Recidivism research is a difficult business. It's not easy obtaining data and following offenders over time. Deciding what the outcome variables should be and how they should be measured is notoriously tricky. Thus, it is hardly surprising when one study suggests a low recidivism rate for certain offenders while others signal much higher rates. But when a study suggests a zero rate of recidivism, that's something worth looking at carefully.
This study is not new, but it's frequently cited by those who wish to suggest that recidivism rates among juvenile sex offenders can be low - very low. Rarely do those who cite to it, however, mention that in that study the authors followed only 10 adolescent sex offenders, for only 6 months, and relied on self-report as the sole measure of recidivism. The authors probably never intended their study to stand for the proposition that sex offender recidivism can be in the zero range, but alas, that is what it has become.
The devil really is in the details.
This study is not new, but it's frequently cited by those who wish to suggest that recidivism rates among juvenile sex offenders can be low - very low. Rarely do those who cite to it, however, mention that in that study the authors followed only 10 adolescent sex offenders, for only 6 months, and relied on self-report as the sole measure of recidivism. The authors probably never intended their study to stand for the proposition that sex offender recidivism can be in the zero range, but alas, that is what it has become.
The devil really is in the details.
Leave a comment