This report that details findings from a study designed to follow sex offenders on probation over time in two geographically diverse settings to assess recidivism and the predictive accuracy of Evaluation of the Implementation of the Sex Offender Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS). Results indicate that SOTIPS is a promising instrument for assessing dynamic risk factors in sex offenders on probation.
Refer to the paper’s “references” and see how many times Karl Hanson’s name shows up as a source. Amy Phenix is another Static 99R developer who just happens to be cited. Already pointed out by others, this is a conflict of interest. All the other reference sources are either outdated or write positively of the Static 99R, basing their “analysis” largely on Hanson or the other 99R developer’s claim (you have to read the other papers’ references to see the conflicts of interests). This paper is like watching those Erik Estrada “California Pines” infomercials and having trust in Estrada that… Read more »
To Dave C – If you want to know one of the Static-99R’s many weakness (yes, there are too many), it is that R. Karl Hanson keeps his data secret. I agree that we must demand full transparency, especially since so many are pushing this ‘static’ scam. Can 10 questions really predict every RSO’s future? I doubt it. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is. I am also flabbergasted as to why nearly every expert in our movement supports the Static ‘tests’ without regard to the fact that many other experts—including ‘Bible of Psychology’ DSM Chair… Read more »
“I am also flabbergasted as to why nearly every expert in our movement supports the Static ‘tests’[.]” —– This. I don’t understand the hype behind the Static-99R either. The Static-99R doesn’t say what offense a person will commit if he reoffends. The Static-99R punishes people for behavior they MIGHT commit in the future. This paper tries to tie the credibility of the government’s “SOTIPS” dynamic assessment by attaching SOTIPS to the “validated” Static-99R. Kind of ridiculous if you ask me. But nowadays, so many things (at least politically) seem so absurd that [insert random “expert’s” name] citing Hanson citing Hanson… Read more »
Having a number of years (about 6) of reviewing human subjects research, specifically Prisoner research, this particular study is a justification to extend the use of the Static-99 (in all forms) when it is a poor instrument. In other words, if the Static-99 is used within this larger framework, then it is a valid instrument. The purpose of this paper is to bolster the use of Hanson’s research. Also, what you don’t see are the amounts of money (Federally Funded) that go to pay the researchers. This is another form of job security for Hanson.