RESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The overrepresentation of certain racial/ethnic groups in criminal legal systems raises concerns about the cross-cultural application of risk assessment tools. We provide a framework for conceptualizing and measuring racial bias/fairness and review research for three tools assessing risk of sexual recidivism: Static-99R, STABLE-2007, and VRS-SO. RECENT FINDINGS: Most cross-cultural research examines Static-99R and generally supports its use with Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian men. Preliminary research also supports STABLE-2007 with Asian men. Findings are most concerning for Indigenous men, where Static-99R and STABLE-2007 significantly predict sexual recidivism, but with significantly and meaningfully lower accuracy compared to White men. For the VRS-SO and the combined Static-99R/STABLE-2007 risk levels, predictive accuracy was not significantly lower for Indigenous men, for which we discuss several possible explanations. We offer considerations for risk scale selection with Indigenous men and highlight recent guidance produced for cross-cultural risk assessment.
Asunto(s)
Criminales , Reincidencia , Delitos Sexuales , Masculino , Humanos , Comparación Transcultural , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The overrepresentation of numerous racial/ethnic groups in the criminal legal system warrants examination of the cross-cultural applicability of risk assessment tools. Static-99R is a tool used in diverse countries to assess sexual recidivism risk. We conducted a meta-analysis on the predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups. HYPOTHESES: No hypotheses were made regarding discrimination, given that past research could support hypotheses of differential or equivalent accuracy. We hypothesized that Indigenous individuals would score higher on Static-99R than non-Indigenous or White individuals. METHOD: Our search identified 18 eligible documents (from 17 distinct studies) with 41 nonoverlapping effect sizes. These 17 studies examined the predictive accuracy of Static-99R with racially/ethnically diverse men charged with or convicted of sexually motivated offenses. We report analyses using both fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Indigenous and Black individuals scored significantly higher on Static-99R than their non-Indigenous or White counterparts, with small effect sizes. For discrimination, area under the curve (AUC) values were generally moderate-to-large and statistically significant for all groups in both fixed-effect and random-effects analyses. Within-study subgroup analyses indicated significantly lower accuracy for Indigenous and Hispanic individuals compared with White/non-Indigenous samples (though for Hispanic individuals, this finding was significant only in the fixed-effect analyses). No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between White and Black individuals. Static-99R significantly predicted recidivism with large effect sizes across two samples of Asian individuals. Two studies supported calibration across Black, White, and Hispanic individuals. Two studies examining calibration of Static-99R for Indigenous individuals had mixed findings. CONCLUSIONS: Given a small number of studies and limitations with both the fixed- and random-effects analyses, readers should interpret findings regarding Hispanic individuals with caution. The analyses clearly found significant but lower accuracy for Static-99R with Indigenous individuals. Potential reasons for this differential accuracy are discussed, along with limitations of the meta-analysis and suggestions for research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).