2021
DOI: 10.1177/00938548211054031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the Utility of the LSI-R in a Sample of Women who have Sexually Offended

Abstract: The ability to identify factors predictive of recidivism among individuals who have offended is integral to properly targeting supervision and treatment focus. Instruments such as the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) show promise with general justice-involved females, but no study to our knowledge has assessed it with women who have sexually offended. The purpose of this study is to examine the utility of the LSI-R in a sample of 243 women from the State of Texas who have sexually offended. Results i… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 53 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Effects were similarly large using PCRA scores (Harrell’s c = .73 for any arrest, c = .77 for any revocation; Cohen, 2018). Predicting general recidivism among adult women convicted of sexual crimes showed a medium effect for LSI-R scores ( c = .65; Marshall et al, 2022). Similarly, prediction generally showed medium effects among youth with sexual crimes using YLS/CMI scores, but with more inconsistency and greater range due to most samples being small (AUC = .58 to .73; Caldwell & Dickinson, 2009; Chu et al, 2012; Morton, 2003; Schmidt et al, 2016; Viljoen et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Effects were similarly large using PCRA scores (Harrell’s c = .73 for any arrest, c = .77 for any revocation; Cohen, 2018). Predicting general recidivism among adult women convicted of sexual crimes showed a medium effect for LSI-R scores ( c = .65; Marshall et al, 2022). Similarly, prediction generally showed medium effects among youth with sexual crimes using YLS/CMI scores, but with more inconsistency and greater range due to most samples being small (AUC = .58 to .73; Caldwell & Dickinson, 2009; Chu et al, 2012; Morton, 2003; Schmidt et al, 2016; Viljoen et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%