The limits of human predictions of recidivism
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 14 February 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Science Advances
- Vol. 6 (7), eaaz0652
- https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz0652
Abstract
Dressel and Farid recently found that laypeople were as accurate as statistical algorithms in predicting whether a defendant would reoffend, casting doubt on the value of risk assessment tools in the criminal justice system. We report the results of a replication and extension of Dressel and Farid’s experiment. Under conditions similar to the original study, we found nearly identical results, with humans and algorithms performing comparably. However, algorithms beat humans in the three other datasets we examined. The performance gap between humans and algorithms was particularly pronounced when, in a departure from the original study, participants were not provided with immediate feedback on the accuracy of their responses. Algorithms also outperformed humans when the information provided for predictions included an enriched (versus restricted) set of risk factors. These results suggest that algorithms can outperform human predictions of recidivism in ecologically valid settings.This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies.Psychological Assessment, 2009
- The Meta-Analysis of Clinical Judgment Project: Fifty-Six Years of Accumulated Research on Clinical Versus Statistical PredictionThe Counseling Psychologist, 2006
- The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need AssessmentCrime & Delinquency, 2006
- Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis.Psychological Assessment, 2000
- Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis.Psychological Assessment, 2000
- The likelihood of violent behaviour: Predictions, postdictions, and hindsight bias.Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 1995
- Clinical Versus Actuarial JudgmentScience, 1989
- On the psychology of prediction.Psychological Review, 1973
- VERIFICATION OF FORECASTS EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF PROBABILITYMonthly Weather Review, 1950
- Vox PopuliNature, 1907