skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 216184 Find in a Library
Title: Clinical Versus Actuarial Judgments in Criminal Justice Decisions: Should One Replace the Other?
Journal: Federal Probation  Volume:70  Issue:2  Dated:September 2006  Pages:15-18
Author(s): Stephen D. Gottfredson; Laura J. Moriarty
Date Published: September 2006
Page Count: 4
Document: HTML
Type: Issue Overview
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article argues for the use of both standardized actuarial assessment tools and clinical judgments to assess the risk of offenders.
Abstract: Research has repeatedly demonstrated the superiority of actuarial assessment tools over clinical judgments made by corrections or psychiatric practitioners. While some have argued for the sole use of actuarial assessment tools for assessing offender risk, the authors argue that clinical judgments should be used in combination with actuarial assessment tools to produce the best risk assessments of offenders. The authors show how human judgment can add subtleties to the assessment process that actuarial methods cannot pick up on, such as the demeanor of the offender or rare events that have occurred in the offenders’ life. Indeed, recent research on violence risk in a sample of criminal offenders indicated that structured clinical judgments were just as accurate as actuarial assessment tools in predicting the future risk of violence among the offenders. The statistical prediction power of the actuarial assessment tool is put to best use when combined with the structured clinical judgments of professionals, particularly when the two methods are combined in a predetermined formula that has been empirically tested and validated. References
Main Term(s): Needs assessment; Testing and measurement
Index Term(s): Corrections standards; Offender supervision; Risk management
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.