Improving risk assessments for sex offenders a comparison of three actuarial scales in Burbank

Beech, Ph. Gress, M. Richard Laws, Ph. Weighing the Risks: Reunification vs. CraigK. You need at least version 5.

Creeden, M. Scheve, III, B. The Way of the Dream C. LasherGeorgia F. Bryan Silva O. Blasingame, Ph. Edward J.

Что сейчас improving risk assessments for sex offenders a comparison of three actuarial scales in Burbank этот

Gress, M. Marques, Ph. Wellington 3 hours.

  • Skip to search form Skip to main content You are currently offline. Some features of the site may not work correctly.
  • The risk assessment procedures contained in this report, including Static have been developed by the authors in the course of their duties. Anyone choosing to use or adopt the risk assessment procedures, including Static, in any way, does so on the sole basis of their responsibility to judge their suitability for their own specific purposes.
  • The variation in the predictive accuracy of Static across the four samples was no more than would be expected by chance.
  • This study compared a group of adult male sex offenders who received community cognitive-behavioral treatment, correctional supervision, and periodic polygraph compliance exams with a matched group of sex offenders who received the same type of treatment and supervision services but no polygraph exams. Polygraph exams focused on whether participants were following their conditions of community supervision and treatment and had avoided committing new sexual offenses.

Share This Paper. Janice K. Lang Psychological assessment Byrne, Ph. Wilson, Ph. Phallometric Assessment Procedures, Dr.

Improving risk assessments for sex offenders a comparison of three actuarial scales in Burbank

Rated 5/5 based on 61 review
international sextet in Wiltshire 617 | 618 | 619 | 620 | 621 determining due date from last sexual act in Mesquite