Factors to Consider in Defining
Sex Offender RecidivismFactors such as the definition of recidivism, unreported
sex crimes, and the length of follow-up can have an
impact on the determination of recidivism rates.
The definition of what constitutes sexual recidi-
vism is a hotly contested topic. While almost all
researchers agree that recidivism should be defined as
a subsequent offense, the nature of the re-offending
has been contested. In some studies, recidivism is
defined as a subsequent charge or arrest, while other
studies specify that the subsequent charges or arrests
must result in a conviction. Furthermore, some
researchers argue that among sex offenders, recidi-
vism should refer only to new sexually based crimes.
However, other researchers define recidivism as any
subsequent crime, regardless of its nature. Finally,
some studies define recidivism as re-incarceration.
These differences in the operational definition of
recidivism have serious implications when considering
the prevalence of sex offender recidivism. For exam-
ple, studies in which subsequent arrests were used as
the criterion would result in higher recidivism rates
because being arrested or charged with a crime does
not always result in conviction. Operationalizing
recidivism as subsequent re-incarceration makes the
definition more narrow thus decreasing recidivism
rates. However, some researchers would argue that sex
offender recidivism should encompass reconviction
only for sexually based crimes and not crimes that are
nonsexual in nature. Finally, using subsequent re-
incarceration as the criterion could also erroneously
inflate recidivism statistics as many sex offenders have
long periods of parole following the completion of
their sentence, and they could be re-incarcerated for
technical parole violations such as drinking alcohol or
failing to meet with their parole officer. Therefore, it is
very important when examining rates of sexual recidi-
vism to determine how the researchers have opera-
tionalized recidivism.
Another issue to consider when examining rates of
sexual recidivism is the number of sex crimes that go
unreported or undetected. For example, it is estimated
that only 32% (or 1 in 3) of sex crimes against indi-
viduals older than 12 are reported to the police.
Polygraph studies of convicted sex offenders found
that sex offenders had committed significantly more
sexual offenses than they were charged or convicted
of and that, on average, sex offenders had been com-
mitting crimes for 16 years before being caught.Furthermore, even if an offender is charged with a sex
crime, it may be harder to prove, so they may plead to
a lesser nonsex crime.
Finally, when conceptualizing sex offender recidi-
vism, it is also important to examine the length of the
follow-up period. While recidivism may be consid-
ered to be a lifelong occurrence, many studies use dis-
crete periods of 5 or 10 years postrelease, while some
studies have followed sex offenders for up to 25 years.
However, the duration of postincarceration follow-up
could also influence recidivism rates as it is inevitable
that the longer the follow-up period, the more likely it
is that a sex offender will re-offend.Static and Dynamic Predictors
of Sex Offender Recidivism
Factors predicting risk for recidivism among sex
offenders can be separated into static and dynamic
risk variables. Static risk variables are risk factors that
are unchangeable, such as age or ethnicity, while
dynamic risk variables are factors that are amenable to
change with treatment, such as anger.
In their 1998 meta-analysis, Hanson and Bussière
found several static variables that were related to sex
offender recidivism. They categorized them into four
broad domains encompassing criminal lifestyle, psy-
chological maladjustment, sexual deviance, and treat-
ment motivation. Of those general categories, they
found that the strongest predictor of sexual recidivism
was deviant sexual interest. Specifically, they found that
offenders who had sexual interest in boys and those who
had any other sort of deviant interest were more likely to
re-offend sexually. Additionally, they found that offend-
ers who were young (under the age of 25) and single
(never having been in a long-term relationship) were
more likely to re-offend. The risk for recidivism was
also increased if the sex offender had a prior sexual
offense, had victimized strangers, had an extrafamilial
victim, started offending at an early age, had male vic-
tims, and had engaged in diverse sexual crimes. Finally,
they found that offenders who had failed to complete
treatment or those who were exhibitionists were more
likely to have committed another sexual offense. These
findings were used as the basis for the development of
the STATIC–99, an actuarial risk assessment tool used
to assess the risk for future sex offender recidivism.
In a subsequent meta-analysis of 82 recidivism
studies, Hanson and Morton-Bourgnon found that sex-
ual deviancy and antisocial orientation (composed of
antisocial personality disorder, psychopathy, antisocialSex Offender Recidivism——— 727S-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:44 PM Page 727