The CPORT and Risk Matrix 2000 for Men Convicted of Child Sexual Exploitation Material (CSEM) Offenses: A Predictive Accuracy Comparison and Meta-Analysis

• Published date: 01 January 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231208194
• Author: L. Maaike Helmus,Angela W. Eke,Linda Farmus,Michael C. Seto
• Date: 01 January 2024

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2024, Vol. 51, No. 1, January 2024, 3 –23.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231208194

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2023 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

3

THE CPORT AND RISK MATRIX 2000 FOR MEN

CONVICTED OF CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION

MATERIAL (CSEM) OFFENSES

A Predictive Accuracy Comparison and Meta-Analysis

L. MAAIKE HELMUS

Simon Fraser University

ANGELA W. EKE

Ontario Provincial Police

LINDA FARMUS

York University

MICHAEL C. SETO

Royal Ottawa Health Care Group

There is demand for valid risk assessment of individuals with child sexual exploitation material (CSEM) offenses. We com-

pared the predictive performance of the Risk Matrix 2000/Sex (RM2000/S) and the Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool

(CPORT) among 365 men convicted of CSEM offenses. In fixed 5-year follow-up analyses, the CPORT (area under the curve

[AUC] = .73) had significantly higher predictive accuracy than the RM2000/S (AUC = .66) for any sexual recidivism. The

predictive difference for CSEM recidivism was not statistically significant. A meta-analysis found the CPORT had large

effects in predicting sexual recidivism (AUC = .75) and moderate accuracy for CSEM recidivism (AUCs = .65 and .66),

AUTHORS’ NOTE: We would like to thank the police officers who assisted with the original project and who

investigated these offenses and we appreciate the research support and assistance of members of the Child

Sexual Exploitation Unit and Criminal Behaviour Analysis Section of the Ontario Provincial Police. The cur-

rent study sample contains protected information maintained by the Ontario Provincial Police and cannot be

shared outside the service; however, requests for additional data analyses or verification can be submitted for

review. The meta-analysis data sets (and syntax template) are available from Open Science Framework

(https://osf.io/pn9d6/?view_only=da2fa684366645d9b6db5a14c72464c5). Syntax for analyses from the cur-

rent study is not available (most analyses were conducted using point-and-click). This work was completed on

the traditional and unceded territories of the Coast Salish Peoples (Simon Fraser University), specifically the

Squamish (S

ḵ

wx̱wú7mesh Úxwumixw), Tsleil-Waututh (səl̓ilw̓əta

ʔɬ

) and Musqueam (x

ʷ

məθk

ʷ

əy̓əm) Nations,

also on the traditional territory of the Chippewas of Rama First Nation (OPP General Headquarters) and the

traditional and unceded territory of Algonquin Anishnaabeg People (Royal Ottawa Health Care Group).

Angela Eke, Michael Seto, and L. Maaike Helmus are co-authors of the Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool

(CPORT) coding manual. They do not receive royalties for use of the CPORT. Correspondence concerning this

article should be addressed to L. Maaike Helmus, Department of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, 10322

Saywell Hall, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada; e-mail: maaike_helmus@sfu.ca.

1208194CJBXXX10.1177/00938548231208194Criminal Justice and BehaviorHelmus et al. / CPORT and Risk Matrix 2000

research-article2023

4 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

while the RM2000/S had moderate accuracy in predicting any sexual recidivism (AUC = .66; insufficient studies of CSEM

recidivism). Results suggest a tool developed specifically for CSEM offending, such as CPORT, may perform better at pre-

dicting any sexual recidivism than adapting a general sexual offending risk tool.

Keywords: child sexual exploitation materials; risk assessment; recidivism; sexual offenses; prediction

Risk assessment is an essential task in the criminal justice system. Interventions to man-

age or reduce risk to reoffend are most effective when they are proportionate and tai-

lored to an individual’s risk to reoffend, following the risk and need principles of the risk/

need/responsivity model of effective correctional practices (Bonta & Andrews, 2017).

Lower intensity interventions are not sufficient for high risk individuals and higher intensity

interventions are inefficient and can have negative effects on low risk individuals (Andrews

& Dowden, 2006; Lovins et al., 2009; Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2005). Consequently, while

it is important to prioritize high risk individuals, we must ensure low risk people are not

overmanaged.

The development, validation, and implementation of risk assessment tools to predict

sexual offense recidivism have proliferated in the last 30 years (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon,

2009; Kelley et al., 2020). However, given the recency of widespread internet technologies

and the length of time required to conduct recidivism studies with adequate follow-up, there

is comparably less research and fewer risk assessment tools available for individuals con-

victed of internet sex offenses, particularly related to the possession and distribution of

child sexual exploitation materials (CSEM; also sometimes referred to as child pornogra-

phy or indecent images involving children). This gap in research and knowledge requires

attention because CSEM offending in particular has increased rapidly (Allen, 2016;

Statistics Canada, 2021).

RISK ASSESSMENT FOR MEN WITH CSEM OFFENSES

Virtually all empirically based risk assessment tools for sexual recidivism were devel-

oped with samples of men who had few to no CSEM offenses in their criminal history

because the sampling timeframes predated the widespread adoption of the internet, which

is itself linked to the rapid increase in CSEM-related offending (Martin, 2021; Seto, 2013).

For example, the original Static-99 and Risk Matrix were developed using individuals

released between 1959 and the early 1990s (Hanson & Thornton, 2000; Thornton et al.,

2003). However, lack of inclusion in the development research does not necessarily require

separate risk tools for this population. The 2014 Standards for Educational and Psychological

Testing from the Joint Committee of the American Educational Research Association, the

American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement in

Education (hereafter referred to as the Joint Committee) provide guidance for applying

existing assessment tools to new populations. Although not every possible subgroup or

unique case requires separate validation research, the Joint Committee (2014) emphasized

that test development and validation must consider relevant subgroups (see Chapter 3).

The question then becomes whether individuals with CSEM offenses are a relevant sub-

group requiring separate validation research and potentially unique risk tools. Early research

found these individuals are often at lower risk to sexually reoffend than those who