The Predictive Validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision on General and Violent Recidivism among Various Offender Groups

By Lina Girard, S. Wormith. 2004

205 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a9088513159b2adc132fa67651d6dbb46dcfcc6d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

1. J. Bonta
2. Demetra Andrews
3. J. Wormith
4. Duyen Luong
5. C. Dowden
6. Sarah M. Hogg
7. Lina Guzzo
8. S. Wormith

In Sociology and Political Science

1. J. Bonta
2. Demetra Andrews
3. J. Wormith
4. Duyen Luong
5. C. Dowden
6. Sarah M. Hogg
7. Lina Guzzo
8. S. Wormith

Citations in the corpus

• The Risk-Need-Responsivity Model of Assessment and Human Service in Prevention and Corrections: Crime-Prevention Jurisprudence (2007, background): “However, when a broader sampling of a history of violent offending is added, the validity estimates approach those achieved with the best of the predictors of violence (Barnoski and Aos 2003; Girard and Wormith 2004).”
• Applying Risk/Need Assessment to Probation Practice and its Impact on the Recidivism of Young Offenders (2011, background): “…assessing the reliability and validity of the LS instruments, including violence prediction (e.g., Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2010; Campbell, French, & Gendreau, 2009; Flores, Lowenkamp, Smith, & Latessa, 2006; Girard & Wormith, 2004; Holsinger, Lowenkamp, & Latessa, 2006; Simourd & Bruce, 1998).”
• The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: a meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. (2009, unknown): “…30 Endrass et al. (in press) 90 Song & Lieb (1994) 31(a,b) Epperson (2003) 91 Soothill et al. (2005) 32 Florida (1985) 92 Stadtland et al. (2005) 33 Girard & Wormith (2004) 93 Stalans et al. (2002) 34 Gore (2007) 94 Sturgeon & Taylor (1980) 35 Haag (2005) 95 [Sweden] Sjöstedt & Långström…”
• The Predictive Validity of a General Risk/Needs Assessment Inventory on Sexual Offender Recidivism and an Exploration of the Professional Override (2012, background): “Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses (Hanley & McNeil, 1982) of the Washington study produced an area under the curve (AUC) of .650. girard and Wormith (2004) reported on the predictive validity of the Level”
• The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need Assessment (2006, background): “In the first prospective validation of the LS/CMI, the correlation with violent recidivism of the enhanced assessment of personality pattern and history of aggression was r = .42 in the follow-up of incarcerated individuals (Girard & Wormith, 2004).”
• Sources of Variability in Estimates of Predictive Validity (2011, background): “In Table 2, examining female offenders alone, predictive validities vary from .61 to –.13 (M = .36, SD = .16). Follow-up times vary from 6 months to 6 years (M = 2.16 years, SD = 1.42). Sixteen out of 41 validity coefficients (39%) were associated with high-allegiance authors. Fourteen coefficients ”