Assessment of dynamic risk factors: An independent validation study of the violence risk scale: Sexual offender version

Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 234-251

  Beggs, Sarah M ^a   Grace, Randolph C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Child molesters; Recidivism; Sexual offenders; Static and dynamic risk; Treatment change; VRS:SO

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952316251     PISSN: 10790632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1079063210369014     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Allan, M., Grace, R.C., Rutherford, B., & Hudson, S.M. (2007). Psychometric assessment of dynamic risk factors for child molesters. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 19, 347-367.
2. Andrews, D.A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Newark, NJ: LexisNexis /Anderson.
3. Beggs, S.M., & Grace, R.C. (2010). Measuring treatment outcome for child molesters: A comparative validity study. Manuscript submitted for publication.
4. Bickley, J.A., & Beech, A.R. (2003). Implications for treatment of sexual offenders of the Ward and Hudson model of relapse. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 121-134.
5. Brown, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 445-455). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. Craissati, J., & Beech, A.R. (2003). A review of dynamic variables and their relationship to risk prediction in sex offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 9, 41-55.
7. Doren, D.M. (2006). Recidivism risk assessments: Making sense of controversies. In W. L. Marshall, Y. M. Fernandez, L. E. Marshall, & G. A. Serran (Eds.), Sexual offender treatment: Controversial issues (pp. 3-15). Chichester, England: Wiley.
8. 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.
9. Hanley, J.A., & McNeil, B.J. (1983). A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839-843.
10. Hanson, R.K., & Bussière, M.T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348-362.
11. Hanson, R.K., & Harris, A.J.R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sexual assault recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35.
12. Harris, A., Phenix, A., Hanson, R.K., & Thornton, D. (2003). STATIC-99 coding rules revised-2003. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
13. Hanson, R.K., & Morton-Bourgon, K.E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154-1163.
14. Hanson, R.K., & Morton-Bourgon, K.E. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychological Assessment, 21, 1-21.
15. Hanson, R.K., & Thornton, D. (1999). Static 99: Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders (User Rep. 1999-02). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
16. Kingston, D.A. (2003). Violence Risk Scale: Sex Offender Version: A re-validation of a scale to assess re-offence risk among sexual offenders (Unpublished Honours Project), Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
17. Looman, J., Dickie, I., & Abracen, J. (2005). Responsivity issues in the treatment of sexual offenders. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6, 330-353.
18. Olver, M.E. (2003). The development and validation of the Violence Risk Scale: Sexual Offender Version (VRS:SO) and its relationship to psychopathy and treatment attrition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
19. Olver, M.E., Wong, S.C.P., Nicholaichuk, T.P., & Gordon, A.E. (2007). The validity and reliability of the Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offender Version: Assessing sex offender risk and evaluating therapeutic change. Psychological Assessment, 19, 318-329.
20. Prochaska, J.O., DiClemente, C.C., & Norcross, J.C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, 47, 1102-1114.
21. Quinsey, V. L., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (Eds.). (1998). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
22. Thornton, D. (2002). Constructing and testing a framework for dynamic risk assessment Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 139-153.
23. Ward, T., & Hudson, S.M. (1998). A model of the relapse process in sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 700-725.
24. Wong, S.C.P., & Gordon, A. (2006). The validity and reliability of the Violence Risk Scale: A treatment-friendly violence risk assessment tool. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 12, 279-309.
25. Wong, S., Olver, M., Nicholaichuk, T., & Gordon, A. (2003). Violence Risk Scale: Sexual Offender Version (Manual provided by authors).
26. Yates, P.M., & Kingston, D.A. (2006). The self-regulation model of sexual offending: The relationship between offence pathways and static and dynamic sexual offence risk. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 18, 259-270.