Great Analysis, But Problematic Assumptions: A Critique of Janus and Meehl (1997)

Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 45-51

  Doren, Dennis M ^a   Epperson, Douglas L ^b  

^a Mendota Mental Health Institute   (United States)

^b Department of Statistics Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence Iowa State University 2438 Osborn Dr Ames   (United States)

Author keywords

commitment; Janus and Meehl; judiciary standard; predator; prediction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84993709946     PISSN: 10790632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/107906320101300105     Document Type: Article

References (6)

1. Doren, D.M. (1998). Recidivism base rates, predictions of sex offender recidivism, and the “sexual predator” commitment laws. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 16. 97-114.
2. Epperson, D.L., Kaul, J.D., & Hesselton, D. (1999, March). Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool— Revised: Development, effectiveness, and recommended risk level cut scores. Paper distributed as part of a presentation to the Wisconsin Sex Offender Treatment Network Fellows, LaCrosse, WI.
3. Hanson, R.K. (1997). The development of a brief actuarial risk scale for sexual offense recidivism (User Report No. 1997-04). Ottawa: Corrections Branck, Ministry of the Solicitor General of Canada.
4. Hanson, R.K., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24(1), 119-136.
5. Janus, E.S., & Meehl, P.E. (1997). Assessing the legal standard for predictions of dangerousness in sex offender commitment proceedings. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3(1), 33-64.
6. Prentky, R.A., Lee, A.F.S., Knight, R.A., & Cerce, D. (1997). Recidivism rates among child molesters and rapists: A methodological analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 21(6),635-659.