False positives, false negatives, and false analyses: A rejoinder to "machine bias: There's software used across the country to predict future criminals. And it's biased against blacks"

Federal Probation

Volumn 80, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 38-46

  Flores, Anthony W ^a   Bechtel, Kristin ^b   Lowenkamp, Christopher T ^c  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Crime and Justice Institute at CRJ   (United States)

^c Administrative Office of the US Courts Probation and Pretrial Services Office   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85010723519     PISSN: 00149128     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Aguinis, H., Culpepper, S. A., & Pierce, C. A. (2010). Revival of test bias research in preemployment testing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 648-680.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (2014). The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA Publications.
3. Andrews, D., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52(1), 7-27.
4. Angwin, J., Larson, J., Mattu, S., & Kirchner, L. (2016). Machine Bias. There is software that is used across the county to predict future criminals. And it is biased against blacks. Retrieved from: https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessmentsin-criminal-sentencing
5. Brennan, X, Dietrich, W, & Ehret, B. (2009). Evaluating the predictive validity of the COMPAS risk and needs assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(1), 21-40.
6. Carson, E. A. (2015). Prisoners in 2014. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved 10/10/15 from: http://www.bjs. gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5387
7. Dawid, A. P. (2015). Statistical causality from a decision-theoretic perspective. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 2, 273-303.
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. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychological Assessment, 21(1), 1-21.
10. Harris, G. T., Lowenkamp, C. X., Hilton, N. Z. (2015). Estimate for risk assessment precision: Implications for individual risk communication. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 33, 111-127.
11. Henrichson, C, & Delaney, R. (2012). The price of prisons: What incarceration costs the taxpayer. Vera Institute of Justice. Retrieved from: http://www.vera.org/pubs/special/price-prisons-what-incarceration-coststaxpayers
12. Imrey, R B., & Dawid, A. P. (2015). A commentary on statistical assessment of violence recidivism risk. Statistics and Public Policy, 2(1), 1-18.
13. Kirchner, L. (2016). The Senate's popular sentencing reform bill would sort prisoners by risk score. Retrieved from: https://www.propublica.org/article/senates-popular-sentencing-reform-bill-would-sort-prisonersby-risk-score
14. Larson, J., Mattu, S., Kirchner, L., & Angwin, J. (2016). How we analyzed the COMPAS recidivism algorithm. Retrieved from: https://www.propublica.org/article/how-weanalyzed-the-compas-recidivism-algorithm
15. Marco, C. A. & Larkin, G. L. (2000). Research ethics: Ethical issues for data reporting and the quest for authenticity. Academic Emergency Medicine, 7(6), 691-694.
16. Maltz, M. D. (1984). Recidivism. Originally published by Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL.
17. Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
18. Mills, J. L. (1993). Data torturing. The New England Journal of Medicine, 329(16), 1196-1199.
19. Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC Area, Cohens d, and r. Law and Human Behavior, 29(5), 15-20.
20. Silver, E., Smith, W. R., & Banks, S. (2000). Constructing actuarial devices for predicting recidivism: A comparison of methods. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 733-764.
21. Singh, J. P. (2013). Predictive validity performance indicators in violence risk assessment: A methodological primer. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31(1), 8-22.
22. Singh, J. P., Grann, M., & Fazel, S. (2011). A comparative study of violent risk assessment tools: A systematic metaregression analysis of 68 studies involving 25, 890 participants. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(3), 499-513.
23. Skeem, J. L., & Lowenkamp, C. T. (2016a). Risk, race, and recidivism: Predictive bias and disparate impact. Manuscript under review. Retrieved from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract-id=2687339
24. Skeem, J., & Lowenkamp, C. T. (2016b). Race and actuarial risk assessment: The Level of Service Inventory Revised. University of California, Berkeley: Unpublished Manuscript.
25. Skeem, J. L., Monahan, J., & Lowenkamp, C. T. (in press). Gender, risk assessment, and sanctioning: The cost of treating women like men. Law and Human Behavior
26. United States Census Bureau (2014). United States Quick Facts. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00
27. Wagner, P., & Walsh, A. (2016). States of incarceration: The global context. Prison Policy Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.prisonpolicy.org/global/2016.html