Pretrial risk assessment instruments are used in many jurisdictions to inform decisions regarding pretrial release and conditions. Many are concerned that the use of pretrial risk assessment instruments may be contributing to worsened, not improved, pretrial outcomes, including increased rates of pretrial detention and exacerbated racial disparities in pretrial decisions. These concerns have led prominent organizations to reverse their position on the role of pretrial risk assessment instruments in pretrial system change. Reforms that centered on their use have been rolled back or have failed to be implemented in the first place. However, the scientific evidence behind these concerns is lacking. Instead, the findings of rigorous research show that the results of pretrial risk assessment instruments demonstrate good accuracy in predicting new criminal activity, including violent crime, during the pretrial period, even when there are differences between groups defined by race and ethnicity. Furthermore, the scientific evidence suggests they can be an effective strategy to help achieve pretrial system change, including reducing pretrial detention for people of color and white people, alike, when their results are actually used to inform decision-making. In this article, we review the scientific evidence in relation to three primary critiques of pretrial risk assessment instruments, namely, that their results have poor accuracy and are racially biased and that their use increases pretrial detention rates. We also provide recommendations for addressing these critiques to ensure that their use supports, rather than detracts from, the goals of pretrial reform and articulates an agenda for future research.

许多司法管辖区使用审前风险评估工具来为有关审前释放和条件的决定提供信息。许多人担心，审前风险评估工具的使用可能会导致审前结果恶化，而不是改善，包括审前拘留率增加和审前决定中加剧的种族差异。这些担忧导致知名组织改变了他们对审前风险评估工具在审前制度变革中的作用的立场。以使用为中心的改革被倒退或未能从一开始就实施。然而，缺乏这些担忧背后的科学证据。反而，严格研究的结果表明，审前风险评估工具的结果表明，即使在按种族和族裔界定的群体之间存在差异的情况下，在预审期间预测包括暴力犯罪在内的新犯罪活动方面也具有良好的准确性。此外，科学证据表明，它们可以成为帮助实现审前制度变革的有效策略，包括减少对有色人种和白人等人的审前拘留，当他们的结果实际用于为决策提供信息时。在本文中，我们回顾了与审前风险评估工具的三个主要批评相关的科学证据，即它们的结果准确性差且存在种族偏见，以及它们的使用会增加审前拘留率。