The study used data from 745 SVP evaluations conducted by 10 different evaluators who were assigned cases from the same referral stream. Potential evaluator difference variables included behavioral abnormality opinions, paraphilia and antisocial personality disorder diagnoses, and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised and Static-99 scores.

Results: Evaluator differences explained a statistically significant (p < .001) amount of variance in behavioral abnormality opinions (17%), paraphilia diagnoses (7%), and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised scores (16%). Contrary to our expectation of a simple tendency for some evaluators to find all indicators of SVP status more often than others, evaluators differed in the ways that underlying diagnoses and scores corresponded with their conclusions. The overall pattern was one in which different evaluators appeared to base their final opinions on different factors.

Conclusions: Findings reveal further evidence of substantial forensic evaluator differences in patterns of assigning instrument scores and reaching forensic conclusions. But these findings are the first to also reveal wide variability in their patterns of reaching forensic conclusions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

目的:实地研究日益表明,法医鉴定人员并不是可以互换的。相反,他们往往在法医意见的模式上存在差异,这种差异很可能反映了他们自身的一些情况,而不仅仅是被评估者的情况。本研究使用了来自性暴力犯罪者(SVP)评估的数据,以研究评估者在做出中间决定(如工具评分、指定诊断)时的差异是否可以解释他们最终意见的不同模式:尽管这项研究总体上是探索性的,并没有强烈的假设驱动,但我们预计可能会有证据表明存在一种简单形式的偏差,即一些评估者比其他评估者更有可能持续 "发现 "SVP 状态的迹象(即持续给予更高的风险评分和更多与 SVP 相关的诊断),因此更有可能发现行为异常,而行为异常是使某人有资格作为 SVP 进行收容的法律构造:研究使用了由 10 位不同评估员进行的 745 次 SVP 评估的数据,这些评估员分配的案例来自同一转介流程。潜在的评估者差异变量包括行为异常意见、性变态和反社会人格障碍诊断、精神变态检查表-修订版和 Static-99 评分:评估者差异可以解释行为异常意见(17%)、性变态诊断(7%)和精神病态检查表-修订版评分(16%)的显著差异(p < .001)。与我们所预期的一些评估者比其他评估者更经常地发现 SVP 状态的所有指标这一简单趋势相反,评估者在基本诊断和分数与他们的结论的对应方式上存在差异。总的来说,不同的评估人员似乎根据不同的因素得出最终意见:研究结果进一步证明,法医评估员在给仪器打分和得出法医结论的模式上存在很大差异。但是,这些研究结果也首次揭示了他们在得出法医鉴定结论的模式方面存在的巨大差异。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Do risk measure scores and diagnoses predict evaluator opinions in sexually violent predator cases? It depends on the evaluator.","authors":"Marcus T Boccaccini, Daniel C Murrie, Paige B Harris","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000561","DOIUrl":"10.1037/lhb0000561","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Field research increasingly reveals that forensic evaluators are not interchangeable. Instead, they tend to differ in their patterns of forensic opinions, in ways that likely reflect something about themselves, not just the persons evaluated. This study used data from sexually violent predator (SVP) evaluations to examine whether evaluator differences in making intermediate decisions (e.g., instrument scoring, assigning diagnoses) might explain their different patterns of final opinions.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>Although this study was generally exploratory and not strongly hypothesis driven, we expected that there might be evidence for a simple form of bias in which some evaluators would be more likely than others to consistently \"find\" indications of SVP status (i.e., consistently assigning higher risk scores and more SVP-relevant diagnoses) and, therefore, be more likely to find behavioral abnormality, the legal construct qualifying someone for commitment as an SVP.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study used data from 745 SVP evaluations conducted by 10 different evaluators who were assigned cases from the same referral stream. Potential evaluator difference variables included behavioral abnormality opinions, paraphilia and antisocial personality disorder diagnoses, and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised and Static-99 scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Evaluator differences explained a statistically significant (<i>p</i> < .001) amount of variance in behavioral abnormality opinions (17%), paraphilia diagnoses (7%), and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised scores (16%). Contrary to our expectation of a simple tendency for some evaluators to find all indicators of SVP status more often than others, evaluators differed in the ways that underlying diagnoses and scores corresponded with their conclusions. The overall pattern was one in which different evaluators appeared to base their final opinions on different factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings reveal further evidence of substantial forensic evaluator differences in patterns of assigning instrument scores and reaching forensic conclusions. But these findings are the first to also reveal wide variability in their patterns of reaching forensic conclusions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"531-544"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141972109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Implicit bias training for police: Evaluating impacts on enforcement disparities. 对警察进行隐性偏见培训:评估对执法差异的影响。
IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-12 DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000568
Robert E Worden, Cynthia J Najdowski, Sarah J McLean, Kenan M Worden, Nicholas Corsaro, Hannah Cochran, Robin S Engel

Objective: The purpose of this study was to estimate the behavioral impacts of training police officers in implicit bias awareness and management.

Hypotheses: Training police in implicit bias reduces racial and ethnic disparities in stops, arrests, summonses, frisks, searches, and/or use of force.

Method: A cluster randomized controlled trial using the stepped wedge design was applied to 14,471 officers in the New York City Police Department, with a 1-day training delivered to clusters of police commands between May 2018 and April 2019 and outcomes measured with police records of individual events from April 2018 to May 2019. Police records were supplemented with survey data on 1,973 officers matched to administrative data. For each type of enforcement action, the likelihood that the action involved or was taken against Black or Hispanic suspects, respectively, relative to White suspects was estimated, controlling for potential confounders. Additional analysis allowed for estimating training effects of different magnitudes for Black, Hispanic, and White officers and for officers with greater motivation to act without prejudice or greater concern about discrimination.

Results: None of the estimated training effects achieved statistical significance at the .05 level.

Conclusions: Isolated and weak evidence of behavioral impacts of the training was detected. Several explanations for the null findings are considered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

研究目的本研究的目的是估计对警察进行隐性偏见意识和管理培训对行为的影响:假设:对警察进行隐性偏见培训可减少拦截、逮捕、传唤、搜身、搜查和/或使用武力方面的种族和民族差异:在 2018 年 5 月至 2019 年 4 月期间,对纽约市警察局的 14471 名警察进行了为期 1 天的培训,并通过 2018 年 4 月至 2019 年 5 月期间警方对个别事件的记录来衡量培训结果。警方记录由与行政数据相匹配的 1,973 名警官的调查数据作为补充。对于每种类型的执法行动,在控制潜在混杂因素的情况下,分别估算了相对于白人嫌疑人,执法行动涉及或针对黑人或西班牙裔嫌疑人的可能性。通过附加分析,还可以估算出黑人、西班牙裔和白人警官的不同培训效果,以及对无偏见行动有更大积极性或对歧视有更大担忧的警官的不同培训效果:结果:估计的培训效果均未达到 0.05 的统计显著性水平:结论:发现了培训对行为产生影响的孤立而微弱的证据。结论:发现了培训对行为产生影响的孤立而微弱的证据,考虑了对无效结果的几种解释。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Implicit bias training for police: Evaluating impacts on enforcement disparities.","authors":"Robert E Worden, Cynthia J Najdowski, Sarah J McLean, Kenan M Worden, Nicholas Corsaro, Hannah Cochran, Robin S Engel","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000568","DOIUrl":"10.1037/lhb0000568","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to estimate the behavioral impacts of training police officers in implicit bias awareness and management.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>Training police in implicit bias reduces racial and ethnic disparities in stops, arrests, summonses, frisks, searches, and/or use of force.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A cluster randomized controlled trial using the stepped wedge design was applied to 14,471 officers in the New York City Police Department, with a 1-day training delivered to clusters of police commands between May 2018 and April 2019 and outcomes measured with police records of individual events from April 2018 to May 2019. Police records were supplemented with survey data on 1,973 officers matched to administrative data. For each type of enforcement action, the likelihood that the action involved or was taken against Black or Hispanic suspects, respectively, relative to White suspects was estimated, controlling for potential confounders. Additional analysis allowed for estimating training effects of different magnitudes for Black, Hispanic, and White officers and for officers with greater motivation to act without prejudice or greater concern about discrimination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>None of the estimated training effects achieved statistical significance at the .05 level.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Isolated and weak evidence of behavioral impacts of the training was detected. Several explanations for the null findings are considered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"338-355"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141972110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Law and Human Behavior
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1