Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Research on Social Work Practice
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gentry, A. L.
Right arrow Articles by Theriot, M. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Comparing Sex Offender Risk Classification Using the Static-99 and LSI-R Assessment Instruments

Amanda L. Gentry

University of Tennessee

Catherine N. Dulmus

University at Buffalo

Matthew T. Theriot

University of Tennessee

Objective: This study compares sex offender risk classification using two popular actuarial risk assessment instruments—the Static-99 and the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R). Despite their extensive use, the two scales assess different types of risk factors and research has yet to compare them. Method: Static-99 and LSI-R risk assessments were compared for 30 adult male sex offenders attending a community-based treatment program. Results: A paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed a significant difference (Z = –3.962,p < .001) between the instruments, with 63.3% of the sample classified as higher risk for reoffending by the Static-99 than by the LSI-R. Conclusions: The Static-99 may be a more conservative risk assessment tool. Yet because the LSI-R provides useful information about an offender’s current needs not included on the Static-99, treatment providers should use both instruments. This more comprehensive assessment of criminogenic risk and need will better inform supervision and intervention decisions.

Key Words: risk assessment • sex offenders • Static-99 • Level Of Service Inventory-Revised • LSI-R

Research on Social Work Practice, Vol. 15, No. 6, 557-563 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1049731505275869
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
C.-I Hsu, P. Caputi, and M. K. Byrne
The Level of Service Inventory--Revised (LSI-R): A Useful Risk Assessment Measure for Australian Offenders?
Criminal Justice and Behavior, July 1, 2009; 36(7): 728 - 740.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Contemporary Criminal JusticeHome page
K. Holtfreter and R. Cupp
Gender and Risk Assessment: The Empirical Status of the LSI-R for Women
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, November 1, 2007; 23(4): 363 - 382.
[Abstract] [PDF]