The psychometric properties of the Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool (CPORT) in different subgroups of individuals convicted of offenses related to child sexual exploitation material (CSEM)

06/11/2025

Law Hum Behav. 2025 Oct;49(5):426-439. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000616.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Despite the increasing number of individuals convicted of offenses related to child sexual exploitation material (CSEM), empirical research on the psychometric properties of actuarial risk assessment instruments for this population is limited.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the German version of the Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool (CPORT) demonstrate predictive validity in an Austrian sample of individuals incarcerated for CSEM offenses?

METHOD: Using an exploratory, retrospective, file-based research design, we calculated effect sizes for the total sample (N = 128; follow-up period: M = 8.5 years, SD = 3.68), a subsample with fixed 5-year follow-up periods (n = 104), and subgroups of individuals convicted of either CSEM offenses only or both CSEM and sexual contact offenses. The study was exploratory in nature, evaluating the discriminatory power of a German CPORT and a shortened version (CPORT-SV), with scoring rules adapted for correctional settings.

RESULTS: The German CPORT validly classified CSEM recidivism in the total sample (Harrell’s C = 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.62, 0.82]), the subsample with fixed 5-year follow-up periods (n = 104, area under the curve [AUC] = .73, 95% CI [0.60, 0.86]), individuals with additional sexual contact offenses (n = 57, AUC = .82, 95% CI [0.69, 0.94]), and individuals convicted of CSEM offenses only (n = 47, AUC = .70, 95% CI [0.55, 0.86]). The CPORT-SV performed comparably with the CPORT full version. Furthermore, in a subsample of individuals with additional sexual contact offenses, the CPORT (AUC = .84, 95% CI [0.70, 0.97]) and the CPORT-SV (AUC = .82, 95% CI [0.67, 0.97]) yielded effect sizes that were comparable with those of the Static-99 (AUC = .81, 95% CI [0.64, 0.97]).

CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the German version of the CPORT has potential as a risk assessment tool for professionals working in correctional settings, but further validation is needed before it can be fully implemented. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

PMID:41196724 | DOI:10.1037/lhb0000616

Document this CPD