Disconfirmation of the predictive validity of the self-appraisal questionnaire in a sample of high-risk drug offenders

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 449-466

  Mitchell, Ojmarrh ^a   MacKenzie, Doris Layton ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Drug offender; Psychometrics; Risk assessment; Self Appraisal Questionnaire

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745626784     PISSN: 00938548     EISSN: 15523594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0093854806287421     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
2. Bonta, J., Law, M., & Hanson, K. (1998). The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 123-142.
3. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4. Ebel, R. L. (1965). Measuring educational achievement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5. Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works! Criminology, 34, 575-607.
6. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
7. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
8. Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snitz, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19-30.
9. Hare, R. D. (1990). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
10. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1993). Violent recidivism of mentally disordered offenders: The development of a statistical prediction instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 315-335.
11. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting errors and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12. Kanyongo, G. Y., & Brooks, G. P. (2003, October). A Monte Carlo study of the influence of reliability on four rules for determining the number of components to retain from a principal components analysis. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Columbus, OH.
13. Kelley, T. L. (1939). Selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 17-24.
14. Knol, D. L., & Berger, M. P. F. (1991). Empirical comparison between factor analysis and multidimensional item response models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 457-477.
15. Kroner, D. G., & Loza, W. (2001). Evidence for the efficacy of self-report in predicting nonviolent and violent criminal recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 168-177.
16. Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70. Boston: Harvard University Press.
17. Loza, W. (1996). Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ): A measure for assessing violent and non-violent recidivism. Unpublished manuscript.
18. Loza, W., Conley, M., & Warren, B. (2004). Concurrent cross-validation of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire: A tool for assessing violent and nonviolent recidivism and institutional adjustment on a sample of North Carolina offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, 85-95.
19. Loza, W., Cumbleton, A., Neo, L. H., Evans, M., Conley, M., & Summers, R. (2004). Crossvalidation of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1172-1190.
20. Loza, W., Dhaliwal, G., Kroner, D. G., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2000). Reliability, construct, and concurrent validities of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 356-374.
21. Loza, W., & Green, K. (2003). A self-report measure for predicting recidivism versus clinicianadministered measures: A 5-year follow-up study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 781-797.
22. Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2000). Predictive validity of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 1183-1191.
23. Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2001). The effectiveness of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire in predicting offenders' postrelease outcome: A comparison study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 105-121.
24. Loza, W., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2003). More evidence for the validity of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire for predicting violent and nonviolent recidivism: A 5-year follow-up study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 709-721.
25. Loza, W., Neo, L. H., Shanifar, A., & Loza-Fanous, A. (2005). Cross-validation of the Self Appraisal Questionnaire: A tool for assessing violent and nonviolent recidivism with female offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49, 547-560.
26. McLeod, L. D., Swygert, K., & Thissen, D. (2001). Factor analysis for items scored in two categories. In D. Thissen & H. Wainer (Eds.), Test scoring (pp. 189-216). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Mislevy, R. (1986). Recent developments in the factor analysis of categorical variables. Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 3-31.
28. Mitchell, O., MacKenzie, D. L., & Perez, D. (2005). A randomized evaluation of the Maryland correctional boot camp for adults: Effects on offender anti-social attitudes and cognitions. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 40, 71-86.
29. Muthén, B. O. (1989). Dichotomous factor analysis of symptom data. Sociological Methods & Research, 18, 19-65.
30. Nagin, D. S., & Paternoster, R. (2000). Population heterogeneity and state dependence: State of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16, 117-144.
31. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
32. Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., & Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In R. D. Goffin, & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (pp. 41-71). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
33. Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Factors influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.