Gender Differences in the Prevalence and Predictive Validity of Protective Factors in a Sample of Justice-Involved Youth

Goodwin, Julie; Brown, Shelley L.; Skilling, Tracey A.

doi:10.1177/15412040221089235

Cited by 7 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 56 publications

(108 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings were consistent with the moderate relationships reported by de Ruigh et al ( 2021), Kleeven et al (2022) and Lovatt et al (2022). They contrasted somewhat with Chu et al (2020)'s large AUC and with Goodwin et al (2022) and Koh et al (2022), who found that the SAPROF-YV was a more modest predictor of any recidivism. The SAPROF-YV was a weak predictor of violent recidivism, which is consistent with Goodwin et al (2022) 2022), who found the tool to be a moderate predictor of violent recidivism.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…We did not make any predictions about the factor structure of the SAPROF-YV given the lack of prior research. Evidencing a direct-or promotiveeffect, we hypothesized that the SAPROF-YV total score would discriminate between recidivists and nonrecidivists and significantly predict recidivism, consistent with prior research (Chu et al, 2020;de Ruigh et al, 2021;Kleeven et al, 2022;Koh et al, 2022) and that it would predict recidivism better for males than for females (Goodwin et al, 2022;Lovatt et al, 2022). Given the lack of clear theoretical or empirical (Chu et al, 2020;de Ruigh et al, 2021;Kleeven et al, 2022;Koh et al, 2022;Lovatt et al, 2022) justification, we did not hypothesize that the SAPROF-YV would provide incremental validity to a measure of risk (the YLS/CMI) in predicting recidivism.…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 68%

“…In contrast, Koh et al (2022) found that the SAPROF-YV was a small predictor of any, violent, and nonviolent recidivism at both 1- and 3-year follow-ups (AUCs = .58-.62) in a sample of Singaporean youth serving custodial or community sentences. Similarly, in a sample of Canadian youth, Goodwin et al (2022) reported that the SAPROF-YV evidenced a small association with any (AUC = .58) and violent recidivism (AUC = .56) using a 3-year follow-up.…”

Section: The Saprof-yv: a Dedicated Measure Of Youth Strengths In The...mentioning

confidence: 85%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessment of Strengths in Criminal Justice System-Impacted Youth: A Retrospective Validation Study of the SAPROF-YV

Finseth¹,

Peterson‐Badali

Brown

et al. 2023

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk-Youth Version (SAPROF-YV; de Vries Robbé et al., 2015) was designed specifically to assess strengths as a complement to risk assessment tools. We retrospectively examined its reliability and validity in 305 Canadian community-sentenced youth, both in the overall sample and in male and female, and Black and White, subgroups. In all groups, the total score had strong internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, and convergent validity, and significantly predicted general recidivism at 3-year fixed follow-up. The SAPROF-YV showed incremental validity over the YLS/CMI only in Black youth. In the total sample, a moderation effect was identified whereby strengths were protective at lower levels of risk but not for moderate or high risk youth. The SAPROF-YV shows promising reliability and validity; however, more research is needed before clear guidance can be provided regarding the use of this measure in clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: The Saprof-yv: a Dedicated Measure Of Youth Strengths In The...mentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of Strengths in Criminal Justice System-Impacted Youth: A Retrospective Validation Study of the SAPROF-YV

Finseth¹,

Peterson‐Badali

Brown

et al. 2023

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These SAVRY indices have been shown to predict multiple types of recidivism outcomes with various populations of justice-involved adolescent males, although the evidence is more equivocal both with justice-involved adolescent females and for the summed total of the Protective Factor items (cf. Goodwin et al, 2022; Muir et al, 2020; Olver et al, 2009; Soderstrom et al, 2020; Viljoen et al, 2008; Vincent et al, 2011). But, to date, the potential risk, promotive, and mixed effects of any SAVRY items have not been investigated.…”

Section: Farrington Et Al’s (2016) Risk Promotive and Mixed Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A proof of concept study of promotive, mixed, and risk effects using the SAVRY assessment tool items with youth with sexual offenses.

Langton,

Ranjit,

Worling

2023

Psychological Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is currently a lack of consensus about the nature of strengths in forensic assessments. With 273 justice-involved male youth and a fixed 3-year follow-up, this study adopted the approach of Farrington and colleagues to investigating the nature of associations between trichotomized variables, representing risks and strengths, and outcomes using pairs of odds ratios (ORs) and percentage point changes from base rates. Items from the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), a structured professional judgment tool used to assess risk and protective factors in justice-involved youth, were employed for this purpose. In the literature, the accuracy of SAVRY summed totals for its Risk Factor item sets (each item rated using a trichotomy) has been generally in the moderate range in predicting future violence. But the total for its summed Protective Factor items (each rated using a dichotomy) has been less consistently encouraging. In this study, contrary to their labels, the majority of SAVRY Risk and Protective Factors (rated using trichotomies) exerted a risk effect at one end of their trichotomy (risk item ratings of 2, protective item ratings of 0) and a promotive effect at the other end (risk item ratings of 0, protective factor ratings of 2) for a new violent (including sexual) offense and any new offense. Subsets of items conservatively weighted using ORs (capturing risk and strength) were statistically significantly more accurate in predicting outcomes than their originally rated counterpart subsets. Implications for understanding the nature of strengths and for applied assessment practices are discussed.

show abstract

“…The literature on the predictive validity by gender is mixed. Some studies have found the SAVRY to be an excellent predictor of recidivism among males (Goodwin et al, 2022; Schmidt et al, 2011), while others have found it works well for both gender groups (Gammelgård et al, 2008; Meyers & Schmidt, 2008; Muir et al, 2020; Penney et al, 2010; Shepherd et al, 2014a). These studies underscore the importance of assessing the psychometric properties and predictive validity of the SAVRY by gender and race.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal Cohort Study: Predictive Validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth Individual/Clinical Risk Factor on Recidivism Among Mississippi Justice-Involved Youth

Dembo,

Gardner,

Robertson

et al. 2024

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many juvenile justice agencies have moved toward risk-need-responsivity and risk-need-assessment approaches to manage youth and reduce future risk of recidivism. The Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) instrument is a popular tool to assess risk and protective factors among justice-involved youth. The present study explored the consistency of the Individual/Clinical Risk measure, comprised of eight items (e.g., anger, negative attitudes, empathy), as a single latent factor across five years (2017–2021) of juvenile court data in Mississippi. Further, this study examined gender (male vs. female) and race (Black vs. non-Black) invariance in this risk factor and the predictive validity of the risk factor for one-year recidivism. Findings support the existence of a single factor of Individual/Clinical Risk and consistency across time. The risk factor was invariant across gender and race. Further, the risk factor significantly predicted recidivism in years 2019–2021, and near significantly predicted recidivism for 2017. These findings recommend the continued use of the SAVRY as an evidence-based measure of risk.

show abstract

Gender Differences in the Prevalence and Predictive Validity of Protective Factors in a Sample of Justice-Involved Youth

Cited by 7 publications

References 56 publications

Assessment of Strengths in Criminal Justice System-Impacted Youth: A Retrospective Validation Study of the SAPROF-YV

Assessment of Strengths in Criminal Justice System-Impacted Youth: A Retrospective Validation Study of the SAPROF-YV

A proof of concept study of promotive, mixed, and risk effects using the SAVRY assessment tool items with youth with sexual offenses.

Longitudinal Cohort Study: Predictive Validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth Individual/Clinical Risk Factor on Recidivism Among Mississippi Justice-Involved Youth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About