Criminal Justice and Behavior

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on The Virtual Advisor

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schwalbe, C. S.
Right arrow Articles by Day, S. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 34, No. 3, 348-361 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854806292244

Predictive Validity of the Joint Risk Matrix With Juvenile Offenders

A Focus on Gender and Race/Ethnicity

Craig S. Schwalbe

Columbia University School of Social Work, css2109{at}columbia.edu

Mark W. Fraser

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Steven H. Day

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Actuarial risk assessment instruments promise to increase decision-making accuracy and equity in settings such as the juvenile justice system, but both aims presume high levels of predictive validity. Prior research suggests that the predictive validity of some juvenile justice risk assessment instruments differs across gender and race/ethnicity. The Joint Risk Matrix (JRM) described herein is an instrument developed to increase the predictive validity of risk assessment for the diverse populations served by the nation’s juvenile courts. The predictive validity of the JRM was estimated on a sample of 536 court-involved juveniles. The instrument demonstrated acceptable levels of validity across all juveniles (AUC = .710). Gender-based differences were explained by gendered patterns of referral to out-of-home placements. Differences by race/ethnicity were reduced compared with previous reports. The findings suggest that risk assessment can be improved by including measures related to the behavior and demeanor of offenders and the cooperation of their parents or caretakers.

Key Words: risk assessment • juvenile justice • delinquency


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
C. S. Schwalbe
A Meta-Analysis of Juvenile Justice Risk Assessment Instruments: Predictive Validity by Gender
Criminal Justice and Behavior, November 1, 2008; 35(11): 1367 - 1381.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Youth Violence and Juvenile JusticeHome page
C. S. Schwalbe, R. J. Macy, S. H. Day, and M. W. Fraser
Classifying Offenders: An Application of Latent Class Analysis to Needs Assessment in Juvenile Justice
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, July 1, 2008; 6(3): 279 - 294.
[Abstract] [PDF]