A Jack of All Trades But a Master of None? Evaluating the Performance of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) in the Assessment of Risk and Need

References

• Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI–R). Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2000). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2007). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52(1), 7–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2011). The risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model: Does adding the good lives model contribute to effective crime prevention? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(7), 735–755.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., Wormith, J. S., Guzzo, L., Brews, A., Rettinger, J., & Rowe, R. (2011). Sources of variability in estimates of predictive validity A specification with level of service general risk and need. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(5), 413–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, J. (2003). Findings in prison classification and risk assessment. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Prisons.
   Google Scholar
• Austin, J., Coleman, D., Peyton, J., & Johnson, K. D. (2003). Reliability and validity study of the LSI-R risk assessment instrument. Washington, DC: Institute on Crime, Justice and Corrections at the George Washington University.
   Google Scholar
• Baird, C. (2009). A question of evidence: A critique of risk assessment models used in the justice system. Madison WI: National Council on Crime & Delinquency. Retrieved from http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/pubs/2009_a_question_evidence.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Baird, C., Healy, T., Johnson, K., Bogie, A., Dankert, E. W., & Scharenbroch, C. (2013). A comparison of risk assessment instruments in juvenile justice. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime & Delinquency. Retrieved from https://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdf/nccd_fire_report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Barnoski, R. (2006). Sex offender sentencing in Washington State: Predicting recidivism based on the LSI-R. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Barnoski, R., & Aos, S. (2003). Washington’s offender accountability act: An analysis of the Department of Corrections’ risk assessment ( Document No. 03-12-1202). Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Berk, R. A., Ladd, H., Graziano, H., & Baek, J.-H. (2003). Randomized experiment testing inmate classification systems. Criminology and Public Policy, 2(2), 215–242.
   Google Scholar
• Bonta, J. (2002). Offender risk assessment guidelines for selection and use. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29(4), 355–379.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouffard, J. A., & Bergseth, K. J. (2008). The impact of reentry services on juvenile offenders’ recidivism. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6(3), 295–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, E. W. (1928). Factors determining success or failure on parole. In A. A. Bruce, E. W. Burgess, J. Landesco, & A. J. Harno (Eds.), The workings of the indeterminate sentence law and the parole system in Illinois (pp. 221–234). Springfield, IL: Illinois State Board of Parole.
   Google Scholar
• Bushway, S., & Smith, J. (2007). Sentencing using statistical treatment rules: What we don’t know can hurt us. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 23, 377–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, J., & Pattavina, A. (2006). Assessing the role of clinical and actuarial risk assessment in an evidence-based community corrections system: Issues to consider. Federal Probation, 70(2), 64–67.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, M. A., French, S., & Gendreau, P. (2009). The prediction of violence in adult offenders a meta-analytic comparison of instruments and methods of assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(6), 567–590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, E. A. (2014). Prisoners in 2013. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Caruana, R., Niculescu-Mizil, A., Crew, G., & Ksikes, A. (2004). Ensemble selection from libraries of models. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 1–12). Banff, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Caudy, M. S., Durso, J. M., & Taxman, F. S. (2013). How well do dynamic needs predict recidivism? Implications for risk assessment and risk reduction. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 458–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chenane, J. L., Brennan, P. K., Steiner, B., & Ellison, J. M. (2014). Racial and ethnic differences in the predictive validity of the level of service inventory–revised among prison inmates. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(3), 286–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, V. (2015). Making the most of second chances: An evaluation of Minnesota’s High Risk Revocation Reduction Reentry Program. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(2), 193–215. doi:10.1007/s11292-014-9216-5.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, V., & Duwe, G. (2015). An outcome evaluation of a prison-based life skills program: The power of people. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59, 384–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of State Governments Justice Center (2015). What works in a reentry clearinghouse. Retrieved from https://whatworks.csgjusticecenter.org.
   Google Scholar
• Cullen, F. T. (2013). Rehabilitation: Beyond nothing works. Crime and Justice, 42(1), 299–376.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, M. D., & Sorensen, J. R. (2006). Actuarial models for assessing prison violence risk revisions and extensions of the Risk Assessment Scale for Prison (RASP). Assessment, 13(3), 253–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahle, K. P. (2006). Strengths and limitations of actuarial prediction of criminal re-offence in a German prison sample: A comparative study of LSI-R, HCR-20 and PCL-R. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 29(5), 431–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson, C. (2012). 2012 Iowa Board of Parole risk assessment validation. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning, Statistical Analysis Center.
   Google Scholar
• Dumont, R. (2013). Juvenile recidivism report. Maine Department of Corrections, Division of Juvenile Services. Muskie School of Public Service, Maine Statistical Analysis Center. Retrieved from http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/justiceresearch/Publications/Juvenile/2013_Juvenile_Recidivism_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2010). Prison-based chemical dependency treatment in Minnesota: An outcome evaluation. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6, 57–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2012). Evaluating the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP): Results from a randomized experiment. Justice Quarterly, 29, 347–383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2013). Can Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) work in the United States? Preliminary results from a randomized experiment in Minnesota. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 25, 143–165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2014a). The development, validity, and reliability of the Minnesota Screening Tool Assessing Recidivism Risk (MnSTARR). Criminal Justice Policy Review, 25, 579–613.
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2014b). A randomized experiment of a prisoner reentry program: Updated results from an evaluation of the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP). Criminal Justice Studies, 27, 172–190.
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2015a). The benefits of keeping idle hands busy: The impact of a prisoner reentry employment program on post-release employment and offender recidivism. Crime & Delinquency, 61, 559–586.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2015b). Does release planning for serious and persistent mental illness (SPMI) offenders reduce recidivism? Results from an outcome evaluation. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 54, 19–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G. (2015c). An outcome evaluation of a work release program: Estimating its effects on 810 recidivism, employment, and cost avoidance. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26(6), 531–554. doi:10.1177/0887403414524590.
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2013). Blessed be the social tie that binds: The effects of prison visitation on offender recidivism. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 24, 271–296.
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2014). The effects of prison-based educational programming on recidivism and employment. The Prison Journal, 94, 454–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2015). Importance of program integrity: Outcome evaluation of a gender-responsive, cognitive-behavioral program for female offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 14(2), 301–328. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12123.
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Goldman, R. (2009). The impact of prison-based treatment on sex offender recidivism: Evidence from Minnesota. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 21, 279–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Johnson, B. (2013). Estimating the benefits of a faith-based correctional program. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 2, 227–239.
   Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Johnson, B. (in press). The effects of prison visits from community volunteers on offender recidivism. The Prison Journal.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & Kerschner, D. (2008). Removing a nail from the boot camp coffin: An outcome evaluation of Minnesota’s Challenge Incarceration Program. Crime & Delinquency, 54, 614–643.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duwe, G., & King, M. (2013). Can faith-based correctional programs work? An outcome evaluation of the InnerChange Freedom Initiative in Minnesota. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57, 813–841.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fass, T. L., Heilbrun, K., Dematteo, D., & Fretz, R. (2008). The LSI-R and the COMPAS: Validation data on two risk-needs tools. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(9), 1095–1108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fazel, S., Singh, J. P., Doll, H., & Grann, M. (2012). Use of risk assessment instruments to predict violence and antisocial behaviour in 73 samples involving 24,827 people: systematic review and meta-analysis BMJ, 345, e4692.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flores, A. W., Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., & Latessa, E. J. (2006). Predicting outcome with the Level of Service Inventory-Revised: The importance of implementation integrity. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(5), 523–529.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folsom, J., & Atkinson, J.L. (2007). The generalizability of the LSI-R and the CAT to the prediction of recidivism in female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1044–1056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gendreau, P. (1996). Offender rehabilitation what we know and what needs to be done. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23(1), 144–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gendreau, P., Goggin, C. E., & Law, M. A. (1997). Predicting prison misconducts. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24(4), 414–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2002). Is the PCL-R really the “unparalleled” measure of offender risk? A lesson in knowledge cumulation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29(4), 397–426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottfredson, S. D., & Moriarty, L. J. (2006). Statistical risk assessment: Old problems and new applications. Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 178–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallgren, K.A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8(1), 23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hand, D. J. (2009). Measuring classifier performance: a coherent alternative to the area under the ROC curve. Machine Learning, 77, 103–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herberman, E. J., & Bonczar, T. P. (2015). Probation and parole in the United States, 2013. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs.
   Google Scholar
• Hess, J., & Turner, S. (2013). Risk assessment accuracy in corrections population management: Testing the promise of tree Based Ensemble Predictions. Irvine, CA: The University of California Irvine, Center for Evidence-Based Corrections.
   Google Scholar
• Hoge, R. D., & Andrews, D. A. (2011). Youth Level of Service/case Management Inventory 2.0 (YLS/CMI 2.0): User’s manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Holsinger, A. M., Lowenkamp, C. T., & Latessa, E. J. (2006). Exploring the validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised with Native American offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(3), 331–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holtfreter, K., & Cupp, R. (2007). Gender and risk assessment the empirical status of the LSI-R for women. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23(4), 363–382.
   Google Scholar
• Kroner, D. G., & Mills, J. F. (2001). The accuracy of five risk appraisal instruments in predicting institutional misconduct and new convictions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28(4), 471–489.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labrecque, R. M., Smith, P., Lovins, B. K., & Latessa, E. J. (2014). The importance of reassessment: How changes in the LSI-R risk score can improve the prediction of recidivism. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(2), 116–128.
   Google Scholar
• Latessa, E., Smith, P., Lemke, R., Makarios, M., & Lowenkamp, C. (2009). Creation and Validation of the Ohio Risk Assessment System: Final Report. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati.
   Google Scholar
• Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., & Latessa, E. J. (2001). Risk/need assessment, offender classification, and the role of childhood abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28(5), 543–563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowenkamp, C. T., Lovins, B., & Latessa, E. J. (2009). Validating the Level of Service Inventory–Revised and the Level of Service Inventory: Screening version with a sample of probationers. The Prison Journal, 89(2), 192–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKenzie, D. L. (2000). Evidence-based corrections: Identifying what works. Crime & Delinquency, 46(4), 457–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manchak, S. M., Skeem, J. L., Douglas, K. S., & Siranosian, M. (2009). Does gender moderate the predictive utility of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) for serious violent offenders? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(5), 425–442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morash, M. (2009). A great debate over using the Level of Service Inventory‐Revised (LSI‐R) with women offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(1), 173–181.
   Google Scholar
• Munder, T., Flückiger, C., Gerger, H., Wampold, B. E., & Barth, J. (2012). Is the allegiance effect an epiphenomenon of true efficacy differences between treatments? A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59(4), 631–637.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Northcutt Bohmert, M., & Duwe, G. (2012). Minnesota’s Affordable Homes Program: Evaluating the effects of a prison work program on recidivism, employment, and cost avoidance. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 23, 327–351.
   Google Scholar
• Olver, M. E., Stockdale, K. C., & Wormith, J. S. (2013). Thirty years of research on the Level of Service Scales: A meta-analytic examination of predictive accuracy and sources of variability, Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 156–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M., & Herrschaft, B.A. (2013). Validating the Level of Service Inventory-Revised: A gendered perspective. The Prison Journal, 93, 291–312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer, E. J., & Hollin, C. R. (2007). The Level of Service Inventory–Revised with English women prisoners: A needs and reconviction analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(8), 971–984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859–866.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ragusa-Salerno, L. M., Ostermann, M., & Thomas, S. S. (2013). Does the LSI-R have utility for sex offenders? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 952–969.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocque, M., & Plummer-Beale, J. (2014). In the eye of the beholder? An examination of the inter-rater reliability of the LSI-R and YLS/CMI in a correctional agency. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(6), 568–578.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlager, M. D., & Pacheco, D. (2011). An examination of changes in LSI-R scores over time: Making the case for needs-based case management. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(6), 541–553.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlager, M. D., & Simourd, D. J. (2007). Validity of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) Among African American and Hispanic Male Offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(4), 545–554.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simourd, D. J., & Malcolm, P. B. (1998). Reliability and validity of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised among federally incarcerated sex offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(2), 261–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, J. P., Grann, M., & Fazel, S. (2013). Authorship bias in violence risk assessment? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS One, 8(9), e72484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skeem, J. L., & Monahan, J. (2011). Current directions in violence risk assessment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(1), 38–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, P., Cullen, F. T., & Latessa, E. J. (2009). Can 14,737 women be wrong? A meta‐analysis of the LSI‐R and recidivism for female offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(1), 183–208.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, W. (1996). The effects of base rate and cutoff point choice on commonly used measures of association and accuracy in recidivism research. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 12, 83–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornton, D., & Laws, D. R. (2009). Cognitive approaches to the assessment of sexual interest in sexual offenders. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• VanNostrand, M., & Keebler, G. (2009). Pretrial risk assessment in the Federal court. The Office of the Federal Detention Trustee, Luminosity. Retrieved from http://www.pretrial.org/download/risk-assessment/Pretrial%20Risk%20Assessment%20in%20the%20Federal%20Court%20Final%20Report%20(2009).pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vose, B., Cullen, F. T., & Smith, P. (2008). Empirical status of the Level of Service Inventory. The Federal Probation, 72(3), 22–29.
   Google Scholar
• Vose, B., Smith, P., & Cullen, F. T. (2013). Predictive validity and the impact of change in total LSI-R score on recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(12), 1383–1396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins, I. (2011). The utility of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) assessments within NSW correctional environments. Corrective Services NSW Research Bulletin, January, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Whiteacre, K. W. (2006). Testing the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) for racial/ethnic bias. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17(3), 330–342.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, D. B., Bouffard, L. A., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2005). A quantitative review of structured, group-oriented, cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32(2), 172–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, H. A., & Gutierrez, L. (2014). Does one size fit all? A meta-analysis examining the predictive ability of the Level of Service Inventory (LSI) with Aboriginal offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(2), 196–219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, J. (2014). Testing the predictive validity of the LSI-R using a sample of young male offenders on probation in Guangzhou, China. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. doi:10.1177/0306624X14557471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar