Predictive Validity of the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-Entry Among Intimate Partner Violence Offenders

Perley-Robertson, Bronwen

doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13422

Cited by 4 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 167 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, it is essential that a new scale consistently demonstrates reliability and validity over several investigations that differ in scale application, context, and participant selection, even in the presence of a growing body of research demonstrating promising results. Notably, the scale validation process may include different measures and elements, depending on the specific goals, focus, and applications of the scale (e.g., risk prediction versus case management; Helmus & Babchishin, 2017;Perley-Robertson, 2018). Nonetheless, according to Gehlbach and Brinkworth (2011), scale developers have reached a broad consensus that a scale can be considered an adequate measure of a construct if it (1) minimizes respondent error, and (2) demonstrates sufficient reliability.…”

Section: Scale Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These ranges are inclusive of calculations for both subsamples at baseline. acceptable level included Interpersonal Relationships (Hanby, 2013), Employment (Hanby, 2013;Perley-Robertson, 2018), and Substance Abuse (Chadwick, 2014;Perley-Robertson, 2018).…”

Section: Evidence Of Draor Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research has indicated that the DRAOR's subscales are highly inter-correlated. 12 For example, the DRAOR Total score has been strongly correlated with the Stable (r = .87 to .92), Acute (r = .81 to .87), and Protective subscales (r = -.82 to -.89; Averill, 2016;Ferguson, 2015;Muirhead, 2016;Perley-Robertson, 2018;Smeth, 2013). Additionally, the DRAOR Stable and Acute subscales have been consistently found to be moderately to strongly positively correlated (r = .46 to .73), indicating that the two subscales measure similar constructs (i.e., criminogenic risk; Averill, 2016;Chadwick, 2014;Chadwick, 2020;Ferguson, 2015;Muirhead, 2016;Perley-Robertson, 2018;Smeth, 2013;Tamatea & Wilson, 2009;Wardrop, 2020).…”

Section: Evidence Of Draor Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conversely, researchers have consistently reported negative associations between the Protective subscale and the Stable (r = -.40 to -.73) and Acute subscales (r = -.27 to -.63), suggesting that the Protective subscale is composed of factors that operate differently than dynamic risk factors do (Averill, 2016;Chadwick, 2014;Chadwick, 2020;Ferguson, 2015;Muirhead, 2016;Perley-Robertson, 2018;Smeth, 2013;Tamatea & Wilson, 2009;Wardrop, 2020). In an initial validation study using a sample of 59 New Zealand probationers, Tamatea and Wilson (2009) compared the DRAOR to the Risk of re-Conviction X Risk of re-Imprisonment model (ROC*ROI; Bakker et al, 1999), a validated measure of static risk that has been implemented in New Zealand.…”

Section: Evidence Of Draor Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…"-" = statistic absent. Adapted from Lloyd (2015), Pardoel (2018), andPerley-Robertson (2018). Fourteen additional DRAOR focused studies were omitted due to incompatible or unavailable statistics (Ghartey, 2020;Lloyd, 2015;Lloyd, 2020a;Lloyd, 2020b;Lowenkamp et al, 2016;Pardoel, 2018;Perley-Robertson et al, 2020, Scanlan, 2015Scanlan, 2020;Serin et al, 2020;Serin & Prell, 2012;Stone, 2017;Tamatea & Wilson, 2009;.…”

Section: Evidence Of Draor Constructmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Investigating the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry’s (DRAOR) Ability to Operate as a Weighted Risk Prediction Instrument

Dunham¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dynamic risk and protective factors refer to a collection of psychosocial variables that have been empirically linked to an increased or decreased likelihood of engaging in future criminal behaviour. Monitoring such factors is, therefore, a vital task in the post-incarceration community reintegration process. The current study examined whether weighting could augment the discrimination of the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry (DRAOR; Serin, 2007Serin, , 2015Serin, , 2017, a promising case management instrument composed of dynamic risk and protective factors, in two samples of general justice involved individuals drawn from New Zealand (n = 3,648) and Iowa (n = 510). Two weighting approaches were investigated across subscales, outcomes, assessment periods, and samples. Although weighting did not significantly improve discrimination in either sample, the present research provides further support of the DRAOR's utility as a risk prediction and case management tool.

show abstract

Section: Scale Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence Of Draor Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence Of Draor Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence Of Draor Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence Of Draor Constructmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Investigating the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry’s (DRAOR) Ability to Operate as a Weighted Risk Prediction Instrument

Dunham¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Using a General Case Management Tool With Partner-violent Men on Community Supervision in Iowa

Perley-Robertson

Serin

Chadwick

2020

J Interpers Violence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is among the most common acts of violence against women worldwide, making it a major global threat to women’s health and safety. The assessment and management of IPV offenders are therefore vital tasks in criminal justice systems. The current study examined whether the DRAOR, a general case management tool, was useful for supervising 112 male IPV offenders in Iowa, United States. Several risk factors emerged as potentially important treatment targets for partner-violent men, including poor attachment with others, substance abuse, anger/hostility, opportunity/access to victims, and problematic interpersonal relationships. While further research is needed to improve the utility of the DRAOR for predicting IPV recidivism, it assesses several factors that are relevant for supervising IPV cases (e.g., substance abuse, anger/hostility, victim access). This suggests the DRAOR could potentially be used to guide case management in the presence of a validated IPV tool that focuses on static risk factors, such as the ODARA. The use of the DRAOR with IPV offenders may also be warranted if they are found to be generally violent/antisocial rather than as family only offenders.

show abstract

Does Reassessment Enhance the Prediction of Imminent Criminal Recidivism? Replicating Lloyd et al. (2020) With High-Risk Parolees

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lloyd et al. (2020) proposed and tested a novel three-step framework for examining the extent to which reassessment of dynamic risk and protective factors enhances the prediction of imminent criminal recidivism. We conducted a conceptual replication of Lloyd et al.’s study. We used the same dynamic risk assessment measure in the same jurisdiction but, unlike Lloyd et al., our sample comprised solely high-risk men on parole in New Zealand ( N = 966), the individuals who are most frequently reassessed in the community and most likely to imminently reoffend. The results of the previous study were largely reproduced: reassessment consistently enhanced prediction, with the most pronounced effects observed for a scale derived from theoretically acute dynamic risk factors. These findings indicate reassessment effects are robust to sample selection based on a narrower range of risk levels and remain robust across years of practice in applied contexts, despite potential organizational drift from initial training and reassessment fatigue. The findings also provide further support for the practice of ongoing risk reassessment in community supervision and suggest that the method proposed by Lloyd et al. is a replicable approach for testing the essential criteria for defining dynamic risk and protective factors.

show abstract

Predictive Validity of the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-Entry Among Intimate Partner Violence Offenders

Cited by 4 publications

References 167 publications

Investigating the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry’s (DRAOR) Ability to Operate as a Weighted Risk Prediction Instrument

Investigating the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry’s (DRAOR) Ability to Operate as a Weighted Risk Prediction Instrument

Using a General Case Management Tool With Partner-violent Men on Community Supervision in Iowa

Does Reassessment Enhance the Prediction of Imminent Criminal Recidivism? Replicating Lloyd et al. (2020) With High-Risk Parolees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About