Racist Algorithms or Systemic Problems? Risk Assessments and Racial Disparities

DOI10.1177/0093854820954501
Published date01 December 2020
Date01 December 2020
Subject MatterArticles
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2020, Vol. 47, No. 12, December 2020, 1576 –1584.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820954501
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
1576
RACIST ALGORITHMS OR SYSTEMIC
PROBLEMS?
Risk Assessments and Racial Disparities
GINA M. VINCENT
University of Massachusetts Medical School
JODI L. VILJOEN
Simon Fraser University
As recent and historical events attest, racial and ethnic disparities are widely engrained into the justice system. Recently,
scholars and policymakers have raised concerns that risk assessment instruments may exacerbate these disparities. While it
is critical that risk instruments be scrutinized for racial bias, some concerns, though well-meaning, have gone beyond the
evidence. This article explains what it means for an instrument to be “biased” and why instruments should not all be painted
with the same brush (some will be more susceptible to bias than others). If some groups get apprehended more, those groups
will score higher on non-biased, well-validated instruments derived to maximize prediction of recidivism because of math-
ematics. Thus, risk instruments shine a light on long-standing systemic problems of racial disparities. This article concludes
with suggestions for research and for minimizing disparities by ensuring that systems use risk assessments to avoid unneces-
sary incarceration while allowing for structured discretion.
Keywords: criminal justice; risk assessment; race; ethnicity; decision-making
Risk assessment instruments are often used by personnel in justice settings to inform
decisions at various points in the legal process in which risk to public safety is relevant
(e.g., Starr, 2015; Wachter, 2015). National data indicate most U.S. justice systems use a
pretrial risk assessment instrument to make determinations about risk to community safety
(https://pretrialrisk.com/). The value of risk instruments generally is that they are more
accurate and reliable in their estimates of one’s likelihood of reoffending than unstructured
hunches (e.g., Ægisdóttir et al., 2006; Grove et al., 2000). Moreover, there is meta-analytic
evidence that when properly implemented and paired with evidence-based practice, risk
instruments can reduce incarceration without an increased threat to public safety (Viljoen
et al., 2019). However, risk instruments recently have been subject to substantial concerns
(e.g., Robinson & Koepke, 2019).
AUTHORS’ NOTE: The authors wish to thank Lauren McDowell, M.A., for her assistance with this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gina M. Vincent, Department of Psychiatry,
Law & Psychiatry Program and Implementation Science & Practices Advances Research Center, University of
Massachusetts Medical School, 222 Maple Ave, Shrewsbury, MA 01545; e-mail: Gina.Vincent@umassmed.edu.
954501CJBXXX10.1177/0093854820954501Criminal Justice and BehaviorVincent, Viljoen / Racist Algorithms or Systemic Problems
research-article2020

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT