The size and sign of treatment effects in sex offender therapy
Abstract
We review scientific criteria for the minimally useful evaluation of psychosocial treatment for sex offenders. The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers recently supported a meta-analysis ((Hanson et al., 2002)) of the effectiveness of psychological treatment for sex offenders. It was concluded that current treatments for sex offenders reduce recidivism. In this chapter, we reevaluate the evidence. Whereas the random assignment studies yielded results that provided no evidence of treatment effectiveness, Hanson et al. reviewed approximately a dozen others (called "incidental assignment" studies), which yielded substantial positive results for treatment. Upon close inspection, we conclude that such designs involve noncomparable groups and are too weak to be used to draw inferences about treatment effectiveness. In almost every case, the evidence was contaminated by the fact that comparison groups included higher-risk offenders who would have refused or quit treatment had it been offered to them. We conclude that the effectiveness of psychological treatment for sex offenders remains to be demonstrated. Furthermore, we outline solutions that we think will lead to progress in the field of sex offender treatment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Rice and Harris observed that many methodologically flawed studies were included in the Hanson review and that the 'best' studies showed no effect.
“Rice and Harris observed that not only were many methodologically flawed studies included, but that the 'best' studies showed no effect.”
From Pharmacological interventions for those who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending (2015) · cites this paper as Rice 2003
Cites
Writing meta-analytic reviews.
Rosenthal, R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.118.2.183 · Cited by 1,108 · see citing works
Sexual offender recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of recent treatment studies
Hall, G. C. N. (1995) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.63.5.802 · Cited by 532 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Principles of Effective Correctional Treatment Also Apply To Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis
Hanson, R. K., Bourgon, G., Helmus, L., & Hodgson, S. (2009) · Criminal Justice and Behavior · doi:10.1177/0093854809338545 · Cited by 774 · see citing works
Pharmacological interventions for those who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending
Khan, O., Ferriter, M., Huband, N., Powney, M. J., Dennis, J. A., & Duggan, C. (2015) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd007989.pub2 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Byrne, G., & Ní Ghráda, Á. (2019) · Aggression and Violent Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.avb.2019.01.001 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
- Authors
- RICE, M. E., & HARRIS, G. T.
- Affiliations
- Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (CA)
- Corresponding author
- RICE, MARNIE E.
- Venue
- Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-06
- Volume
- 989
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 428-440
- ISSN
- 0077-8923 (ISSN-L)
- 1749-6632
- OpenAlex
- W2106491827
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 1.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Keywords
- recidivism, treatment effectiveness, psychosocial interventions, treatment refusal, meta-analysis critique
- MeSH terms
- Mental Disorders, Humans, Psychotherapy, Sex Offenses, United States, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review