The impact of interview quality on risk assessment of young people who sexually offend

Abstract

Forensic risk assessments are used to determine sanctions, identify recidivism risk and inform implementation of risk reduction strategies. The best way to gather reliable data to inform decisions is important and the focus of this mixed-method study. Forty-five experienced professionals performed a risk assessment involving a young person who sexually offended (YSPO). They read a good-quality or a poor-quality interview and collateral information. Under half (42.2%) of participants provided the expected risk ratings. Some participants misidentified elements of good-quality interviewing (e.g. rapport, open questions). Ratings of fairness of the forensic interview were positively associated with increased sense of perceived interview quality. Confidence in risk-assessment decisions tended to be higher in the good-quality than the poor-quality interview group. Practitioners involved in the risk assessment of YPSO should receive effective/robust training in best practice interviewing so they can identify and implement empirically based interviewing techniques for care provision for YPSO.