The Juvenile Sex Offender Risk Assessment Protocol-II (J-SOAP-II) is a structured risk assessment tool designed to evaluate risk of sexual violence and general offending in adolescent males (12–18 years) with a history of coercive sexual behavior. The J-SOAP-II is relevant to the field of criminal psychology given that it is one of the most commonly administered risk assessment tools designed for adolescent sexual offenders in the United States and Canada. Moreover, the J-SOAP-II was specifically designed to aid in treatment planning and in monitoring treatment-related change. After a description of the J-SOAP-II, this article discusses its purpose and development and provides a brief overview of empirical findings regarding its reliability and validity.
Description and Purpose of the J-SOAP-II
The J-SOAP-II comprises a 28-item checklist designed to assess and manage risk of sexual violence and general delinquency and can be administered as part of a comprehensive assessment. The 28 items form four distinct scales, two of which are viewed as static or historical (i.e., Sexual Drive/Preoccupation Scale and Impulsive/ Antisocial Scale) while the remaining two are modifiable or dynamic (i.e., Intervention Scale and Community Stability/Adjustment Scale). All items are operationally defined with behavioral anchors and scored using a three-level rating system (i.e., 0, 1, and 2) with all items weighted equally. Table 1 displays the J-SOAP-II items by scale.
Although initially intended to be an actuarial assessment tool (i.e., a risk assessment tool that provides probabilistic estimates of sexual reoffending based on total scores or predetermined cutoffs), the J-SOAP-II does not provide cutoff scores or probability of risk. Rather, total scores may be calculated by summing the items for the J-SOAP-II and its individual scales. In addition, static and dynamic scores can be calculated by summing Items 1–16 and 17–28, respectively. To further aid in interpretation, the level of risk may be calculated for each score by dividing the summed value by the total possible score for the scale. Adjustments to the scoring criteria or total scores are not recommended; nevertheless, incorporating risk-relevant factors not otherwise reflected in the tool (i.e., case-specific risk/ protective factors), and adjusting the adolescent’s overall risk accordingly, is permitted on the basis of the clinical opinion of the assessor. Therefore, it is possible that an adolescent may be deemed high risk by an assessor despite scoring low on the J-SOAP-II (and vice versa). Moreover, should insufficient information be available for scoring items, assessors are encouraged to rate items favoring lower risk; however, the potential for the underestimation of risk in such instances should be acknowledged.
Because of rapid developmental changes occurring during adolescence, the authors of the J-SOAP-II recommend that regular reassessments occur during the course of treatment and prior to release from custody to monitor change in risk. Such reassessments should occur at a minimum of every 6 months, particularly if any risk-relevant changes occur (e.g., expulsion from school). However, if an adolescent is currently incarcerated in a correctional facility or residential treatment program, it is recommended that the Community Stability/Adjustment Scale not be rated unless the youth resided for a minimum of 2 months within the community prior to incarceration. Likewise, following release from custody, adolescents have to be in the community for a minimum of 3 months before the Community Stability/ Adjustment Scale items may be scored.
Development of the J-SOAP-II
The J-SOAP-II is a revision of the 1994 tool, the J-SOAP. Initial item selection was based on an extensive review of the empirical literature on adolescent and adult sexual offenders (e.g., clinical and risk assessment or outcome studies), which resulted in the development of 23 items that are divided into four subscales: Sexual Drive/Sexual Preoccupation; Impulsive, Antisocial Behavior; Clinical/Treatment; and Community Adjustment. In 1998, following an initial validation study, an additional 3 items were incorporated into the tool, and further clarification of item descriptions was provided. In the early 2000s, several studies were conducted to examine the factor structure, reliability, and validity (e.g., concurrent and predictive) of the J-SOAP. These studies informed the next round of revisions to the J-SOAP that would result in the development of the J-SOAP-II.
Based on the study results in the early 2000s, a number of significant changes were made to the items of the J-SOAP. First, several new items were introduced to the Sexual Drive/Preoccupation Scale (i.e., Number of Sexual Abuse Victims, Male Child Victim, Sexualized Aggression, and Sexual Victimization History), while the item High Degree of Sexualizing the Victim was removed and Sexual Drive and Preoccupation (formerly referred to as Evidence of Sexual Preoccupation/Obsessions) was revised. Second, 3 items were removed from the Impulsive/Antisocial Scale: History of Substance Abuse, History of Parental Substance Abuse, and Impulsivity. Furthermore, Physical Assault History/
Exposure to Family Violence was added, Caregiver Consistency was revised, and School Suspensions or Expulsions was collapsed into School Behavior Problems to reduce overlap in item content. Third, items within the Intervention Scale were revised to reflect changes in behavior and attitudes related to both sexual and nonsexual offending, while the item Evidence of Empathy, Remorse, and Guilt was divided into 2 items (i.e., Empathy, and Remorse and Guilt). Last, Management of Sexual Urges and Desire was added to the Community Stability/Adjustment Scale, while Quality of Peer Relationships was moved to the Intervention Scale. Overall, these revisions culminated in the development of the 28-item J-SOAP-II in 2003.
Reliability and Validity of the J-SOAP-II
As the J-SOAP-II was designed for use with only male adolescents with a history of coercive sexual behavior, research investigating its reliability and validity has been conducted with male adolescent sexual offenders. With respect to reliability (i.e., internal consistency and inter-rater reliability), the J-SOAP-II has demonstrated good internal consistency across total and scale scores, and inter-rater agreement has typically ranged from good to excellent, although there is some evidence to suggest that inter-rater agreement is slightly higher at discharge. Moreover, validity measures of the J-SOAP-II have been strong, especially when administered with other adolescent sexual offender risk assessment tools such as the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism and violence risk assessment tools such as the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth.
While the J-SOAP-II total score has been found to be a moderate (and significant) predictor of sexual and nonsexual reoffending at the aggregate level, variability in predictive accuracy has been observed across the scale scores with the Sex Drive/Preoccupation and Intervention Scales displaying lower predictive accuracy relative to the Impulsive/Antisocial Behavior and Community Stability/Adjustment Scales. Nonsignificant differences at the aggregate level have been found for the J-SOAP-II in predicting sexual and nonsexual offending when compared to other adolescent sexual offender risk assessment tools such as the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism. Furthermore, there is some evidence to suggest that the predictive validity of the J-SOAP-II is moderated by sex offender typology, with higher predictive accuracy for sexual reoffending being observed in youth who have engaged only in sexual offending (i.e., sexual offending without prior delinquent behavior) in comparison to youth who have engaged in sexual and nonsexual offending (i.e., sexual offending with prior delinquent behavior). However, the reverse has been found with higher predictive accuracy for nonsexual reoffending observed among youth with a history of sexual offending with prior delinquent behavior. Lastly, with respect to potential moderators, while comparable predictive validity has been demonstrated for the J-SOAP-II across settings (i.e., correctional vs. residential treatment), preliminary research examining its predictive accuracy among Singaporean male adolescent sexual offenders has demonstrated somewhat mixed results; however, further research is required in this area as researchers have yet to examine whether cultural factors directly moderate the predictive validity of the J-SOAP-II.
Moreover, research examining change in dynamic risk on the Intervention and Community Stability/Adjustment Scales has been somewhat mixed. For instance, significantly greater reductions in dynamic risk (as a result of treatment) have been observed in youth rated as moderate risk relative to youth rated as high risk. Additionally, statistically significant reductions in dynamic risk factors on the J-SOAP-II have been observed among adolescent sexual offenders who have undergone a residential, cognitive behavioral treatment program. However, despite the magnitude of the change, and that just under half of the youth demonstrated reliable reductions in risk, neither the change scores nor the presence of reliable reductions in dynamic risk on the Intervention and Community Stability/Adjustment Scales is found to be consistently predictive of sexual, violent nonsexual, and general (i.e., any) reoffending. Surprisingly, after statistically controlling for the static scales of the J-SOAP-II, the presence of reliable change on the Community Stability/Adjustment Scale was associated with a significant increase in sexual and general reoffending. In contrast, however, reliable change on the Intervention Scale was associated with a significant decrease in reoffending, though only for sexual reoffending. While such results support the dynamic (i.e., modifiable) nature of the items on the Community Stability/Adjustment and Intervention Scales, further research is required to determine the impact of such changes on offending behavior.
Future Research
The J-SOAP-II is among the most widely used and researched risk assessment tools designed for use with adolescent sexual offenders. Development of the J-SOAP-II has been driven by empirical findings, and there is a growing body of evidence supporting its reliability and validity. Although the dynamic nature of the risk factors incorporated into the J-SOAP-II has been demonstrated, supporting its use for monitoring treatment-related change, further research is needed.
Moreover, due to a lack of research focusing on implementation outcomes and relevance to intervention planning/risk management, future research should examine the factors related to adherence and feasibility of implementing the J-SOAP-II and determine the effectiveness of tailoring risk management strategies based on the dynamic risk factors incorporated in the tool and whether such strategies result in reduced rates of sexual reoffending.
References:
- Martinez, R., Rosenfeld, B., Cruise, K., & Martin, J. (2015). Predictive validity of the J-SOAP-II: Does accuracy differ across settings? International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 14, 56–65. doi:10.1080/14999013.2015.1019683
- McGrath, R. J., Cumming, G. F., Burchard, B. L., Zeoli, S., & Ellerby, L. (2010). Current practices and emerging trends in sexual abuser management: The Safer Society 2009 North American Survey. Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press. Prentky, R., & Righthand, S. (2003). Juvenile Sex
- Offender Assessment Protocol-II (J-SOAP-II) Manual (NCJ Publication No. 202316). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved from https://www .ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/202316.pdf
- Raljic, G., & Gretton, H. M. (2010). An examination of two sexual recidivism risk measures in adolescent offenders: The moderating effect of offender type. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 1066–1085. doi:10.1177/0093854810376354
- Viljoen, J. L., Gray, A. L., & Barone, C. (2016). Assessing risk for violence and offending in adolescents. In R. Jackson & R. Roesch (Eds.), Learning forensic assessment: Research and practice (2nd ed., 357–388). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Viljoen, J. L., Gray, A. L., Shaffer, C., Latzman, N. E., Scalora, M. J., & Ulman, D. (2017). Changes in J-SOAP-II and SAVRY scores over the course of residential, cognitive-behavioral treatment for adolescent sexual offending. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 29, 342–374. doi:10.1177/1079063215595404
- Viljoen, J. L., Mordell, S., & Beneteau, J. L. (2012). Prediction of adolescent sexual reoffending: A meta-analysis of the J-SOAP-II, ERASOR, J-SORRAT-II, and Static-99. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 423–438. doi:10.1037/h0093938