The criminogenic profile of violent female offenders incarcerated in Western Australian prisons as per the Level of Service/Risk, Need, Responsivity (LS/RNR) and Violence Risk Scale (VRS)

Abstract

Female offender risk assessment is predominantly based on criminogenic factors that predict reoffending in males. Research indicates there are criminogenic factors specific to female offenders, and certain factors linked to offending for both sexes have greater impact on female offenders. This paper extends current research using a Western Australian sample to determine whether findings are replicated with an Australian cohort. Gender differences in the criminogenic profile of 1704 violent offenders (9% female), assessed using the Level of Service/Risk, Need, Responsivity (LS/RNR) and Violence Risk Scale (VRS), were analysed using a matched sample study design. There were significant gender differences on all components of the LS/RNR, except criminal history. In the subsequent matched study, these differences varied, and females scored significantly lower on all VRS-SV items, except age. Gender differences in violence risk scores were clear, providing support for gender-responsive assessment and treatment of violent female offenders, with further validation needed.

Keywords:

• female offenders
• profile
• risk assessment
• violence

Acknowledgements

The assistance of the Department of Justice WA in conducting this research is acknowledged, particularly the Knowledge and Information Team (KIT) information who sourced and provided the initial dataset.

The assistance of the Masters of Social Work students from the University of Western Australia and their Manager at the Department of Justice, Helen Cheetham, are also acknowledged with regards to data entry and data integrity.

Ethical standards

Declaration of conflicts of interest

Menna Gower has declared no conflicts of interest.

Caroline Spiranovic has declared no conflicts of interest.

Frank Morgan has declared no conflicts of interest.

Julie Saunders has declared no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee [Human Ethics Office of Research, RA/4/1/6720; and Research and Ethics Committee at the Department of Justice, Project ID 363] and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

The waiver of informed consent was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) at the University of Western Australia as the data is retrospective and sourced from pre-existing databases, the research was classed as negligible risk, and confidentiality could not be upheld if informed consent was pursued. Contact with participants was not required at any point of the research.

Disclaimer

Any material published or made publicly available by a researcher cannot be considered as endorsed by the Department of Justice WA (the Department) or reflect the policies of the Department.

Any errors of omission or commission are the responsibility of the researchers.

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.