Same Score, Different Audience, Different Message: Perceptions of Sex Offense Risk Depend on Static-99R Risk Level and Personality Factors of the Recipient.

Abstract

There are multiple ways to report risk scale results. Varela et al. (2014) found that Static-99R results were interpreted differently by prospective jurors based on risk level (high vs low) and an interaction between risk level and risk communication format (categorical, absolute estimate, and risk ratio). We adapted and extended Varela et al.'s (2014) study using updated Static-99R norms, recruiting a population-wide sample (n = 166), and adding variables assessing the personality factors 'cognitive motivation' (i.e., need for cognition) and 'attitudinal affect' (i.e., attitudes toward sex offenders, authoritarianism). We found a main effect of risk level and no effect of either communication format or the interaction between the two. Adding the personality variables increased explained variance from 9% to 34%, suggesting risk perception may be more about the personality of the person receiving the information than the information itself. We also found an interaction between attitudes toward sex offenders and risk level. Our results suggest risk perception might be better understood if personality factors are considered, particularly attitudes toward sex offenders. Because biases/personality of the person receiving the information are unknown in real world settings we argue that sharing multiple methods for communicating risk might be best and more inclusive.