skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 67562 Find in a Library
Title: JUDGMENTS OF RECIDIVISM RISK - THE USE OF BASE-RATE INFORMATION IN PAROLE DECISIONS (FROM NEW DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLEGAL RESEARCH, 1980, BY PAUL D LIPSETT AND BRUCE DENNIS SALES - SEE NCJ-71016)
Author(s): J S CARROLL
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 19
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
Grant Number: SOC75-18061
Type: Statistics
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THREE STUDIES SHOW THAT INFORMATION ON RISK OF PAROLE VIOLATION IS USED IF GIVEN TO DECISIONMAKERS IN CLINIC SETTINGS, BUT THAT THE DEGREE TO WHICH STATISTICAL DATA IS USED BY NONEXPERTS IS LESS THAN OPTIMAL.
Abstract: AN INITIAL REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON CLINICAL JUDGMENT FINDS THAT PAROLE DECISIONMAKERS ARE PORTRAYED AS SUBJECTIVE AND UNWILLING TO PROFIT FROM SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. IN STUDY 1, BASE-RATE DATA ON A GROUP OF 100 OFFENDERS WAS GIVEN TO 112 CRIMINOLOGY STUDENTS. THE STUDENTS MADE NO DISTINCTION IN RISK EVALUATIONS BETWEEN PAROLEES FROM A GROUP WITH A KNOWN RECIDIVISM HIGH RATE AND THOSE FROM A GROUP WITH A LOW RATE. IN STUDIES 2 AND 3, HOWEVER, BOTH EXPERTS AND STUDENTS USED RISK INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THE INDIVIDUAL CASE. IN STUDY 2, A TOTAL OF 210 CASE SUMMARIES OF PAROLE APPLICANTS WERE REVIEWED. OF THESE, 62 PERCENT CONTAINED INFORMAL ASSESSMENTS OF PAROLE RISK. ALL WERE USED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER. STUDY 3 DREW 12 CASES FROM THE TOTAL SAMPLE OF 210 AND GAVE THEM TO 75 CRIMINOLOGY STUDENTS. HOWEVER, RISK STATEMENTS WERE EITHER PRESENTED VERBALLY OR IN A STATISTICAL MANNER. THE STUDENTS USED THE INFORMATION REGARDLESS OF THE FORM, BUT WERE NOT AS SENSITIVE TO IT AS THE EXPERTS. THE STUDIES ALSO SHOWED THAT NEGATIVE STATEMENTS CARRIED MORE WEIGHT THAN POSITIVE STATEMENTS AND THAT VERBALLY-STATED RISK PREDICTIONS SEEM MORE INFLUENTIAL THAN EITHER NUMERICALLY-STATED OR CLINICALLY-DERIVED RISK STATEMENTS. STUDY STATISTICS ARE DISCUSSED IN DETAIL. AN EXTENSIVE LIST OF REFERENCES IS APPENDED.
Index Term(s): Data communications; Parole outcome prediction; Probation or parole decisionmaking; Probation or parole records; Recidivism; Statistical analysis
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=67562

*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.