The Impact of Using Documented but Uncharged Offense Data on JSORRAT-II Predictive Validity.

Following the implementation of sexual offender notification laws, researchers have found a drop in the rate of prosecutions and an increase in plea bargains for sexual offenses committed by male juveniles. This type of prosecutorial hesitation has implications for the predictive validity of sexual recidivism risk assessments, such as the Juvenile Sexual Offender Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II (JSORRAT-II), that require data from officially adjudicated offenses in the scoring of several items. The present study sought to test the impact of including data from documented but uncharged (DBU) sexual offenses in the scoring of the JSORRAT-II on its predictive validity using an exhaustive sample of 1,095 juveniles who offended sexually from the states of Iowa and Utah.

Cross-Validation of the JSORRAT-II in Iowa.

The predictive validity of the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II (JSORRAT-II) was evaluated using an exhaustive sample of 11- to 17-year-old male juveniles who offended sexually (JSOs) between 2000 and 2006 in Iowa (n = 529). The validity of the tool in predicting juvenile sexual recidivism was significant (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = .70, 99% confidence interval [CI] = [.

Development and Validation of the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II.

This article describes the development and initial validation of the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II (JSORRAT-II). Potential predictor variables were extracted from case file information for an exhaustive sample of 636 juveniles in Utah who sexually offended between 1990 and 1992. Simultaneous and hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used to identify the group of variables that was most predictive of subsequent juvenile sexual recidivism.

Predictive validity of adult risk assessment tools with juveniles who offended sexually.

An often-held assumption in the area of sexual recidivism risk assessment is that different tools should be used for adults and juveniles. This assumption is driven either by the observation that adolescents tend to be in a constant state of flux in the areas of development, education, and social structure or by the fact that the judicial system recognizes that juveniles and adults are different. Though the assumption is plausible, it is largely untested.