↓ Skip to main content

Predicting Sex Offender Recidivism. I. Correcting for Item Overselection and Accuracy Overestimation in Scale Development. II. Sampling Error-Induced Attenuation of Predictive Validity Over Base Rate…

Overview of attention for article published in Law and Human Behavior, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
Predicting Sex Offender Recidivism. I. Correcting for Item Overselection and Accuracy Overestimation in Scale Development. II. Sampling Error-Induced Attenuation of Predictive Validity Over Base Rate Information
Published in
Law and Human Behavior, June 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10979-007-9092-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott I. Vrieze, William M. Grove

Abstract

The authors demonstrate a statistical bootstrapping method for obtaining unbiased item selection and predictive validity estimates from a scale development sample, using data (N = 256) of Epperson et al. [2003 Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool-Revised (MnSOST-R) technical paper: Development, validation, and recommended risk level cut scores. Retrieved November 18, 2006 from Iowa State University Department of Psychology web site: http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/ approximately dle/mnsost_download.htm] from which the Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool-Revised (MnSOST-R) was developed. Validity (area under receiver operating characteristic curve) reported by Epperson et al. was .77 with 16 items selected. The present analysis yielded an asymptotically unbiased estimator AUC = .58. The present article also focused on the degree to which sampling error renders estimated cutting scores (appropriate to local [varying] recidivism base rates) nonoptimal, so that the long-run performance (measured by correct fraction, the total proportion of correct classifications) of these estimated cutting scores is poor, when they are applied to their parent populations (having assumed values for AUC and recidivism rate). This was investigated by Monte Carlo simulation over a range of AUC and recidivism rate values. Results indicate that, except for the AUC values higher than have ever been cross-validated, in combination with recidivism base rates severalfold higher than the literature average [Hanson and Morton-Bourgon, 2004, Predictors of sexual recidivism: An updated meta-analysis. (User report 2004-02.). Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada], the user of an instrument similar in performance to the MnSOST-R cannot expect to achieve correct fraction performance notably in excess of what is achievable from knowing the population recidivism rate alone. The authors discuss the legal implications of their findings for procedural and substantive due process in relation to state sexually violent person commitment statutes and the Supreme Court's Kansas v. Hendricks decision regarding the constitutionality of such statutes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
Macao 1 1%
Unknown 65 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Other 6 9%
Professor 4 6%
Other 17 25%
Unknown 15 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 49%
Social Sciences 11 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Philosophy 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 14 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2012.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Law and Human Behavior
#708
of 1,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,693
of 97,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Law and Human Behavior
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 97,663 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.