The Consideration of Empirically Unsupported Risk Factors in Risk Assessment Reports About Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offenses
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21424764 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Maximilian Wertz (0009-0007-6744-3956, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, corresponding author), Maren Giersiepen (0009-0000-8255-2930, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich), Kolja Schiltz (0000-0003-3788-3241, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich), Martin Rettenberger (0000-0002-0979-4295, Johannes Gutenberg-University) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 53 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 640-657 |
| Publication date | 2026-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Criminal Justice and Behavior (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0093-8548 • E-ISSN: 1552-3594 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/00938548251397535 |
| OpenAlex | W7117765166 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 47 |
Accurate risk assessment of individuals convicted of sexual offenses is crucial to prevent reoffending and prolonged institutionalization. However, findings indicate a heterogenous quality of risk assessment reports. Some of the qualitative variance may reflect differences in the strength of empirical evidence linking risk factors to reoffending. Some factors that have historically been important treatment targets have meta-analytically been shown to be empirically unsupported. To investigate the influence of unsupported risk factors on the decision-making process, the present study examined risk assessment reports ( N = 304) conducted between 1999 and 2016. Results showed a heterogenous consideration of empirically (un)supported risk factors. Reports following a structured risk assessment approach considered significantly more empirically supported risk factors than reports based on an unstructured, clinical-intuitive assessment procedure. Taken together, our findings provide further support for the use of structured and standardized risk assessment procedures and caution expert witnesses against incorporating empirically unsupported risk factors
Injury prevention · Poison control · Quality (philosophy) · Recidivism · Risk assessment · Risk management tools · Suicide prevention · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Human Factors and Ergonomics · Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending · Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Clinical versus statistical prediction
Applied Logistic Regression
The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders
Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies
Clinical versus mechanical prediction
Assessing Risk for Sexual Recidivism
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Die deutschsprachige Version der Violence Risk Scale – Sexual Offense Version (VRS-SO)
The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations
The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders
The Meta-Analysis of Clinical Judgment Project
The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders
Weighted kappa
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |