Abstract: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)

Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments

Fair-by-design explainable models for prediction of recidivism

Achieving Fairness through Adversarial Learning: an Application to Recidivism Prediction

Algorithmic Bias in Recidivism Prediction: A Causal Perspective

Fairness in Risk Assessment Instruments: Post-Processing to Achieve Counterfactual Equalized Odds

Case Study: Predictive Fairness to Reduce Misdemeanor Recidivism Through Social Service Interventions

A statistical framework for fair predictive algorithms

Fairer and more accurate, but for whom?

An algorithm for removing sensitive information: application to race-independent recidivism prediction

The age of secrecy and unfairness in recidivism prediction

Reducing race-based bias and increasing recidivism prediction accuracy by using past criminal history details

Improving Fairness in Criminal Justice Algorithmic Risk Assessments Using Conformal Prediction Sets

The Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness: On "Correcting" Algorithmic Unfairness in a Child Welfare Reunification Success Classifier

In Pursuit of Interpretable, Fair and Accurate Machine Learning for Criminal Recidivism Prediction

The Progression of Disparities within the Criminal Justice System: Differential Enforcement and Risk Assessment Instruments

Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment

Racial/ethnic disparities of the pact in predicting recidivism and court dispositions for justice-involved youth.

Fair When Trained, Unfair When Deployed: Observable Fairness Measures are Unstable in Performative Prediction Settings

A Comparative User Study of Human Predictions in Algorithm-Supported Recidivism Risk Assessment

Fairness Evaluation in Presence of Biased Noisy Labels

Evaluation of Fairness Trade-offs in Predicting Student Success