OBJECTIVE Use of risk assessment instruments in the criminal justice system is controversial. Advocates emphasize that risk assessments are more transparent, consistent, and accurate in predicting re-offending than judicial intuition. Skeptics worry that risk assessments will increase socioeconomic disparities in incarceration. Ultimately, judges make decisions-not risk assessments. This study tests whether providing risk assessment information interacts with a defendant's socioeconomic class to influence judges' sentencing decisions. HYPOTHESES Tentatively, socioeconomic status was expected to have a main effect; without an interaction with risk assessment information. METHOD Judges (N = 340) with sentencing experience were randomly assigned to review 1 of 4 case vignettes and sentence the defendant to probation, jail, or prison. Information in the vignettes was held constant, except the defendant's socioeconomic status and whether risk assessment information was provided. RESULTS Risk assessment information reduced the likelihood of incarceration for relatively affluent defendants, but the same information increased the likelihood of incarceration for relatively poor defendants. This finding held after controlling for the sex, race, political orientation, and jurisdiction of the judge. CONCLUSIONS Cuing judges to focus on risk may re-frame how they process socioeconomic status-a variable with opposite effects on perceptions of blameworthiness for past crime versus perceptions of risk for future crime. Providing risk assessment information may have transformed low socioeconomic status from a circumstance that reduced the likelihood of incarceration (by mitigating perceived blameworthiness) to a factor that increased the likelihood of incarceration (by increasing perceived risk). Under some circumstances, risk assessment information may increase sentencing disparities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

在量度相对较差的被告时，风险评估对法官公平性的影响。

目的在刑事司法系统中使用风险评估工具存在争议。倡导者强调，与司法直觉相比，风险评估在预测再犯方面更加透明，一致和准确。怀疑论者担心风险评估会增加监禁中的社会经济差距。最终，法官会做出决定，而不是风险评估。本研究测试提供的风险评估信息是否与被告的社会经济阶层互动，从而影响法官的判决判决。假设暂时，人们预期社会经济地位将产生主要影响。无需与风险评估信息进行交互。方法随机分配具有判刑经验的法官（N = 340），以复审4个案件的小插图，并判处被告缓刑，监禁或监禁。除了被告的社会经济地位以及是否提供了风险评估信息外，小插图中的信息保持不变。结果风险评估信息减少了相对富裕的被告被监禁的可能性，但是相同的信息增加了相对贫穷的被告被监禁的可能性。这一发现是在控制了法官的性别，种族，政治倾向和管辖权之后举行的。结论提示法官将重点放在风险上可能会改变他们处理社会经济状况的方式-这个变量对既往犯罪的责任感和对未来犯罪的风险感具有相反的影响。提供风险评估信息可能已经使低社会经济地位从降低监禁可能性（通过减轻感知的应责程度）转变为增加监禁可能性（通过增加感知风险）的因素。在某些情况下，风险评估信息可能会增加量刑差异。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。