Does using nonnumerical terms to describe risk aid violence risk communication?: Clinician agreement and decision making

Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 171-188

  Zoe Hilton, N ^a   Carter, Angela M ^a   Harris, Grant T ^a   Sharpe, Amilynn J B ^a  

^a Mental Health Centre   (Canada)

Author keywords

Decision making; Risk assessment; Risk communication; Violence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FEMALE; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PARTNER VIOLENCE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPOUSE ABUSE;

EID: 37649017369     PISSN: 08862605     EISSN: 15526518     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0886260507309337     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Ægisdttir, S., White, M.J., Spengler, P.M., Maugherman, A.S., Anderson, L.A., Cook, R.S., et al. (2006). The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 341-382.
2. Bryant, G.D., & Norman, G.R. (1980). Expressions of probability: Words and numbers. New England Journal of Medicine, 302, 411.
3. Carter, A.M., & Hilton, N.Z. (2007, June). Using non-numerical descriptions of violence risk: Low, moderate, or high risk? Poster presented at the 7th Annual Conference of the International Association of Forensic Mental Health Services, Montreal, QC, Canada.
4. Douglas, K.S., & Ogloff, J.R.P. (2003). Multiple facets of risk for violence: The impact of judgmental specificity on structured decisions about violence risk. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 2, 19-34.
5. Douglas, K.S., Ogloff, J.R.P., & Hart, S.D. (2003). Evaluation of a model of violence risk assessment among forensic psychiatric patients. Psychiatric Services, 54, 1372-1379.
6. 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.
7. Edgell, S.E., Castellan, N.J., Jr., Roe, R.M., Barnes, J.M., Ng, P.C., Bright, R.D., et al. (1996). Irrelevant information in probabilistic categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1463-1481.
8. Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., & Mulley, A. (2002). Explaining risks: Turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. British Medical Journal, 324, 827-830.
9. Edwards, A., & Gwyn, R. (1999). General practice registrar responses to the use of different risk communication tools in simulated consultations: A focus group study. British Medical Journal, 18, 749-752.
10. Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig, R., van den Broek, E., Fasolo, B., & Katsikopoulos, K. (2005). " A 30% chance of rain tomorrow": How does the public understand probabilistic weather forecasts? Risk Analysis, 25, 623-629.
11. Grann, M., & Pallvik, A. (2002). An empirical investigation of written risk communication in forensic psychiatric evaluations. Psychology, Crime and Law, 8, 113-130.
12. Grove, W.M., Zald, D.H., Lebow, B.S., Snitz, B.E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19-30.
13. Gurmankin, A.D., Baron, J., & Armstrong, K. (2004). The effect of numerical statements of risk on trust and comfort with hypothetical physician risk communication. Medical Decision Making, 24, 265-271.
14. Hanson, R.K., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 119-136.
15. Harris, G.T., Rice, M.E., & Quinsey, V.L. (1993). Violent recidivism of mentally disordered offenders: The development of a statistical prediction instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 315-335.
16. Heilbrun, K., O'Neill, M., Stevens, T.N., Strohman, L.K., Bowman, Q., & Lo, Y.W. (2004). Assessing normative approaches to communicating violence risk: A national survey of psychologists. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 187-196.
17. Hilton, N.Z., Harris, G.T., Rawson, K., & Beach, C.A. (2005). Communicating violence risk information to forensic decision makers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 97-116.
18. Hilton, N.Z., Harris, G.T., & Rice, M.E. (2006). Sixty-six years of research on clinical versus actuarial prediction of violence. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 400-409.
19. Hilton, N.Z., Harris, G.T., Rice, M.E., Lang, C., Cormier, C.A., & Lines, K.J. (2004). A Brief Actuarial Assessment for the Prediction of Wife Assault Recidivism: The Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment. Psychological Assessment, 16, 267-275.
20. Hilton, N.Z., & Simmons, J. (2001). The influence of actuarial risk assessment in clinical judgments and tribunal decisions about mentally disordered offenders in maximum security. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 393-408.
21. Jou, J., Shanteau, J., & Harris, J. (1996). An information processing view of framing effects: The role of causal schemas in decision making. Memory and Cognition, 24, 1-15.
22. Karelitz, T.M., & Budescu, D.V. (2004). You say "probably" and I say "likely": Improving interpersonal communication with verbal probability phrases. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 25-41.
23. McNiel, D.E., & Binder, R.L. (1998, March). Comparison of categorical and probabilistic approaches to communication about psychiatric patients'risk of violence in clinical practice. Paper presented at the Biennial Conference of the American Psychology-Law Society, Redondo Beach, CA.
24. Mills, J.F., & Kroner, D.G. (2006). The effect of base-rate information on the perception of risk for reoffense. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 24, 45-56.
25. Monahan, J., Heilbrun, K., & Silver, E. (2002). Communicating violence risk: Frequency formats, vivid outcomes, and forensic settings. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1, 121-126.
26. Monahan, J., & Silver, E. (2003). Judicial decision thresholds for violence risk management. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 2, 1-6.
27. Natter, H.M., & Berry, D.C. (2005). Effects of active information processing on the understanding of risk information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 123-135.
28. Odeh, M.S., Zeiss, R.A., & Huss, M.T. (2006). Cues they use: Clinicians' endorsement of risk cues in predictions of dangerousness. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 24, 147-156.
29. Olson, M.J., & Budescu, D.V. (1997). Patterns of preference for numerical and verbal probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10, 117-131.
30. Quinsey, V.L., Harris, G.T., Rice, M.E., & Cormier, C.A. (2006). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk (2 nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
31. Schwarz, N., & Bless, H. (1992). Constructing reality and its alternatives: An inclusion/exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 217-245). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. Schwarz, N., & Oyserman, D. (2001). Asking questions about behaviour: Cognition, communication, and questionnaire construction. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 127-160.
33. Sedgwick, P., & Hall, A. (2003). Teaching medical students and doctors how to communicate risk. British Medical Journal, 327, 695.
34. Shaw, N.J., & Dear, P.R.F. (1990). How do parents of babies interpret qualitative expressions of probability? Archives of Disease in Childhood, 65, 520-523.
35. Sieck, W.R., & Arkes, H.R. (2005). The recalcitrance of overconfidence and its contribution to decision aid neglect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 29-53.
36. Slovic, P., & Monahan, J. (1995). Probability, danger, and coercion: A study of risk perception and decision making in mental health law. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 49-66.
37. Slovic, P., Monahan, J., & MacGregor, D.G. (2000). Violence risk assessment and risk communication: The effects of using actual cases, providing instruction, and employing probability versus frequency formats. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 271-296.
38. Walter, F.M., Emery, J.D., Rogers, M., & Britten, N. (2004). Women's views of optimal risk communication and decision making in general practice consultations about the menopause and hormone replacement therapy. Patient Education and Counselling, 53, 121-128.
39. Wells, G.L., & Windschitl, P.D. (1999). Stimulus sampling and social psychological experimentation. Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 1115-1125.