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: 204032 Find in a Library
Title: Comparing Sex Offender Risk Assessment Measures on a UK Sample
Journal: International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology  Volume:48  Issue:1  Dated:February 2004  Pages:7-27
Author(s): Leam A. Craig; Kevin D. Browne; Ian Stringer
Date Published: February 2004
Page Count: 21
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article discusses six measures of risk assessment for sex offenders.
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to consider the application of sex offender risk-assessment measures on offenders with adult or child victims, and to compare risk levels between two referral agencies -- the Probation Service and a United Kingdom Regional Secure Unit (RSU). Estimates of risks were completed on 139 sex offenders using risk assessments for sexual offenders. The risk assessment measures were the Structured Anchored Clinical Judgment Scale (SACJ), the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sex Offense Recidivism (RRASOR), Static-99, the Risk Matrix 2000-Sexual/Violence, and the Sexual Violence Risk-20 (SVR-20). The results show that, in spite of strong concurrent validity between the scales, classifications of risk varied. Levels of risk of sexual offenders against children and adults ranged from 7 percent low risk to 62 percent high risk and 0 percent low risk to 93 percent high risk, respectively. Depending on the risk assessment instrument being used, 85.1 percent and 92.6 percent of offenders with adult victims were considered medium-high to high risk using Static-99 and SACJ-Min, respectively, compared with 83.9 percent of offenders with child victims considered low to medium-low risk using the RM2000/S. Trends and differences in risk between measures were found when considering the referral agency where levels of risk for RSU and Probation Service samples ranged from 1 percent low risk to 66 percent high risk and 8 percent low risk to 70 percent high risk, respectively. Sex offenders supervised by the Probation Service scored significantly higher on Static-99 and RM2000/S than did sex offenders referred to a RSU for a treatment assessment. Levels and categories of risk between instruments appear inconsistent and vary depending on which measure is being used. 6 tables, 1 note, 76 references
Main Term(s): Dangerousness; Sex offenders
Index Term(s): Criminality prediction; Habitual offenders; Instrument validation; Rapists; Recidivism; Serial rapists; United Kingdom (UK)
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.