2.7.1 Validity of risk measures.
2.7.1.1 Convergent validity.
A) Convergent validity between the VRS and HCR-20 total scores was examined using Pearson correlation coefficients between the sets of measures.
B) Convergent validity between the VRS risk categories and HCR-20 SPJ risk categories was examined using Pearson correlation coefficients between the sets of measures. C) Convergent validity between the VRS and HCR-20 dynamic scores was examined
using Pearson correlation coefficients.
D) Convergent validity between the VRS and HCR-20 static scores was examined using Pearson correlation coefficients.
2.7.1.2 Predictive validity.
E) To test the predictive validity of the VRS and HCR-20 total scores, predictive accuracy analyses were conducted using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and point-biserial correlation coefficients (i.e., a correlation between a continuous and dichotomous variable) with community and institutional recidivism. F) To test whether VRS static and dynamic scores independently predicted community
and institutional recidivism, separate ROC curves and point-biserial correlation coefficients were computed.
G) To test whether HCR-20 historical, clinical, risk management, and dynamic (clinical + risk management) scores independently predicted community and institutional recidivism, separate ROC curves and point-biserial correlation coefficients were computed.
H) To test whether the VRS and HCR-20 risk categories predicted community and institutional recidivism, separate ROC curves, point-biserial correlation coefficients, and survival curves for were computed.
I) To test whether HCR-20 and VRS scores were associated with positive community outcomes (e.g., attains stable housing, stable employment, etc.), Pearson correlation coefficients were computed.
J) To test whether risk category on the VRS and HCR-20 were associated with positive community outcomes, Pearson correlation coefficients were computed.
2.7.1.3 Incremental predictive validity.
K) To test whether VRS dynamic scores demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of community and institutional recidivism over VRS static scores, hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were used controlling for individual differences in follow-up time.
L) To test whether the HCR-20 clinical, risk management, and dynamic scores demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of community and institutional recidivism over HCR-20 historical scores, Cox regression survival analyses were conducted controlling for individual differences in follow-up time.
M) To test whether VRS dynamic scores demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of positive community outcomes over VRS static scores, hierarchical multiple regression was used.
N) To test whether the HCR-20 clinical, risk management, and dynamic scores
demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of positive community outcomes over HCR-20 historical scores, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted. 2.7.2 Validity of risk change scores.
2.7.2.1 Convergent validity.
A) To examine convergent validity between VRS and HCR-20 measurements of change, Pearson correlations were computed between the two sets of change scores on these measures.
2.7.2.2 Predictive validity.
B) To test the predictive validity of the VRS and HCR-20 change scores, predictive accuracy analyses were conducted using point-biserial correlations and semi-partial correlations (controlling for pre-treatment risk) with community and institutional recidivism criteria.
C) To test whether change scores on the HCR-20 and the VRS are associated with positive community outcomes (e.g., attains stable housing, stable employment, etc.), correlations and semi-partial correlations (controlling for pre-treatment risk) were computed between change scores on these measures and the operationalized measurements of positive community outcomes.
2.7.2.3 Incremental predictive validity.
D) Hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were conducted to examine changes scores on the VRS and HCR-20 and their relationship with community recidivism while controlling for pre-treatment risk (i.e., pre-treatment VRS total and HCR-20 total, respectively) and individual differences in follow-up time.
E) Hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were conducted to examine changes scores on the VRS and HCR-20 and their relationship with post-treatment
institutional recidivism while controlling for pre-treatment risk (i.e., pre-treatment VRS total and HCR-20 total, respectively) and individual differences in follow-up time.
F) Hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted to examine change scores on the VRS and HCR-20 and their relationship with positive community outcomes total score while controlling for pre-treatment risk (i.e., pre-treatment VRS total and HCR- 20 total, respectively).
2.7.3 Validity of protective factor measures.
2.7.3.1 Convergent validity.
A) To test convergent validity between scores on the PF List and scores on the SAPROF, Pearson correlation coefficients were conducted.
B) To test convergent validity between scores on the PF List and SPJ protection ratings on the SAPROF, Pearson correlation coefficients were conducted.
2.7.3.2 Predictive validity.
C) To test whether scores on the PF List are negatively associated with community and institutional recidivism, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (with the PF List reverse keyed) and point-biserial correlation coefficients with community and institutional recidivism criteria were conducted.
D) To test whether scores on the SAPROF are negatively associated with community and institutional recidivism, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (with the SAPROF reverse keyed) and point-biserial correlation coefficients with community and institutional recidivism criteria were conducted.
E) To test whether the SAPROF protection category predicts community and institutional recidivism, separate ROC curves (with the SAPROF reverse keyed), point-biserial correlation coefficients, and survival curves for were computed. F) To test whether scores on the SAPROF and the PF List are associated with positive
community outcomes (e.g., attains stable housing, stable employment, etc.), Pearson correlations coefficients were computed between scores on these measures and operationalized measurements of positive community outcomes.
G) To test whether protection category on the SAPROF was associated with positive community outcomes, Pearson correlations coefficients were computed.
2.7.4 Validity of protection change scores.
2.7.4.1 Convergent validity.
A) To test convergent validity between change scores on the PF List and change scores on the SAPROF, Pearson correlation coefficients were conducted.
2.7.4.2 Predictive validity.
B) To test the predictive validity of the PF List and SAPROF change scores, predictive accuracy analyses were conducted using point-biserial correlations and semi-partial correlations (controlling for pre-treatment protection) with the community and institutional recidivism criteria.
C) To test whether change scores on the PF List and the SAPROF are associated with positive community outcomes (e.g., attains stable housing, stable employment, etc.), correlations and semi-partial correlations (controlling for pre-treatment risk) were computed between scores on these measures and operationalized measurements of positive community outcomes.
2.7.4.3 Incremental predictive validity.
D) To test whether change scores on the PF List demonstrate incremental validity in the prediction of community and institutional recidivism over PF List pre-treatment total scores, hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were conducted.
E) To test whether change scores on the SAPROF demonstrate incremental validity in the prediction of community and institutional recidivism over SAPROF pre-treatment total scores, hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were conducted.
F) To test whether change scores on the PF List demonstrate incremental validity in the prediction of positive community outcomes over PF List pre-treatment total scores, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted.
G) To test whether change scores on the SAPROF demonstrate incremental validity in the prediction of positive community outcomes over SAPROF pre-treatment total scores, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted.
2.7.5 The relationship between protective and risk measures.
2.7.5.1 Convergence.
A) To test whether scales from the SAPROF and PF List correspond inversely to the scales of the VRS and HCR-20, Pearson correlations were computed between the two sets of scales.
B) To test whether protection categories correspond inversely to risk categories, Pearson correlations were computed.
C) Pearson correlations were computed between scores on the change scores on the PF List and SAPROF, with change scores from the VRS and HCR-20.
2.7.5.2 Predictive validity.
D) To test whether the SAPROF/HCR-20 integrated risk category was associated with community and institutional recidivism, separate ROC curves, point-biserial correlation coefficients, and survival curves for were computed.
E) To test whether SAPROF/HCR-20 integrated risk category was associated with positive community outcomes, Pearson correlation coefficients were computed.
2.7.5.3 Incremental predictive contributions.
F) To test whether scores on the PF List demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of community and institutional recidivism over VRS scores while
controlling for individual differences in follow-up time, hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were conducted. VRS total scores and the protective factor total scores were entered as separate covariates.
G) To test whether scores on the SAPROF demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of community and institutional recidivism over HCR-20 scores while controlling for individual differences in follow-up time, hierarchical Cox regression survival analyses were conducted. HCR-20 total scores and the SAPROF total scores were entered as separate covariates.
H) To test whether scores on the PF List demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of positive community outcomes over VRS total scores, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted.
I) To test whether scores on the SAPROF demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of positive community outcomes over HCR-20 total scores, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted.