Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barbaree, H. E.
Right arrow Articles by Peacock, E. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barbaree, H. E.
Right arrow Articles by Peacock, E. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Different Actuarial Risk Measures Produce Different Risk Rankings for Sexual Offenders

Howard E. Barbaree

Law and Mental Health Program, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4, Canada, howard-barbaree{at}camh.net

Calvin M. Langton

University of Nottingham, and Peaks Unit, Rampton Hospital, Nottinghamshire Healthcare Trust, Nottinghamshire, England

Edward J. Peacock

Correctional Services of Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Percentile ranks were computed for N = 262 sex offenders using each of 5 actuarial risk instruments commonly used with adult sex offenders (RRASOR, Static-99, VRAG, SORAG, and MnSOST-R). Mean differences between percentile ranks obtained by different actuarial measures were found to vary inversely with the correlation between the actuarial scores. Following studies of factor analyses of actuarial items, we argue that the discrepancies among actuarial instruments can be substantially accounted for by the way in which the factor Antisocial Behavior and various factors reflecting sexual deviance are represented among the items contained in each instrument. In the discussion, we provide guidance to clinicians in resolving discrepancies between instruments and we discuss implications for future developments in sex offender risk assessment.

Key Words: Actuarial assessment • Sex offenders • Recidivism • Percentile ranks

Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol. 18, No. 4, 423-440 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/107906320601800408
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?