The Empirical Case for Pretrial Risk Assessment Instruments

DOI10.1177/00938548211041651
Published date01 June 2022
Date01 June 2022
Subject MatterArticles
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2022, Vol. 49, No. 6, June 2022, 807 –816.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211041651
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
807
THE EMPIRICAL CASE FOR PRETRIAL RISK
ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS
SARAH L. DESMARAIS
Policy Research Associates, Inc.
JOHN MONAHAN
University of Virginia School of Law
JAMES AUSTIN
JFA Institute
Pretrial risk assessment instruments are used in many jurisdictions to inform decisions regarding pretrial release and condi-
tions. Many are concerned that the use of pretrial risk assessment instruments may be contributing to worsened, not improved,
pretrial outcomes, including increased rates of pretrial detention and exacerbated racial disparities in pretrial decisions. These
concerns have led prominent organizations to reverse their position on the role of pretrial risk assessment instruments in
pretrial system change. Reforms that centered on their use have been rolled back or have failed to be implemented in the first
place. However, the scientific evidence behind these concerns is lacking. Instead, the findings of rigorous research show that
the results of pretrial risk assessment instruments demonstrate good accuracy in predicting new criminal activity, including
violent crime, during the pretrial period, even when there are differences between groups defined by race and ethnicity.
Furthermore, the scientific evidence suggests they can be an effective strategy to help achieve pretrial system change, includ-
ing reducing pretrial detention for people of color and white people, alike, when their results are actually used to inform
decision-making. In this article, we review the scientific evidence in relation to three primary critiques of pretrial risk assess-
ment instruments, namely, that their results have poor accuracy and are racially biased and that their use increases pretrial
detention rates. We also provide recommendations for addressing these critiques to ensure that their use supports, rather than
detracts from, the goals of pretrial reform and articulates an agenda for future research.
Keywords: risk assessment; race; predictive validity; decision-making; evaluation; jail
AUTHORS’ NOTE: This article draws from the content of an open letter to the Pretrial Justice Institute in
response to their statement arguing that pretrial risk assessment instruments should be abolished. We are grate-
ful to the following scholars on pretrial risk assessment who endorsed the open letter and whose feedback
greatly improved its contents: Richard Berk, Mary Ann Campbell, Todd Clear, Matthew DeMichele, Brandon
Garrett, Alex Holsinger, Michael Jacobson, Brian Lovins, Evan M. Lowder, Christopher Lowenkamp, Sandra
Mayson, Cynthia Rudin, Jennifer Skeem, Christopher Slobogin, Victoria Terranova, Jodi Viljoen, Gina Vincent,
Kyle Ward, and Kevin Wolff. We are also grateful to many other researchers, practitioners, and advocates who
provided feedback but who did not want to endorse the letter for various reasons. Their questions, points of
view, and challenges have helped push and shape our thinking on these critical issues and our interpretation
of the science on pretrial risk assessment instruments. Correspondence concerning this article should be
addressed to Sarah L. Desmarais, Policy Research Associates, Inc., 345 Delaware Ave, Delmar, NY 12054;
e-mail: sdesmarais@prainc.com.
1041651CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211041651Criminal Justice and BehaviorDesmarais et al. / Pretrial Risk Assessment
article-commentary2021

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