MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622578983 · doi:10.1177/0093854817711477

Similar Predictive Accuracy of the Static-99R Risk Tool for White, Black, and Hispanic Sex Offenders in California

2017· article· en· W2622578983 on OpenAlexaff
Seung C. Lee, R. Karl Hanson

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsPublic Safety CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismPredictive validityDemographyPoison controlEthnic groupSex offenseRisk assessmentPsychologyInjury preventionMedicineClinical psychologyMedical emergencySexual abuseComputer securityComputer scienceLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although considerable research has found overall moderate predictive validity of Static-99R, a sex offender risk prediction tool, relatively little research has addressed its potential for cultural bias. This prospective study evaluated the predictive validity of Static-99R across the three major ethnic groups (White, n = 789; Black, n = 466; Hispanic, n = 719) in the state of California. Static-99R was able to discriminate recidivists from nonrecidivists among White, Black, and Hispanic sex offenders (all area under the curve [AUC] values >.70; odds ratios >1.39). Base rates (at a Static-99R score of 2) with a fixed 5-year follow-up across ethnic groups were very similar (2.4%-3.0%) but were significantly lower than the norms (5.6%). The current findings support the use of Static-99R in risk assessment procedures for sex offenders of White, Black, and Hispanic heritage, but it should be used with caution in estimating absolute sexual recidivism rates, particularly for Hispanic sex offenders.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207