Stalans, L. The total scale score for the instrument is computed through simple addition across the 4 item scores. That certain items or domains of risk factors add incrementally to the prediction of violence or crime is uncontroversial.
Given large enough samples sizes, the null hypothesis finding no incremental validity can almost always be rejected Cohen, What statistics should we use to report predictive accuracy. Of course, if the additional items are substantially worse less predictive than the items already considered, the accuracy of the overall prediction would deteriorate.
University of Leicester, United Kingdom.
Such an empirical prediction is particularly relevant when the evaluator's primary concern is predicting a discrete i. Criminal recidivism in sexual homicide perpetrators. Analyses conducted separately for each comparison, with each sample entered as strata and both risk instruments entered in Step 1.
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, Accuracy of actuarial procedures for assessment of sexual offender recidivism risk may vary across ethnicity. Relative risk for StaticR calculated in a previous study Hanson et al. Law and Human Behavior, 34
We could not compute strong tests of the differences between these measures because the data were collected from different studies. Contact SAGE. Such fluctuations are to be expected given the small sample sizes. June 1, The extent to which these risk scales work for the full range of individuals with developmental disability remains a question for future research.
Anderson, Neil, et al. Inclusion criteria. Although the effects were not significantly higher in the DSP samples than in other studies, the sample size was insufficient for strong tests.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 17 , Given large enough samples sizes, the null hypothesis finding no incremental validity can almost always be rejected Cohen, Cohen, J. Corrections Research User Report No. A method of comparing the Areas under ROC curves derived from same cases.