UA cloudflare authentication

Browsing by Author "Evans, Stephanie Ann"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Communicating violence risk: judicial decision making in involuntary civil commitments
    (University of Alabama Libraries, 2012) Evans, Stephanie Ann; Salekin, Karen L.; University of Alabama Tuscaloosa
    Beginning in the 1990s, researchers in the field of violence risk assessment recognized that even the most accurate and valid risk assessment could not assist fact-finders if violence risk was not communicated in a clear, precise, and complete manner (Monahan & Steadman, 1996; Schopp, 1996). Due to this growing attention to the importance of risk communication, four empirical studies have investigated how risk messages impact decisions and how decision-makers interpret risk messages (Kwartner, Lyons, & Boccaccini, 2006; Monahan et al., 2002; Slovic & Monahan, 1995; Slovic, Monahan, & MacGregor, 2000). The main purpose of the current study was to investigate judges' opinions regarding the probative value of risk communication messages in civil commitment proceedings. There were five types of risk communication messages that were investigated in this study: (a) description model; (b) prediction model [categorical format]; (c) prediction model [probabilistic format]; (d) prediction model [frequency format]; and (e) management model. Secondary purposes of this study were to investigate whether these risk messages influence judicial decisions and whether the attributes of role orientation, legal philosophy, and Fear of False Negatives (FFN) impact the decision-making process. A national sample of 403 judges completed the study, which produced an 18.28% response rate. Each participant was randomly selected to receive one of ten risk vignettes in which type of risk message and risk level were systematically varied. Participants answered three questions regarding the applicable risk vignette and completed demographic and judicial attribute questionnaires. This study found that the risk models (i.e., description, prediction, and management messages) were viewed as equally probative. However, within the risk prediction model, categorical messages were rated as highest in probative value. Results indicated that risk prediction messages, in general, led to stricter rulings than did the other risk models, but no one risk prediction format (i.e., categorical, probabilistic, or frequency) resulted in higher restrictiveness in judicial ruling. Finally, this study found that legal philosophy and FFN, but not role orientation, impacted the restrictiveness of judicial rulings. Limitations of this study and recommendations for future research are discussed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Gender disparity in the prediction of recidivism: the accuracy of the LSI-R modified
    (University of Alabama Libraries, 2009) Evans, Stephanie Ann; Salekin, Karen L.; University of Alabama Tuscaloosa
    During the last 50 years, the rate at which females enter the correctional system has increased exponentially. Despite this influx, risk assessment instruments remain geared toward male offenders. The Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) is considered by some to be one of the most predictive and comprehensive risk instruments, but critics assert that this instrument neglects risk factors salient for female offenders. This study examined whether modifying the LSI-R to assess gender responsive variables (i.e., victimization, economic marginality, and "gendered" substance abuse) would result in an improved assessment of recidivism risk over the original LSI-R. Participants were 37 male and 26 female offenders incarcerated at community corrections centers and county jails in a southeastern state. The study found that the inclusion of all the gender responsive crime variables did not increase the predictive accuracy of the LSI-R. However, the victimization domain performed better than the other gender responsive variables in increasing the predictive accuracy of the LSI-R, while not impacting the predictive accuracy for male offenders. Furthermore, the victimization domain accounted for a significant amount of variability in the rearrest status, of both male and female offenders, above and beyond that predicted by the LSI-R risk score. Implications regarding the assessment of dynamic victimization factors in risk evaluation practices are discussed.