The validity of violence risk estimates: An issue of item performance

Psychological Services

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-12

  Mills, Jeremy F ^a,b   Kroner, Daryl G ^c,d   Hemmati, Toni ^b  

^a Bath Institution   (Canada)

^b CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c Pittsburgh Institution   (Canada)

^d Pittsburgh Institution   (Canada)

Author keywords

HCR 20; Historical clinical risk 20; Recidivism; Risk; Validation; Violence; Violence risk appraisal guide; VRAG

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847689936     PISSN: 15411559     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1541-1559.4.1.1     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. L. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
2. Belfrage, H., Fransson, G., & Strand, S. (2000). Prediction of violence using the HCR-20: A prospective study in two maximum-security correctional institutions. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 11, 167-175.
3. Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science, 243, 1668-1674.
4. Douglas, K. S., & Webster, C. D. (1999). The HCR-20 violence risk assessment scheme: Concurrent validity in a sample of incarcerated offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26, 3-19.
5. Douglas, K. S., Yeomans, M., & Boer, D. P. (2005). Comparative validity analysis of multiple measures of violence risk in a sample of criminal offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 479-510.
6. Grann, M., Belfrage, H., & Tengstrom, A. (2000). Actuarial assessment of risk for violence: Predictive validity of the VRAG and the historical part of the HCR-20. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 97-114.
7. Grove, W. M., & Meehl, P. E. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 293-323.
8. Hanson, R. K. (1997). The development of a brief actuarial risk scale for sexual offence recidivism. (User Report 97-04.). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
9. Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sex ual offence recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35.
10. Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (1999). Static-99: Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders. (User Report 1999-02.) Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
11. Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (manual). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
12. Hare, R. D. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (2nd ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
13. Heilbrun, K., O'Neill, M. L., Strohman, L. K., Bowman, Q., & Philipson, J. (2000). Expert approaches to communicating violence risk. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 137-148.
14. Kroner, D. G., & Mills, J. F. (2001). The accuracy of five risk, appraisal instruments in predicting institutional misconduct and new convictions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 471-489.
15. Litwack, T. R. (2001). Actuarial versus clinical assessments of dangerousness. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 409-443.
16. Loza, W., & Dhaliwal, G. K. (1997). Psychometric evaluation of the Risk Appraisal Guide (RAG): A tool for assessing violent recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 779-793.
17. Mathiesen, T. (1998). Selective incapacitation revisited. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 455-469.
18. Mills, J. F., Jones, M. N., & Kroner, D. G. (2005). An examination of the generalizability of the LSI-R and VRAG probability bins. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 565-585.
19. Mills, J. F., Kroner, D. G., & Hemmati, T. (2003). Predicting violent behavior through a static/stable variable lens. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 891-904.
20. Mossman, D. (2000). Commentary: Assessing the risk of violence - Are accurate predictions useful? Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 272-281.
21. Norko, M. A. (2000). Commentary: Dangerousness - A failed paradigm for clinical practice and service delivery. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 282-289.
22. Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1995). Violent recidivism: Assessing predictive validity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 737-748.
23. Rice, M. E., Harris, G. T., & Cormier, C. (1992). Evaluation of a maximum security therapeutic community for psychopaths and other mentally disordered offenders, Law and Human Behavior, 16, 399-412.
24. Rice, M. E., Harris, G. T., & Quinsey, V. L. (1990). A follow-up of rapists assessed in a maximum-security psychiatric facility. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 435-448.
25. Sjostedt, G., & Lanstrom, N. (2001). Actuarial assessment of sex offender recidivism risk: A cross-validation of the RRASOR and the Static-99 in Sweden. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 629-645.
26. Steadman, H. J. (2000). From dangerousness to risk assessment of community violence: Taking stock at the turn of the century. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 28, 265-271.
27. Webster, C. D., Douglas, K. S., Eaves, D., & Hart, S. D. (1997). HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence - Version 2. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Simon Fraser University and British Columbia Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission.
28. Webster, C. D., Eaves, D., Douglas, K. S., & Wintrup, A. (1995). The HCR-20 scheme: The assessment of dangerousness and risk. Vancouver. British Columbia, Canada: Simon Fraser University and British Columbia Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission.
29. Webster, C. D., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., Cormier, C., & Quinsey, V. L. (1994). The Violence Prediction Scheme: Assessing dangerousness in high risk men. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto.
30. Zamble, E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1997). The criminal recidivism process. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.