Based on the best available research data and consensus in professional clinical opinion, a number of high-risk factors have been identified in the literature regarding potential for sexual re-offense in youth. The Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (The ERASOR-2: Worling & Curwen, 2001) summarizes available research and expert clinical opinion. Early validation has been continued in subsequent research studies on the ERASOR-2.
The Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR): Preliminary psychometric data.
Worling, James R.
Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol 16(3), Jul, 2004. pp. 235-254.
Abstract:
The Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR) is an empirically guided checklist designed to assist clinicians to estimate the short-term risk of a sexual reoffense for youth aged 12-18 years of age. The ERASOR provides objective coding instructions for 25 risk factors (16 dynamic and 9 static). To investigate the psychometric properties, risk ratings were collected from 28 clinicians who evaluated 136 adolescent males (aged 12-18 years) following comprehensive, clinical assessments. Preliminary psychometric data (i.e., interrater agreement, item-total correlation, internal consistency) were found to be supportive of the reliability and item composition of the tool. ERASOR ratings also significantly discriminated adolescents based on whether or not they had previously been sanctioned for a prior sexual offense.
Differentiation and predictive factors in adolescent sexual offending.
Skowron, Christine
Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, Vol 66(3-B), 2005. pp. 1788.
Abstract:
Adolescent males perpetrate approximately 20% of all sexual offenses in North America (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1993; Statistics Canada, 1997), yet there is little published research within the area, especially when compared to the adult sexual offending literature. The purpose of this study was to differentiate adolescent sexual and nonsexual offenders and to examine the predictive criterion validity of two adolescent risk/need assessment procedures, the ERASOR (Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offence Recidivism) and the YLS-CMI (Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory). Archival data were collected from 220 young offender files in a community-based assessment and treatment unit. Recidivism data spanning up to 14 years (1987-2002), with an average follow-up period of 4 years were obtained from CPIC. In the differentiation study, the adolescent sexual offender group was quite different from the nonsexual offender group. The sex offenders displayed lower mean scores on all eight of the YLS/CMI propensity subscales but higher Deviant Sexual Interests on the ERASOR. In the prediction study, ERASOR was the single best predictor of sexual recidivism (r = .37, ROC = .713) while YLS/CMI was the single best predictor of any recidivism (r = .38, ROC = .720). Subscale and item analyses are reported and limitations are discussed.
Risk assessment of juvenile sex offender reoffense.
Hersant, Jamie L.
Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, Vol 67(8-B), 2007.
Abstract:
The Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR; Worling & Curwen, 2000) is an empirically guided measure designed to aid clinicians in estimating the short term risk of sexual reoffense for juveniles between 12–18 years of age. Three independent male juvenile residential sex offender treatment facilities provided information on the ERASOR (N = 91), Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI; Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996) (N = 42), and the Sexualized Violence Questionnaire (SVQ; DiLalla, Stevens, & Le, 1998) (N = 44). The ERASOR demonstrated high to excellent internal consistency. The ERASOR Total score was also related to the empirically guided clinical rating of reoffense risk status. More importantly, scores from the ERASOR differentiated between those individuals labeled as repeaters verses those labeled as nonrepeaters, lending support to the concurrent validity of the ERASOR. The PPI scales of Machiavellian Egocentricity, Impulse Nonconformity, Social Potency, and Carefree Nonplanfulness were related to increased risk for reoffense. After controlling for personality variables, attitudinal scales as measured by the SVQ, were not related to risk for reoffense. Overall, the results of this study provide support for the ERASOR’s reliability and utility for assessing juvenile sex offender reoffense. The current results also provide support for the inclusion of dynamic risk factors in the assessment of juvenile sex offender reoffense and for empirically guided risk assessment. Implications for assessment and clinical practice are also discussed.
Assessment of reoffense risk in adolescents who have committed sexual offenses: Predictive validity of the ERASOR, PCL:YV, YLS/CMI, and Static-99.
Viljoen, Jodi L., et.al.
Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol 36(10), Oct, 2009. pp. 981-1000.
Abstract:
Clinicians are often asked to assess the likelihood that an adolescent who has committed a sexual offense will reoffend. However, there is limited research on the predictive validity of available assessment tools. To help address this gap, this study examined the ability of the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR), the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV), and the Static-99 to predict reoffending in a sample of 193 adolescents. Youth were followed for an average of 7.24 years after discharge from a residential sex offender treatment program. Although none of the instruments significantly predicted detected cases of sexual reoffending, ERASOR’s structured professional judgments nearly reached significance (p = .069). Both the YLS/CMI and the PCL:YV predicted nonsexual violence, any violence, and any offending; however, the YLS/CMI demonstrated incremental validity over the PCL:YV. Although the Static-99 has considerable support with adult sex offenders, it did not predict sexual or general reoffending in the present sample of adolescents.
Dialogue on risk assessment on youth and accuracy of terms: A response to worling’s (2010) letter to the editor.
Miccio-Fonseca, L. C., Rasmussen, Lucinda A.
Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, Vol 19(3), Apr, 2010. pp. 247-251.
Abstract:
Reply by the current authors to the comments made by James R. Worling (see record 2010-07905-001) on the original article (see record 2009-01541-006). Dr. Worling is absolutely correct that our statement that the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism and the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II are primarily focused on static factors is inaccurate. Dr. Worling noted potential inaccuracies in our discussion of available risk assessment tools. Dr. Worling felt that we had missed items on the J-SOAP-II related to the regulation and expression of anger and sexual impulses, and items on the ERASOR 2.0 related to problematic self-regulation. Dr. Worling felt that we went out of our way to state that risk factors identified for adults who sexually offend have no bearing on adolescents who sexually offend, and argued that most of the empirically supported risk factors for adolescent sexual assault recidivism are similar to those for adults. We thank Dr. Worling for his thoughtful and comprehensive critique of our work. This kind of feedback and critical review contributes to our becoming better researchers. We appreciate having an open dialogue regarding the issues involved in the risk assessment of young people who sexually abuse or have coarse sexual improprieties. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
An examination of two sexual recidivism risk measures in adolescent offenders: The moderating effect of offender type.
Rajlic, Gordana, Gretton, Heather M..
Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol 37(10), Oct, 2010. pp. 1066-1085.
Abstract:
[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 37(11) of Criminal Justice and Behavior (see record 2010-20811-008). In the original article, on page 1071 of the referenced article, and in the headings for Tables 2, 4, and 5, the term ‘Receiving operating characteristic’ should instead read ‘Receiver operating characteristic.’] The present study explored the predictive validity of two measures designed to assess risk for sexual recidivism in adolescent sexual offenders (ASO), the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II and the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism, in the context of an antisociality-based typology of adolescent sexual offenders. The authors distinguished between adolescent sexual offenders with a history of general offending (delinquent ASO) and adolescent sexual offenders without a history of general offending (sex offense-only ASO). They found differential predictive accuracy of risk measures according to offender type: Both instruments predicted sexual recidivism in the sex offense-only ASO group (large effect sizes), whereas in the delinquent ASO group, the measures did not predict sexual recidivism beyond chance levels. Risk assessment in the context of an antisociality-based sex offender typology is discussed.
Assessing youth who sexually offended: The predictive validity of the ERASOR, J-SOAP-II, and YLS/CMI in a non- Western context.
Chu, Chi Meng, et.al.
Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol 24(2), Apr, 2012. pp. 153-174.
Abstract:
Recent research suggested that the predictive validity of adult sexual offender risk assessment measures can be affected when used cross-culturally, but there is no published study on the predictive validity of risk assessment measures for youth who sexually offended in a non-Western context. This study compared the predictive validity of three youth risk assessment measures (i.e., the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism [ERASOR], the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II [J-SOAP-II], and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory [YLS/CMI]) for sexual and nonviolent recidivism in a sample of 104 male youth who sexually offended within a Singaporean context (Mfollow-up = 1,637 days; SDfollow-up = 491). Results showed that the ERASOR overall clinical rating and total score significantly predicted sexual recidivism but only the former significantly predicted time to sexual reoffense. All of the measures (i.e., the ERASOR overall clinical rating and total score, the J-SOAP-II total score, as well as the YLS/CMI) significantly predicted nonsexual recidivism and time to nonsexual reoffense for this sample of youth who sexually offended. Overall, the results suggest that the ERASOR appears to be suited for assessing youth who sexually offended in a non-Western context, but the J-SOAP-II and the YLS/CMI have limited utility for such a purpose.
Prospective validity of the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR).
Worling, James R., et.al.
Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol 24(3), Jun, 2012. pp. 203-223.
Abstract:
Data from the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR; Worling & Curwen) were collected for a sample of 191 adolescent males who had offended sexually. Adolescents were aged 12 to 19 years (M = 15.34; SD = 1.53) at the time of their participation in a comprehensive assessment. The ERASOR was completed by 1 of 22 clinicians immediately following each assessment. Forty-five adolescents were independently rated by pairs of clinicians, and significant interrater agreement was found for the ERASOR risk factors, the clinical judgment ratings (low, moderate, or high), and a total score. Recidivism data (criminal charges) were subsequently collected from three sources that spanned a follow-up period between 0.1 and 7.9 years (M = 3.66; SD = 2.08). Overall, 9.4% (18 of 191) of the adolescents were charged with a subsequent sexual offense over this time period. A shorter follow-up interval of up to 2.5 years (M = 1.4; SD = 0.71) was also examined. Recidivism data for the shorter follow-up interval were available for a subgroup of 70 adolescents, with a comparable recidivism rate of 8.6% (6 of 70). Clinical judgment ratings, the total score, and the sum of risk factors rated as present were significantly predictive of sexual reoffending for the short follow-up period. The total score and the sum of risk factors were predictive of sexual reoffending over the entire follow-up interval. These results add to the emerging research supporting the reliability and validity of structured risk assessment tools for adolescent sexual recidivism.
Prediction of adolescent sexual reoffending: A meta-analysis of the J-SOAP-II, ERASOR, J-SORRAT-II, and Static-99.
Viljoen, Jodi L., et.al.
Law and Human Behavior, Vol 36(5), Oct, 2012. pp. 423-438.
Abstract:
Several risk assessment tools, including the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II (Prentky & Righthand, 2003), the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (Worling & Curwen, 2001), the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II (Epperson, Ralston, Fowers, DeWitt, & Gore, 2006), and the Static-99 (Hanson & Thornton, 1999), have been used to assess reoffense risk among adolescents who have committed sexual offenses. Given that research on these tools has yielded somewhat mixed results, we empirically synthesized 33 published and unpublished studies involving 6,196 male adolescents who had committed a sexual offense. We conducted two separate meta-analyses, first with correlations and then with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs). Total scores on each of the tools significantly predicted sexual reoffending, with aggregated correlations ranging from .12 to .20 and aggregated AUC scores ranging from .64 to .67. However, in many cases heterogeneity across studies was moderate to high. There were no significant differences between tools, and although the Static-99 was developed for adults, it achieved similar results as the adolescent tools. Results are compared to other meta-analyses of risk tools used in the area of violence risk assessment and in other fields.
Review of risk assessment instruments for juvenile sex offenders: What is next?
Hempel, Ingem et,al.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Vol 57(2), Feb, 2013. pp. 208-228.
Abstract:
Risk assessment is considered to be a key element in the prevention of recidivism among juvenile sex offenders (JSOs), often by imposing long-term consequences based on that assessment. The authors reviewed the literature on the predictive accuracy of six well-known risk assessment instruments used to appraise risk among JSOs: the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II (J-SOAP-II), Juvenile Sexual Offence Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II (J-SORRAT-II), Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offence Recidivism (ERASOR), Juvenile Risk Assessment Scale (JRAS), Structured Assessment of Violent Risk in Youth (SAVRY), and Hare Psychopathy Checklist:Youth Version (PCL:YV). Through a systematic search, 19 studies were reviewed. Studies showed differences in the predictive accuracies for general, violent, and sexual recidivism, and none of the instruments showed unequivocal positive results in predicting future offending. Not unexpectedly, the accuracy of the SAVRY and PCL:YV appeared to be weaker for sexual recidivism compared with specialized tools such as the J-SOAP-II or the ERASOR. Because of the rapid development of juveniles, it is questionable to impose long-term restrictions based on a risk assessment only. New challenges in improving risk assessment are discussed.
Risk and protective factors for recidivism among juveniles who have offended sexually.
Spice, Andrew, et.al.
Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol 25(4), Aug, 2013. pp. 347-369.
Abstract:
Literature on risk factors for recidivism among juveniles who have sexually offended (JSOs) is limited. In addition, there have been no studies published concerning protective factors among this population. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship of risk and protective factors to sexual and nonsexual recidivism among a sample of 193 male JSOs (mean age = 15.26). Youths were followed for an average of 7.24 years following discharge from a residential sex offender treatment program. The risk factor opportunities to reoffend, as coded based on the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism, was associated with sexual recidivism. Several risk factors (e.g., prior offending; peer delinquency) were associated with nonsexual recidivism. No protective factors examined were associated with sexual recidivism, although strong attachments and bonds as measured by the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth was negatively related to nonsexual recidivism. These findings indicate that risk factors for nonsexual recidivism may be consistent across both general adolescent offender populations and JSOs, but that there may be distinct protective factors that apply to sexual recidivism among JSOs. Results also indicate important needs for further research on risk factors, protective factors, and risk management strategies for JSOs.
Die Einschätzung des Rückfallrisikos bei sexuell auffälligen Kindern und Jugendlichen anhand standardisierter Prognoseinstrumente.
Translated Title: The accuracy of standardized risk assessment instruments for the prediction of recidivism in accused juveniles who sexually offended.
Rettenberger, Martin, et.al.
Kindheit und Entwicklung: Zeitschrift für Klinische Kinderpsychologie, Vol 23(4), 2014. pp. 210-219.
Abstract:
The present study examines the predictive accuracy of standardized risk assessment instruments for the prediction of recidivism in a sample of young alleged sex offenders (N = 80) in pretrial and pretreatment settings. For risk assessment purposes, the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR), and the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II (J-SOAP-II) were used. The results of the present study show that these instruments, which were originally developed for officially sanctioned (i. e., convicted) juvenile offenders, are also predictive in a sample of young accused juveniles who sexually offended. However, the risk assessment instruments yielded sufficient predictive validity indices only for the prediction of general criminal and violent recidivism and failed to predict significantly sexually motivated recidivism.
A prospective investigation of factors that predict desistance from recidivism for adolescents who have sexually offended.
Worling, James R., Langton, Calvin M.
Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol 27(1), Feb, 2015. pp. 127-142.
Abstract:
Current approaches to violence risk assessment are focused on the identification of factors that are predictive of future violence rather than factors that predict desistance. This is also true for the popular tools designed to predict adolescent sexual recidivism. Research on strengths-based variables with adolescents who have sexually offended that could serve a protective function is only recently underway. In the current prospective study, scores from clinician-completed assessments using the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR) and the parent-completed form of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS-2) were evaluated in a sample of 81 adolescent males with at least one sexual offense. As expected, the ERASOR was significantly correlated with sexual recidivism over an average 3.5-year follow-up. In terms of a protective function, the Affective Strength scale of the BERS-2 was significantly negatively correlated with sexual recidivism, although it did not have incremental validity over and above the ERASOR. The BERS-2 School Functioning scale was significantly negatively correlated with nonsexual recidivism. The results are discussed in terms of previous findings and theoretical work on attachment in sexual offending behavior and implications for risk assessment practice.
Testing the validity of criminal risk assessment tools in sexually abusive youth.
Barra, Steffen, et.al.
Psychological Assessment, Vol 30(11), Nov, 2018. pp. 1430-1443.
Abstract (English):
Although accurate risk appraisals are mandatory to provide effective treatment to juveniles who have sexually offended (JSOs), the current knowledge on the validity of risk assessment instruments for JSOs is inconclusive. We compared the predictive validities of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol II (J-SOAP II), the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR), and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide-Revised (VRAG-R) scores concerning sexual, nonsexual-violent, and general criminal recidivism (based on both official and nonregistered reoffenses) in a consecutive sample of 597 male JSOs (Mage = 14.47 years, SDage = 1.57 years) while accounting for different recidivism periods, offense severities, and cumulative burden of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves and Cox regression analyses indicated that the tools allowed valid predictions of recidivism according to their intended purposes: The ERASOR was best suited to predict sexual recidivism within 0.5 and 3 years, the J-SOAP II was valid for predictions of sexual and nonsexual-violent recidivism within these recidivism periods, and the VRAG-R showed potential strengths in predicting nonsexual-violent recidivism, especially when committed above age 18. Elevated offense severity and burden of ACEs impeded predictive accuracies of the J-SOAP II and the VRAG-R, particularly in case of sexual recidivism. Our findings emphasize that risk assessment for JSOs must not rely solely on scores derived from risk assessment instruments, but a comprehensive consideration of a JSOs offense severity and psychosocial adversities is additionally necessary to approach accurate risk appraisals.