The Structured Risk Assessment-Forensic Version (SRA-FV) is one of a number of tools that professionals may use to assist them in assessing an individual’s risk of sexual reoffending. Professionals working with men who have been convicted of committing a sexual offense are commonly expected to identify psychological factors that are thought to predispose offenders to recidivism (i.e., further offending). Such judgments may contribute to two practical tasks: First, assessing the degree of risk for future sexual offending presented by an individual, which has implications for the degree of resources that should be assigned to managing his risk, and second, such judgments can increase the effectiveness of treatment interventions by focusing on the psychological problems that are most relevant to this specific individual. Assessment of the kinds of factors contributing to an individual’s risk depend on knowledge regarding which factors contribute to risk when present and on determining which of these factors apply to the individual being assessed. This article defines sexual recidivism and its risk factors, then examines the SRA-FV, its validity, and how it compares to other, similar risk assessment tools.
Risk of Sexual Recidivism
Sexual recidivism refers to someone who has been convicted for committing a sex offense going on to commit further sex offenses despite having been punished for the earlier offense. Researchers study rates of detected sexual recidivism, usually defined in terms of new charges or convictions for sexual offenses. This is sometimes called official recidivism. Inevitably such rates underestimate rates of actual recidivism since some people will reoffend sexually without ever being detected. Risk of official recidivism can therefore be thought of as indexing risk of repeatedly engaging in the kinds of sexual offense that are more likely to be reported. Typically, about one in 10 persons with a history of sexual offending is detected sexually reoffending within 5 years of being released after being punished for an earlier offense.
Individuals who have been convicted for a sexual offense differ greatly in their risk of sexually recidivating. About 2% of men released from prison for nonsexual crimes go on to be convicted for out of the blue sexual offenses within 5 years of release. Some known sexual offenders present a risk that is at this level (i.e., 98% of them are not known to commit further sexual offenses). At the other extreme, some men with a history of being convicted for a sexual offense have official sexual recidivism rates above 50%. Risk assessment generally seeks to determine where any given individual falls between these two extremes.
Factors Contributing to Sexual Recidivism Risk
Psychological factors contributing to sexual recidivism can generally be classified into one of four domains. These are (1) offense-related sexual interests: sexual interests which are more easily satisfied through sexual offenses than through legal sexual behavior (e.g., sexual interest in young children); (2) pro-offending attitudes: beliefs that make it easier to rationalize committing sexual offenses (e.g., believing that young children enjoy sexual activity with adults); (3) dysfunctional relational style: includes both an aggressive relational style and an inadequate relational style, as well as difficulty making or sustaining emotionally close relationships; (4) dysfunctional self-management: includes various ways in which people have difficulty regulating their immediate impulses in the service of their longer term self-interests. The SRA framework holds that to be usefully predictive of sexual reoffending psychological measures need to effectively assess problems from at least three of these four domains. Various structured measures have been created that achieve this (e.g., STABLE-2007 and the Violence Risk Scale–Sex Offender Version [VRS-SO]).
The SRA-FV
The SRA-FV is one of the structured measures designed to provide a reasonably comprehensive measure of psychological risk factors for sexual recidivism. It has items from three of the four domains. The sexual interest domain is covered by ratings for Sexual Interest in Children, Sexualized Violence, and Sexual Preoccupation. The relational style domain is covered by ratings for emotional congruence with children, lack of emotionally intimate relationships with adults, callousness, and grievance thinking. The selfmanagement domain is covered by ratings for lifestyle impulsivity, resistance to rules and supervision, and dysfunctional coping. Items are selected and scoring rules defined based on previous research using the SRA framework.
Reliability
The SRA-FV was tested in a sample of sexual offenders who had been assessed for potential civil commitment, subsequently released, and then followed for at least 5 years to determine their sexual recidivism rates. Interrater reliability was 0.64 for a single rater and 0.78 for two raters. A moderate ability to predict sexual recidivism (area under curve = .73) was found, similar to that achieved by other instruments for predicting sexual recidivism. Results also indicated that combining it with prediction instruments that are based on prior criminal history and other demographic factors gave better prediction than could be achieved using either kind of instrument alone. For example, the area under curve for predicting sexual recidivism from a static actuarial instrument alone was about 0.68/0.69 but rose to 0.75 when the static instrument was combined with SRA-FV. This is similar to the kinds of results that have been achieved with other comprehensive measures of psychological risk factors.
In Comparison With Other Assessments
The SRA-FV differs from the STABLE-2007 and the VRS-SO in the primary context it was designed for. STABLE-2007 was originally designed to assist community supervision of sexual offenders, while the VRS-SO was designed for use in the context of intensive treatment for sexual offenders run in an institutional setting. In contrast, the SRA-FV was designed to be used in an institutional context where sexual offenders are being assessed to inform decisions about potential release and where they therefore may be particularly cautious about making disclosures that may count against them.
As compared to the STABLE-2007 since the SRA-FV is designed to be used in an institutional setting, it may be preferable when assessing someone in that kind of setting. Compared to the VRSSO, the SRA-FV is simpler to score and depends less on the kind of detailed clinical observation of behavior that is obtained through sexual offender treatment. On the other hand, it is less suitable for use in the community, and unlike the VRS-SO, it does not contain a method of assessing change in response to treatment.
Final Thoughts
To date only a limited amount of research has been carried out assessing the predictive value of the SRA-FV. Instruments that classify risk based on past criminal history have been tested with many thousands of offenders, while psychological instruments like the SRA-FV have mainly been tested with hundreds of offenders. Converging results from different psychological instruments, along with an awareness of the limitations of instruments based on criminal history, have encouraged practitioners to employ psychological instruments despite the limitations of the research on which they are based. Of particular concern is evidence that it can be difficult to score psychological instruments reliably. Consequently, it is particularly important for practitioners to be carefully trained in scoring such tools and where possible to cross-check their scores with a colleague.
References:
- Hanson, R. K., Helmus, L. M., & Harris, A. J. R. (2015). A prospective study using STABLE-2007, Static-99R and Static-2002R. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 1205–1224. doi:10.1177/0093854815602094
- Hanson, R. K., Thornton, D., Helmus, L., & Babchishin, K. M. (2016). What sexual recidivism rates are associated with Static-99R and Static-2002R scores? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 28, 215–282. doi:10.1177/1079063215574710
- Olver, M. E., Beggs Christofferson, S. M., & Wong, S. C. P. (2015). Evaluation and applications of the clinically significant change method with the violence risk scale–sexual offender version. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 33, 92–110. doi:10.1002/bsl.2159
- Thornton, D. (2013). Implications for treatment of our developing understanding of risk and protective factors. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 8, 62–65.
- Thornton, D., & Knight, R. A. (2015). Construction and validation of SRA-FV need assessment. Sex Abuse, A Journal of Research and Treatment, 27(4), 360–375. doi:10.1177/1079063213511120