Both methods have their benefits, and understandably, both have potentially negative consequences for the community into which the individual may be released and for the individuals themselves. The outcome is usually assessed as a false positive, false negative, true positive or true negative . A false positive incorrectly identifies someone as a future risk when in reality they are not. A false negative is when an individual is determined not to act in future dangerous ways, but they, in fact, do. A true positive is a correct assessment that the individual will be dangerous, while a true negative is a correct prediction that the person will not be dangerous.
Clinical tools use a controlled setting during which an assessment of the person in question occurs.
This may also be performed without any personal interaction between the professional and the offender. That is, with the clinician having access to full accounts of the individuals behaviour, which may also include any psychological tests performed, rather than access to the individuals themselves. Of the variety of different assessment tools available, perhaps the most subjective are clinical judgements. This type of assessment is made based on experience with a certain clientele. For example, a psychologist may propose that based on my experience with these offenders, I would suggest that this person will re-offend within the next 12 to 18 months .