Editorial: Guest editors’ comments: risk assessment and judicial decision making

No Thumbnail Available
Issue Date
2019-02-01
Embargo End Date
Authors
Salisbury, Emily J.
Sundt, Jody L.
Boppre, Breanna L.
Advisor
Citation

Salisbury, E. J., Sundt, J., & Boppre, B. (2019). Guest Editors’ Comments: Risk Assessment and Judicial Decision Making. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(2), 181–184

Abstract

Many readers and contributors to Criminal Justice and Behavior (CJB) have been trained on and inculcated into a culture that supports the use of actuarial risk assessment instruments (including ourselves). In fact, much of the hallmark research on offender risk assessment has been published in this journal over the last three decades (e.g., Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990; Barbaree, Seto, Langton, & Peacock, 2001; Bonta, 2002; Gendreau, Goggin, & Law, 1997; Jesness, 1988; Monahan, 1996; Schwalbe, 2008; Simourd, 2004). Still other scholars firmly caution against the use of risk assessment, arguing it produces biased, unfair inequities based on factors such as race, gender, and financial status (Hannah-Moffat, 2013; Harcourt, 2015; Starr, 2015). As scholars who were formerly part of the CJB editorial team, we felt this journal was an important venue for discussing the risk assessment debate, and to encourage ongoing discourse.

Table of Content
Description
Click on the DOI link to access the article (may not be free).
publication.page.dc.relation.uri
DOI