Current directions in violence risk assessment

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 38-42

  Skeem, Jennifer L ^a   Monahan, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

risk assessment; risk reduction; violence

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952096274     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: 14678721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963721410397271     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Douglas, K., & Skeem, J. (2005). Violence risk assessment: Getting specific about being dynamic. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 11, 347-383. Reviews the difference between static and changeable risk factors and their implications for risk management.
2. Heilbrun, K. (2009). Evaluation of risk of violence in adults. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. A step-by-step guide (from preparation to report writing) that is part of Oxford's "Best Practices in Forensic Assessment" Series.
3. Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford. Comprehensive sourcebook on forensic assessment that covers law and research relevant to violence risk assessment.
4. Abraham, K. (1986). Distributing risk: Insurance, legal theory, and public policy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
5. Andrews, D. (2009, September). The Level of Service Assessments: A question of confusion, selectivity, and misrepresentation of evidence in Baird (2009). Paper presented at the meeting of the International Community Corrections Association, Orlando, Florida. Available online at http://www.iccaweb.org/documents/D.Andrews_Service.Assessments.pdf.
6. Andrews, D., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. (2004). Manual for the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
7. Baird, C. (2009). A question of evidence: A critique of risk assessment models used in the justice system. Madison WI: National Council on Crime & Delinquency. Available electronically at http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/pubs/2009_a_question_evidence.pdf.
8. Cooke, D., & Michie, C. (2010). Limitations of diagnostic precision and predictive utility in the individual case: A challenge for forensic practice. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 259-274.
9. Goldstein, D., & Gigerenzer, G. (2009). Fast and frugal forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting, 25, 760-772.
10. 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.
11. Hanson, R.K., & Howard, P. (2010). Individual confidence intervals do not inform decision-makers about the accuracy of risk assessment evaluations. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 275-281.
12. Hanson, R.K., & Morton-Bourgon, K.E. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 21, 1-21.
13. Hart, S.D., Michie, C., & Cooke, D.J. (2007). Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments: Evaluating the 'margins of error' of group versus individual predictions of violence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(Suppl.), 60-65.
14. Heilbrun, K. (1997). Prediction versus management models relevant to risk assessment: The importance of legal decision-making context. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 347-359.
15. Heilbrun, K., Douglas, K.S., & Yasuhara, K. (2009). Controversies in violence risk assessment. In J.L. Skeem, K.S. Douglas, & S.O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), Psychological science in the courtroom: Controversies and consensus (pp. 333-356). New York, NY: Guilford.
16. Kraemer, H., Kazdin, A., Offord, D., Kessler, R., Jensen, P., & Kupfer, D. (1997). Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 337-343.
17. Kroner, D., Mills, J., & Morgan, B. (2005). A coffee can, factor analysis, and prediction of antisocial behavior: The structure of criminal risk. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 28, 360-374.
18. Lidz, C., Mulvey, E., & Gardner, W. (1993). The accuracy of predictions of violence to others. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 269, 1007-1011.
19. Meehl, P. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
20. Monahan, J. (2006). A jurisprudence of risk assessment: Forecasting harm among prisoners, predators, and patients. Virginia Law Review, 92, 391-435.
21. Monahan, J., Steadman, H., Silver, E., Appelbaum, P., Robbins, P., Mulvey, E.,et al.(2001). Rethinking risk assessment: The MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
22. National Research Council. (1989). Improving risk communication. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
23. Nock, M.K., Park, J.M., Finn, C.T., Deliberto, T.L., Dour, H.J., & Banaji, M.R. (2010). Measuring the suicidal mind: Implicit cognition predicts suicidal behavior. Psychological Science, 21, 511-517.
24. Quinsey, V.L., Harris, G.T., Rice, M.E., & Cormier, C.A. (2006). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25. Skeem, J., Manchak, S., & Peterson, J. (in press). Correctional policy for offenders with mental disorder: Creating a new paradigm for recidivism reduction. Law and Human Behavior.
26. Webster, C., Douglas, K., Eaves, D., & Hart, S. (1997). HCR-20: Assessing Risk for Violence (Version 2). Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Simon Fraser University.
27. Yang, M., Wong, S.C.P., & Coid, J.W. (in press). The efficacy of violence prediction: A meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment tools. Psychological Bulletin.