Further Testing of the Inter-rater Reliability of ESTER-assessment – a Risk-need Assessment Instrument for Youths with or at Risk for Conduct Problems
American Journal of Applied Psychology
Volume 2, Issue 2, March 2013, Pages: 16-21
Received: Mar. 7, 2013;
Published: Mar. 10, 2013
Views 3459 Downloads 216
Henrique Bond, School of Law, Psychology, and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Sweden
Marja Rudenhed, School of Law, Psychology, and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Sweden
Eva Bergquist, School of Law, Psychology, and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Sweden
Anna-Karin Andershed, School of Law, Psychology, and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Sweden
Henrik Andershed, School of Law, Psychology, and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Sweden
Behavioral problems in childhood have been associated with conduct problems later in life. Thus, it is essen-tial that youths with or at risk for conduct problems receive the help they need on time. Therefore, youth with or at risk for conduct problem must receive effective risk-need assessments and intervention plans regardless the person who conducts the assessment. ESTER-assessment is a structured, computer-aided, risk-need instrument developed for assessing youth (0-18) with or at risk for conduct problems. It uses a five-step response scale to assess 19 research-based risk and protective factors and the present study tests the inter-rater reliability of these 19 factors. This was done by comparing the assessments conducted by two independent raters who assessed the file information of 30 girls (mean age = 16.9) who had been incarcerated due to psychosocial problems, criminality and/or drug abuse. Results showed fair to good agreement for the majority of the factors via intra-class correlations and percentage agreement varied on the 19 factors from 24.1 to 80.8 % for exact agreement and from 72.2 to 96.7 % for exact agreement or difference by one step on the response scale. We conclude that it is possible to gain acceptable to excellent inter-rater reliability in assessing risk and protective factors via ESTER-assessment.
Further Testing of the Inter-rater Reliability of ESTER-assessment – a Risk-need Assessment Instrument for Youths with or at Risk for Conduct Problems, American Journal of Applied Psychology.
Vol. 2, No. 2,
2013, pp. 16-21.
Frick, P. J., & Viding, E. (2009). Antisocial Behavior from a Developmental psychopathology Perspective. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 1111-1131.
Krohn, M. D., Thornberry, T. P., Rivera, C., & Le Blanc, M. (2001). Later delinquency careers. In R. Loeber & D. P. Far-rington (Eds.), Child delinquents (pp. 67-94). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Snyder, H. N. (2001). Epidemiology of Official Offending. In R. Loeber & D. P. Farrington (Red.), Child delinquents (pp. 25-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moffitt, T. E., & Scott, S. (2008). Conduct disorders of childhood and adolescence. In M. Rutter, D. Bishop, D. Pine, S. Scott, J. Stevenson, E. Taylor, & A. Thapar (Eds.), Rut-ter´s Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, (5th ed., pp. 543-564). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Odgers, C., Caspi, A., Broadbent, J. M., Dickson, N., Han-cox, R. J., & Harrington, H. (2007). Prediction of Differential Adult Health Burden by Conduct Problem Subtypes in Males. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64, 476-484.
Andershed, H., & Andershed, A-K. (2010). Risk-need as-sessment for youth with or at risk for conduct problems: In-troducing the assessment system ESTER. Procedia Social and Behavioral Journal, 5, 377-383.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2006). The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need Assess-ment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7-27.
Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (2003). Does family inter-vention work for delinquents? Results of a meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 45, 327-342.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classifica-tion for effective rehabilitation- Rediscovering Psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19-52.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16, 39-55.
Borum, R., Bartel, P., & Forth, A. (2002). Manual for the Structured Assessment for Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), Consultation edition, Version 1. Tampa: University of South Florida.
Augimeri, L. K., Webster, C. D., Koegl, C. J., & Levene, K. S. (1998). Early Assessment Risk List for Boys: EARL-20B. Version 1: Consultation edition. Toronto, Canada: Earlscourt Child and Family Centre.
Levene, K. S., Augimeri, L. K., Pepler, D. J., Walsh, M. M., Webster, C. D., Koegl C. J. (2001). Early Assessment Risk List for Girls (EARL-21G). Version 1 - Consultation Edition. Toronto, Canada: Earlscourt Child and Family Centre.
Vincent, G. M., Guy, L. S., Fusco, S. L., & Gerhenson, B. G. (2011). Field Reliability of the SAVRY with Juvenile Proba-tion Officers: Implications for Training. Law and Human Behavior.doi: 10.1007/s10979-011-9284-2.
Hrynkiw-Augimeri, L. K. (2005). Aggressive and antisocial young children: Risk prediction, assessment and management utilizing the Early Assessment Risk List for Boys (EARL-20B). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Catchpole, R., & Gretton, H. (2003). The predictive validity of risk assessment with violent young offenders: A 1-year examination of criminal outcome. Criminal Justice & Beha-vior, 30, 688-708.
Dolan, M. C., & Rennie, C. E. (2008). The Structured As-sessment of Violence Risk in Youth as a Predictor of Reci-divism in a United Kingdom Cohort of Adolescent Offenders With Conduct Disorder. Psychological Assessment, 20, 35-46.
Enebrink, P., Långström, N., Hultén, A., & Gumpert, C. H. (2006). Swedish Validation of the Early Assessment Risk List for Boys (EARL 20B), a decision aid for use with child-ren presenting with conduct-disrordered behaviour. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 60, 438-446.
Lodewijks, H. P. B., Doreleijers, T. A. H., de Ruiter, C., & Borum, R. (2008). Predictive validity of the Structured As-sessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) during resi-dential treatment. International Journal of Law and Pyschiatry, 31, 263-271.
Meyers, J., & Schmidt, F. (2008). Predictive Validity of the Structured Assessment for Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) with Juvenile Offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior 35, 696-709.
Viljoen. J. L., Scalora, M., Cuadra, L., Bader, S., Chávez, V., Ullman, D., Lawrence, L. (2008). Assessing risk for violence in adolescents who have sexually offended. A Comparison of the J-SOAP-II, J-SORRAT-II, and SAVRY. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 5-23.
Hrynkiw-Augimeri, L. K. (1998). Assessing risk for violence in boys: A preliminary risk assessment study using the Early Assessment Risk List for Boys (EARL-20B). Unpublished master’s thesis, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Levene, K. S., Walsh, M. M., Augimeri, L. K., & Pepler, D. J. (2004). Linking Identification and Treatment of Early Risk Factors for Female Delinquency. In M. M, Moretti, C. L., Odgers, & M. A., Jackson (Eds.), Girls and Agression: Contibuting Factors and Intervention Principles (pp. 147-163). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Andershed, H., Fredriksson, J., Engelholm, K., Ahlberg, R., Berggren, S., & Andershed, A-K. (2010). Initial test of the new risk-need assessment instrument for youths with or at risk for conduct problems: ESTER-assessment. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 488-492.
Friedman, A. S., & Utada, A. (1989). A method for diagnos-ing and planning the treatment of adolescent drug abusers: The Adolescent Drug Abuse Diagnosis (ADAD) instrument. Journal of Drug Education, 19, 285-312.
Wechsler, D. (2003). The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, Criteria, and Rules of Thumb for Evaluating Normed and Standardized Assessment instruments in Psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284-290.
Svensson, E. (2001). Guidelines to Statistical Evaluation of Data from Rating Scales and Questionnaires. Journal of Re-habilitation Medicine, 33, 47-48.