A Bayesian approach to the group versus individual prediction controversy in actuarial risk assessment

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 237-246

  Scurich, Nicholas ^a   John, Richard S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

actuarial risk assessment; Bayes theorem; credible intervals

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS;

ACTUARIAL ANALYSIS; BAYES THEOREM; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; HUMANS; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84867662261     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/h0093973     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Aickin, M. (1986). Issues and methods in discrimination statistics. In D. H. Kaye & M. Aickin (Eds.), Statistical methods in discrimination litigation (pp. 159 -210). New York: Marcel Dekker.
2. Berry, D. A. (1996). Statistics: A Bayesian perspective. New York: Duxbury Press.
3. Bolstad, W. M. (2007). Introduction to Bayesian statistics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
4. Clemen, R. T. (1991). Making hard decisions: An introduction to decision analysis. Boston: PWS-Kent.
5. Cooke, D. J. (2010). More prejudicial than probative? The Journal Online. Available at http://www.journalonline.co.uk/Extras/ 1007494.aspx.
6. Cooke, D. J., & Michie, C. (2010). Limitations of diagnostic precision and predictive utility in the individual case: A challenge for forensic practice. Law and Human Behavior, 34(4), 259 -274. doi:10.1007/ s10979-009-9176-x
7. Coyne, J. (1994) In re Linehan 518 N.W.2d 609 at 616.
8. Dawes, R. M. (2002). The ethics of using or not using statistical prediction rules in psychological practice and related consulting activities. Philosophy of Science, 69, s178 -s184. doi:10.1086/ 341844
9. Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science, 243, 1668 -1674. doi:10.1126/ science. 2648573
10. Degroot, M. H. (1970). Optimal statistical decisions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
11. Edwards, W., Lindman, H., & Savage, L. J. (1963). Bayesian statistical inference for psychological research. Psychological Review, 70(3), 193-242. doi:10.1037/h0044139
12. English, P. W., & Sales, B. D. (2005). More than the law: Behavioral and social facts in legal decision making. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Reno v. Flores (1993) 507 U.S. 292.
13. Goodman, D. S. (1987). Demographic evidence in capital sentencing. Stanford Law Review, 39, 499 -523.
14. Grisso, T., & Applebaum, P. S. (1992). Is it unethical to offer predictions of future violence? Law and Human Behavior, 16(6), 621- 633. doi:10.1007/BF01884019
15. Grove, W. M., & Meehl, P. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 2(2), 293-323.
16. Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snith, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 19 -30. doi:10.1037/1040- 3590.12.1.19
17. Haney, C. (1980). Psychology and legal change: On the limits of factual jurisprudence. Law and Human Behavior, 4(3), 147-199. doi: 10.1007/BF01040317
18. Hanson, R. K., & Howard, P. D. (2010). Individual confidence intervals do not inform decision-makers about the accuracy of risk assessment evaluations. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 275-281. doi:10.1007/ s10979-010-9227-3
19. Harris, G. T. (2003). Men in his category have a 50% likelihood, but which half is he in? Comments on Berlin, Galbreath, Geary, and McGlone. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15(4), 389 -392. doi:10.1023/A:1025064514752
20. Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (2007). Abandoning evidence-based risk appraisal in forensic psychiatry: Comments on
21. Hart et al. British Journal of Psychiatry. http://bjp.rcpsych. org/cgi/ eletters/190/49/s60#5674.
22. Hart, S. D. (2003). Actuarial risk assessment: commentary on Berlin et al. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15(4), 383-388. doi:10.1023/A:1025012530682 0
23. Hart, S. D., Cooke, D. J., & Michie, C. (2007a). Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments: Evaluating the "margins of error" of group v. individual predictions of violence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, s60 -s65. doi:10.1192/bjp.190.5.s60
24. Hart, S. D., Cooke, D. J., & Michie, C. (2007b) Margins of error for individual risk estimates: Large, unknown and incalculable. British Journal of Psychiatry [electronic letter]. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/eletters/190/49/ s60#5674.
25. Heilbrun, K., Douglas, K. S., & Yasuhara, K. (2009). Violence risk assessment: core controversies. In J. Skeem, K. S. Douglas, & S. Lilienfield (Eds.), Psychological science in the courtroom: Controversies and consensus. New York: Guilford.
26. Hilton, N. Z., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2006). Sixty-six years of research on the clinical versus actuarial prediction of violence. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(3), 400 - 409. doi:10.1177/ 0011000005285877
27. Hora, S. C. (2007). Eliciting probabilities from experts. In W. Edwards, R. Miles & D. von Winterfeldt (Eds.), Advances in decision analysis (pp. 129-153). New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Janus, E., & Meehl, P. E. (1997). Assessing the legal standard for predictions of dangerousness in sexual offender commitment proceedings. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3(1), 33-64.
29. Janus, E., & Prentky, R. A. (2003). Forensic use of actuarial risk assessment with sex offenders: Accuracy, admissibility and accountability. American Law Review, 40, 1443-1502.
30. Koehler, J. J. (1996). The base rate fallacy reconsidered: descriptive, normative and methodological challenges. Behavioral and Brian Sciences, 19, 1-53.
31. Lempert, R. O. (1977). Modeling relevance. Michigan Law Review, 75, 1021-1057.
32. Lempert, R. (1986). The new evidence scholarship: analyzing the process of proof. Boston University Law Review, 66, 439-477.
33. Lyon, T. D., & Koehler, J. (1996). The relevance ratio: Examining the probative value of expert testimony in child sexual abuse cases. Cornell Law Review, 82, 43-78.
34. Meehl, P. E., & Rosen, A. (1955). Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns or cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 194-216.
35. Miller, M., & Morris, N. (1988). Predictions of dangerousness: An argument for limited use. Violence and Victims, 3(4), 263-283.
36. Monahan, J. (1981). The clinical prediction of violent behavior. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
37. Monahan, J. (2005). Clinical and actuarial predictions of violence: scientific status. In D. Faigman, D. H. Kaye, M. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Modern scientific evidence (pp. 90-109). St. Paul, MN: Thompson West.
38. Monahan, J., & Wexler, D. B. (1978). A definite maybe: proof and probability in civil commitment. Law and Human Behavior, 2(1), 37- 42. doi:10.1007/BF01047500
39. Morris, G. H. (1999). Defining dangerousness: Risking a dangerous definition. Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 10, 61-101.
40. Mossman, D. (1994). Assessing predictions of violence: Being accurate about accuracy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62(4), 783-792.
41. Mossman, D. (2006). Another look at interpreting risk categories. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 18(1), 41-63. doi: 10.1007/s11194-006-9001-8
42. Mossman, D., & Sellke, T. M. (2007). Avoiding errors about "margins of error". British Journal of Psychiatry. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/eletters/ 190/49/s60#5674.
43. Oleson, J. J. (2010). Bayesian credible intervals for binomial proportions in a single patient trial. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 19, 559-574. doi:10.1177/0962280209349008
44. Phillips, L. D. (1973). Bayesian statistics for social scientists. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd.
45. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Dover.
46. Schopp, R. F. (1996). Communicating risk assessments: Accuracy, efficacy and responsibility. American Psychologist, 51, 939-944.
47. Scurich, N. (2010). Interpretative arguments of forensic match evidence: An evidentiary analysis. Dartmouth Law Journal, 8(2), 31-47.
48. Scurich, N., & John, R. S. (2010). The normative threshold for psychiatric civil commitment. Jurimetrics Journal, 50(4), 425-452.
49. Skeem, J. L., & Monahan, J. (2011). Current directions in violence risk assessment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(1), 38-42. doi:10.1177/0963721410397271
50. Slobogin, C. (2006). Dangerousness and expertise redux. Emory Law Journal, 56(2), 275-326.
51. Slobogin, C. (2007). Proving the unprovable. The role of law, science and speculation in adjudicating culpability and dangerousness. New York: Oxford University Press.
52. Underwood, B. (1979). Law and the crystal ball: Predicting behavior with statistical inference and individualized judgment. Yale Law Journal, 88(7), 1404-1448.
53. Winkler, R. L. (1972). Introduction to Bayesian inference and decision. New York: Holt and Winston, Inc.