Sentencing Using Statistical Treatment Rules: What We Don’t Know Can Hurt Us
- 338 Downloads
The existing literature seriously misinterprets the available evidence on the predictability of high rate criminal offending and thus the potential value of statistical treatment rules that impose stiffer punishments on offenders with higher predicted risk of recidivism. The misinterpretation results from the failure to take account of the fact that the data used in existing risk assessment exercises come from environments characterized by informal (and sometimes formal) attempts by judges and other actors to base penal treatments on expected recidivism. Findings of little or no predictive power for baseline covariates may simply indicate the efficient use of the available information. We lay out the problem in detail, provide examples from several literatures and then consider general solutions to the problem.
KeywordsSelective incarceration Sentencing Statistical treatment rule Profiling
We thank Gary Sweeten and Peter Reuter for helpful discussions and two anonymous referees for their thoughtful comments.
- Berger M, Black D, Smith J (2001) Evaluating profiling as a means of allocating government services. In: Lechner M, Pfeiffer P (eds) Econometric evaluation of active labour market policies. Physica, Heidelberg, pp 59–84Google Scholar
- Black D, Smith J, Plesca M, Shannon S (2003) Estimating the duration of unemployment insurance benefit recipiency. Revised Final Report to the U.S. Department of LaborGoogle Scholar
- Black D, Galdo J, Smith J (2007) Evaluating the worker profiling and reemployment services system using a regression discontinuity design. Am Econ Rev Papers Proc 97(2):104–107Google Scholar
- Engel RS (forthcoming). A critique of the outcome test in racial profiling research. Justice QuartGoogle Scholar
- Gottfredson D (1999) Effects of judge’s sentencing decisions on criminal careers. National Institute of Justice Research in Brief. NCJ 178889Google Scholar
- Gottfredson S, Gottfredson D (1986) Accuracy of prediction models. In: Blumstein A, Cohen J, Roth J, Visher C (eds) Criminal careers and “career criminals”. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 212–290Google Scholar
- Harcourt B (2006) Against prediction: profiling, policing and punishing in an actuarial age. University Of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- Klepper S, Nagin D, Tierney L (1983) Discrimination in the criminal justice system: a critical appraisal of the literature. In: Blumstein A et al. (eds) Research on sentencing: the search for reform, vol II. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 55–128Google Scholar
- Ostrom B, Kleiman M, Cheesman F, Hansen R, Kauder N (2002) Offender risk assessment in Virginia: a three-stage evaluation. National Center for State Courts, WilliamsburgGoogle Scholar
- Tonry M (1996) Sentencing matters. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Visher C (1986) The Rand inmate survey: a reanalysis. In: Blumstein A, Cohen J, Roth J, Visher C (eds) Criminal careers and “career criminals”, vol 2. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 161–211Google Scholar