Vasiljevic Zoran, Berglund Mats, Öjehagen Agneta, Höglund Peter, Andersson Claes
Department of Criminology, Malmö University, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Sweden.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2017 Apr 30;24(5):715-729. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2017.1308219. eCollection 2017.
Few studies have assessed acute dynamic risk repeatedly among paroled offenders to investigate the relationship between changes in acute dynamic risk and recidivism in crime. The present study investigates whether one-month changes in ten stress-related acute dynamic risk factors, collected through automated telephony while the participants were still in prison and over 30 consecutive days following parole, predict one-year criminal recidivism, including its predictive accuracy. The study also investigates whether a brief feedback intervention in conjunction with the daily assessments reduces recidivism compared to an assessment-only control group. Changes in five risk factors were found to be associated with increased risk of criminal recidivism after controlling for the results in prison, the initial value after parole, and the intervention. The predictive accuracy is marginally accurate: Summary score (AUC) = .666; Level of stress (AHSS) = .644; Psychiatric symptoms (SCL-8D) = .641; Anxiety symptoms = .673; Severity of most stressful daily event = .690. No differences in one-year recidivism rates were established between the intervention group and the control group. The study shows that daily assessments can usefully be made of dynamic risk factors in paroled offenders.
很少有研究在假释罪犯中反复评估急性动态风险，以调查急性动态风险变化与再次犯罪之间的关系。本研究调查了通过自动电话收集的十个与压力相关的急性动态风险因素在参与者仍在监狱时以及假释后的连续30多天内的一个月变化，是否能预测一年后的再次犯罪，包括其预测准确性。该研究还调查了与仅进行评估的对照组相比，结合每日评估的简短反馈干预是否能减少再次犯罪。在控制了入狱时的结果、假释后的初始值和干预措施后，发现五个风险因素的变化与再次犯罪风险的增加有关。预测准确性勉强准确：综合评分（AUC）=0.666；压力水平（AHSS）=0.644；精神症状（SCL-8D）=0.641；焦虑症状=0.673；最具压力的日常事件严重程度=0.690。干预组和对照组之间在一年再犯率上没有差异。该研究表明，对假释罪犯的动态风险因素进行每日评估是有用的。
