Prevalence and prediction of institutional misconduct and gradual release violations in socio-therapeutic institutions

被引:7
作者
Biedermann, Laura [1 ]
Rettenberger, Martin [2 ]
机构
[1] Johannes Gutenberg Univ Mainz JGU, Psychol Inst, Binger Str 14-16, D-55122 Mainz, Germany
[2] Kriminol Zentralstelle KrimZ, Luisenstr 7, D-65185 Wiesbaden, Germany
来源
MONATSSCHRIFT FUR KRIMINOLOGIE UND STRAFRECHTSREFORM | 2020年 / 103卷 / 04期
关键词
Gradual release violations; institutional misconduct; risk assessment; actuarial risk assessment instruments; predictive validity; PRISON VIOLENCE RISK; SEXUAL OFFENDERS; RECIDIVISM; METAANALYSIS; MODEL; ASSESSMENTS; INSTRUMENTS; VALIDITY; SCALE;
D O I
10.1515/mks-2020-2059
中图分类号
DF [法律]; D9 [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
The prediction of institutional misconduct and gradual release violations is essential for the treatment planning in prisons and in most cases a precondition for decisions about gradual release and other incarceration related efforts. However, currently existing risk assessment tools have not yet been examined in the German speaking language area to determine whether they are also suitable for predicting institutional misconduct and gradual release violations. In this study, three actuarial risk assessment tools (Static-99, SVG-5, and OGRS 3) were examined in this context based on 129 offenders, who were released from the socio-therapeutic institution in Ludwigshafen (Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany) between 2013 and 2018. In addition, two internal checldists were included in the study to assess their predictive validity. All three actuarial instruments and the institutional checklist about the risk of flight showed good predictive accuracy for the prediction of institutional misconduct, with the OGRS 3 (AUC = .77) achieving the highest effect sizes. The results of the OGRS 3 and SVG-5 were also promising for the prediction of gradual release violations, with the OGRS 3 (AUC = .77) again obtaining the highest predictive accuracy. However, especially for the prediction of gradual release violations, the results also showed limitations of the available methods, which have to be taken into consideration when they are used in applied risk assessment settings.
引用
收藏
页码:235 / 249
页数:15
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]   The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project:: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction [J].
AEgisdottir, S ;
White, MJ ;
Spengler, PM ;
Maugherman, AS ;
Anderson, LA ;
Cook, RS ;
Nichols, CN ;
Lampropoulos, GK ;
Walker, BS ;
Cohen, G ;
Rush, JD .
COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST, 2006, 34 (03) :341-382
[2]   THE RISK-NEED-RESPONSIVITY (RNR) MODEL Does Adding the Good Lives Model Contribute to Effective Crime Prevention? [J].
Andrews, D. A. ;
Bonta, James ;
Wormith, J. Stephen .
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2011, 38 (07) :735-755
[3]  
[Anonymous], STRAFVOLLZUG
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2003, STRAFT TERBEHANDLUNG, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-86226-474-2_3
[5]  
Baier D., 2013, FORUM STRAFVOLLZUG, V62, P76
[6]  
Bieneck S., 2012, VIKTIMISIERUNGSERFAH
[7]   THE PREDICTION OF VIOLENCE IN ADULT OFFENDERS A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Instruments and Methods of Assessment [J].
Campbell, Mary Ann ;
French, Sheila ;
Gendreau, Paul .
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2009, 36 (06) :567-590
[8]  
Cohen J., 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences., V2nd, DOI [DOI 10.1007/978-1-4684-5439-0_2, DOI 10.4324/9780203771587, 10.4324/9780203771587]
[9]   Towards a guide to best practice in conducting actuarial risk assessments with sex offenders [J].
Craig, Leam A. ;
Beech, Anthony R. .
AGGRESSION AND VIOLENT BEHAVIOR, 2010, 15 (04) :278-293
[10]   Predictive factors for violent misconduct in close custody [J].
Cunningham, Mark D. ;
Sorensen, Jon R. .
PRISON JOURNAL, 2007, 87 (02) :241-253