关注积极:保护性因素结构化评估的回顾性验证——性侵犯版本。

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1177/10790632221098354
Thomas Nolan, Gwenda M Willis, David Thornton, Sharon M Kelley, Sarah Beggs Christofferson
{"title":"关注积极:保护性因素结构化评估的回顾性验证——性侵犯版本。","authors":"Thomas Nolan,&nbsp;Gwenda M Willis,&nbsp;David Thornton,&nbsp;Sharon M Kelley,&nbsp;Sarah Beggs Christofferson","doi":"10.1177/10790632221098354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sexual recidivism risk assessment tools focus almost exclusively on risk factors associated with increased rates of recidivism and do not attend to protective factors that might mitigate reoffense risk. The present study investigated the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors - Sexual Offence version (SAPROF-SO), developed to assess hypothesised protective factors against sexual recidivism in adult males. The SAPROF-SO pilot version contains 24 items across two domains: Personal and Professionally Provided Support. SAPROF-SO scores were rated retrospectively from a review of archived case files of 210 men with convictions for child sexual offenses, using the SAPROF-SO pilot manual and a supplementary retrospective scoring guide developed for the current study. SAPROF-SO Total and Personal domain scores were significantly predictive of sexual recidivism after an average follow-up period of 12.24 years (AUC = .81), and to a lesser extent, violent and general recidivism. SAPROF-SO Total and Personal scores additionally provided significant incremental validity over Static-99R scores in the prediction of sexual recidivism. Results support the predictive validity of protective factors for reduced sexual recidivism and invite future research examining how to integrate the SAPROF-SO alongside contemporary sexual recidivism risk assessment tools.</p>","PeriodicalId":21828,"journal":{"name":"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attending to the Positive: A Retrospective Validation of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors-Sexual Offence Version.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Nolan,&nbsp;Gwenda M Willis,&nbsp;David Thornton,&nbsp;Sharon M Kelley,&nbsp;Sarah Beggs Christofferson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10790632221098354\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Sexual recidivism risk assessment tools focus almost exclusively on risk factors associated with increased rates of recidivism and do not attend to protective factors that might mitigate reoffense risk. The present study investigated the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors - Sexual Offence version (SAPROF-SO), developed to assess hypothesised protective factors against sexual recidivism in adult males. The SAPROF-SO pilot version contains 24 items across two domains: Personal and Professionally Provided Support. SAPROF-SO scores were rated retrospectively from a review of archived case files of 210 men with convictions for child sexual offenses, using the SAPROF-SO pilot manual and a supplementary retrospective scoring guide developed for the current study. SAPROF-SO Total and Personal domain scores were significantly predictive of sexual recidivism after an average follow-up period of 12.24 years (AUC = .81), and to a lesser extent, violent and general recidivism. SAPROF-SO Total and Personal scores additionally provided significant incremental validity over Static-99R scores in the prediction of sexual recidivism. Results support the predictive validity of protective factors for reduced sexual recidivism and invite future research examining how to integrate the SAPROF-SO alongside contemporary sexual recidivism risk assessment tools.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632221098354\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632221098354","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

性再犯风险评估工具几乎只关注与再犯率增加相关的风险因素,而不关注可能降低再犯风险的保护性因素。本研究调查了保护性因素结构化评估-性犯罪版本(saprofo - so)的预测有效性,该版本旨在评估成年男性对性再犯的假设保护因素。sapro - so试点版本包含两个领域的24个项目:个人和专业提供的支持。saprofo - so分数是根据对210名儿童性侵犯定罪的男性的档案档案进行回顾性评估,使用saprofo - so试点手册和为本研究开发的补充回顾性评分指南。平均随访12.24年后,saprofo - so总分和个人领域得分对性累犯有显著的预测作用(AUC = 0.81),对暴力累犯和一般累犯有较低的预测作用。此外,saprofo - so总分和个人得分在预测性再犯方面比Static-99R得分具有显著的递增效度。结果支持保护性因素对减少性再犯的预测有效性,并邀请未来研究如何将saprofo - so与当代性再犯风险评估工具结合起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Attending to the Positive: A Retrospective Validation of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors-Sexual Offence Version.

Sexual recidivism risk assessment tools focus almost exclusively on risk factors associated with increased rates of recidivism and do not attend to protective factors that might mitigate reoffense risk. The present study investigated the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors - Sexual Offence version (SAPROF-SO), developed to assess hypothesised protective factors against sexual recidivism in adult males. The SAPROF-SO pilot version contains 24 items across two domains: Personal and Professionally Provided Support. SAPROF-SO scores were rated retrospectively from a review of archived case files of 210 men with convictions for child sexual offenses, using the SAPROF-SO pilot manual and a supplementary retrospective scoring guide developed for the current study. SAPROF-SO Total and Personal domain scores were significantly predictive of sexual recidivism after an average follow-up period of 12.24 years (AUC = .81), and to a lesser extent, violent and general recidivism. SAPROF-SO Total and Personal scores additionally provided significant incremental validity over Static-99R scores in the prediction of sexual recidivism. Results support the predictive validity of protective factors for reduced sexual recidivism and invite future research examining how to integrate the SAPROF-SO alongside contemporary sexual recidivism risk assessment tools.

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
5.30
自引率
17.40%
发文量
33
期刊最新文献
"Falling Through the Cracks": A Retrospective Exploration of the Barriers to Help-Seeking Among Men Convicted of Sexual Crimes. Protectors of Society: Understanding the Impact of Courtesy Stigma on the Experiences of Volunteers Working With Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offences. Sexual Recidivism During Treatment: Impact on Therapists. Same Score, Different Audience, Different Message: Perceptions of Sex Offense Risk Depend on Static-99R Risk Level and Personality Factors of the Recipient. Open Versus Closed Group Treatment of Men with a History of Sexual Offenses.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
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
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
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