OBJECTIVE Responding to the concern about racial/ethnic disparities (R/ED) in the use of risk assessment instruments (RAIs) in justice systems, previous research has overwhelmingly tested the extent to which RAI scores consistently predict recidivism across race and ethnicity (predictive bias). However, little is known about R/ED in the association between RAI measures and court dispositions (disparate application) for justice-involved youths. This study investigated predictive bias and disparate application of three risk measures-criminal history, social history, and the overall risk level-produced by the Positive Achievement Change Tool (PACT) for White, Black, and Hispanic justice-involved youths. HYPOTHESES Given the mixed evidence in existing research for predictive bias and lack of evidence for disparate application, we did not make any specific hypothesis but conducted exploratory analyses. From a clinical perspective, however, we anticipated little or no evidence to support predictive bias and disparate application of the PACT among White, Black, and Hispanic youths in the jurisdiction we examined. METHOD The sample consisted of 5,578 youths (11.4% White, 43.9% Black, and 44.7% Hispanic) who completed the PACT while in the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department, Texas. The outcome variables included recidivism (general and violent reoffending) and court dispositions (deferred adjudication, probation without placement, and probation with placement). We ran a series of moderating binary logistic regression models and moderating ordinal logistic regression models to evaluate predictive bias and disparate application. RESULTS Race and ethnicity influenced how the criminal history score related to violent recidivism: This compromised the validity of the score as a predictor of recidivism. Moreover, evidence showed that the overall risk of reoffending was associated with harsher sanctioning decisions for Black and Hispanic youths than for White youths. CONCLUSION Ensuring that RAI results are consistently interpreted and used in informing decisions is as important as ensuring that RAI scores function equally well in predicting recidivism regardless of race and ethnicity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

该协议在预测累犯和法庭对涉足正义的青年的处置方面存在种族/民族差异。


目的 为了回应对司法系统中使用风险评估工具 (RAI) 时的种族/民族差异 (R/ED) 的担忧，之前的研究以压倒性的方式测试了 RAI 分数在多大程度上一致地预测跨种族和族裔的累犯（预测偏差） ）。然而，人们对 R/ED 在 RAI 措施与法院对参与司法的青少年的处置（不同的申请）之间的关系知之甚少。本研究调查了积极成就改变工具（PACT）为白人、黑人和西班牙裔参与司法的青少年产生的三种风险衡量标准（犯罪史、社会史和总体风险水平）的预测偏差和不同应用。假设鉴于现有研究中预测偏差的证据混杂，且缺乏不同应用的证据，我们没有做出任何具体假设，而是进行了探索性分析。然而，从临床角度来看，我们预计很少或根本没有证据支持我们研究的管辖范围内的白人、黑人和西班牙裔青年中 PACT 的预测偏差和不同应用。方法 样本由 5,578 名青少年（11.4% 白人、43.9% 黑人和 44.7% 西班牙裔）组成，他们在德克萨斯州哈里斯县青少年缓刑部门完成了 PACT。结果变量包括累犯（一般和暴力再犯）和法庭处理（延期审判、缓刑但不安置和缓刑但安置）。我们运行了一系列调节二元逻辑回归模型和调节有序逻辑回归模型来评估预测偏差和不同的应用。 结果 种族和族裔影响了犯罪史评分与暴力累犯的关系：这损害了分数作为累犯预测指标的有效性。此外，有证据表明，与白人青年相比，黑人和西班牙裔青年再次犯罪的总体风险与更严厉的制裁决定有关。结论 确保 RAI 结果得到一致的解释和用于为决策提供信息，与确保 RAI 分数在预测累犯方面同样重要，无论种族和民族如何。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。