運用科學實證觀點來思考受刑人個別處遇計畫：從風險－需求－對應模式談起

Advancing Individual Treatment Plans for Offenders: A Research-based study through the Lens of the Risk-Need-Responsivity Model

10.6905/JC.202407_13(2).0003

蔡震邦(Cheng-Pang Tsai)

風險－需求－對應 ； 動態犯罪風險 ； 動態犯罪需求 ； 個別處遇計畫 ； 風險評估 ； risk-need-responsivity ； dynamic criminal risk ； dynamic criminal need ； individual treatment plans ； risk assessment

矯政期刊

13卷2期（2024 / 07 / 01）

77 - 116

繁體中文;英文

2022年2月11日法務部矯正署頒定「深化受刑人個別處遇實施計畫」並將加拿大犯罪心理學家Andrews、Bonta和Hoge於1990年起發展至今的風險－需求－對應模式放入計畫文字時，即宣告我國的矯正工作邁向以科學實證基礎、融合理論應用的里程碑；因此，本文除說明Andrews和Bonta於2023年9月剛付梓的「犯罪心理學」英文第七版內容的主要更新修正處外，也將逐步介紹該模式的理論內容（一般人格與認知社會學習觀點理論、犯罪風險／犯罪需求的八個核心議題及評估工具、對應處遇策略及服務方案），和在未成年涉法當事人、女性涉法當事人等不同族群的實際運用情形。此刻，風險－需求－對應模式仍在持續發展中，然而原理論在降低再犯的效益之外，也經常有不同學者使用此理論來進行再犯預測，故特別另說明降低再犯、再犯預測兩者之間的差異；希冀藉由本文拋磚引玉，提供在應用和設計風險－需求－對應模式的本土化過程的不同思維，期盼終能有事半功倍的進程。

The implementation of the " Individual Treatment Plans for Offenders" by the Agency of Corrections, Ministry of Justice, incorporating the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model developed by eminent Canadian criminologists Andrews, Bonta, and Hoge since 1990, marks a pivotal shift in our nation's correctional landscape towards evidence-based practices and the integration of theoretical frameworks. This paper not only elucidates the substantive updates and revisions in the seventh edition of "The Psychology of Criminal Conduct," authored by Andrews and Bonta, published in September 2023 but also systematically introduces the theoretical underpinnings of the RNR model, encompassing general personality and cognitive social learning perspectives, the eight dimensions of criminal risk/criminal needs and associated assessment instruments, the responsivity to tailoring treatment strategies and service protocols, while delineating their practical implementation across varied demographic cohorts such as juvenile and female offenders. Presently, while the Risk-Need-Responsivity model continues its evolution, its theoretical tenets, beyond their efficacy in recidivism reduction, are frequently leveraged by scholars for recidivism prediction. Consequently, a nuanced clarification regarding the distinction between recidivism reduction and recidivism prediction is provided. It is hoped that this paper, by contributing insights, will foster diverse perspectives in the contextualization process of applying and configuring the Risk-Need-Responsivity model, ultimately fostering a more efficacious progression.