Assessments in Forensic Practice E-Book
33,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
Assessments in Forensic Practice: A Handbook provides practical guidance in the assessment of the most frequently encountered offender subgroups found within the criminal justice system. Topics include:
- criminal justice assessments
- offenders with mental disorders
- family violence
- policy and practice
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 886
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
About the Editors
Contributors
1 Introduction
STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK
PART ONE: Criminal Justice Assessments
2 Case Formulation and Risk Assessment
INTRODUCTION
RISK ASSESSMENT
CASE FORMULATION
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
3 Assessment of Violence and Homicide
VIOLENCE: DEFINITIONS AND CONCEPTIONS
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
4 Sexual Offenders
INTRODUCTION
ASSESSING RISK OF RECIDIVISM AND TREATMENT NEEDS
SPECIAL POPULATIONS
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
5 The Assessment of Firesetters
INTRODUCTION
UNDERSTANDING THE BEHAVIOR
ARSON
OFFENDER MOTIVATION
CONSIDERATION OF INTENT
ASSESSMENT LOGISTICS
ABC ANALYSIS
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
6 Forensic Psychological Risk Assessment for the Parole Board
INTRODUCTION
THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE PAROLE BOARD
PAROLE BOARD REVIEWS
WHO DOES THE PAROLE BOARD ASSESS?
PAROLE BOARD POWERS IN RELATION TO INDETERMINATE SENTENCED PRISONERS
RISK ASSESSMENT REPORTS
HOW THE RISK WILL BE ASSESSED
BACKGROUND AND CRIMINAL HISTORY
CLINICAL RISK FORMULATION
PROGRESS IN TREATMENT AND CUSTODIAL BEHAVIOR
COMMUNICATING THE RISK ASSESSMENT
HAS THE TEST FOR RELEASE OR TRANSFER TO OPEN CONDITIONS BEEN MET?
ETHICAL AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX
REFERENCES
7 Behavioral Assessment in Investigative Psychology
THE ORIGINS OF OFFENDER PROFILING
THE EMERGENCE OF INVESTIGATIVE PSYCHOLOGY
WHAT IS INVESTIGATIVE PSYCHOLOGY?
AREAS OF RESEARCH IN INVESTIGATIVE PSYCHOLOGY
OFFENDER PROFILING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM TODAY
REFERENCES
PART TWO: Offenders with Mental Disorders
8 Assessing Risk of Violence in Offenders with Mental Disorders
STIGMA, SOCIAL DISTANCE, AND RISK PERCEPTION
RISK ASSESSMENT AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION
MENTAL DISORDER AND VIOLENCE RISK
DEVELOPMENT OF RISK ASSESSMENT
METHODOLOGY OF RISK ASSESSMENT RESEARCH
SPECIFIC ASSESSMENTS
RISK ASSESSMENT IN PRACTICE
COMMUNICATING RISK INFORMATION
ETHICAL ISSUES IN RISK ASSESSMENT
WIDER IMPLICATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
9 Assessing Mental Capacity and Fitness to Plead in Offenders with Intellectual Disabilities
INTRODUCTION
PREVALENCE OF OFFENDERS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES
DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA
FITNESS TO PLEAD AND STAND TRIAL
IMPLICATIONS OF THE PRICHARD CRITERIA FOR PSYCHIATRIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT (PACE) 1984
THE MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005
SUPPORTING DECISION‐MAKING
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
10 Offenders with ‘Personality Disorder’ Diagnoses
THE ROLE OF CASE FORMULATION IN IDENTIFYING DOMAINS FOR ASSESSMENT
STANDARDIZED BATTERIES OF PSYCHOMETRICS
ASSESSMENT METHODS
VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF CASE FORMULATION
THE ASSESSORS
REFERENCES
11 Offenders and Substance Abuse
SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND OFFENDING
DRUG USE AS A TRIGGER FOR OFFENDING
OFFENDING AS A TRIGGER FOR DRUG USE
OFFENDING AND DRUG USE ARE INDEPENDENT OF ONE ANOTHER (I.E., THERE IS NO RELATIONSHIP)
THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE/OFFENDING RELATIONSHIP IS MORE COMPLEX
PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
PART THREE: Family Violence
12 Community Approaches to the Assessment and Prevention of Intimate Partner Violence and Child Maltreatment
INTRODUCTION
INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE
CHILD MALTREATMENT
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
13 Psychological Assessment of Parenting in Family Proceedings
INTRODUCTION
REASONS FOR REFERRAL
THE FPP SURVEY
PARENTING INTERVENTIONS
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
14 Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITIONS OF IPV
PREVALENCE OF IPV
THEORETICAL DEBATE
UNDERSTANDING IPV USING A NESTED ECOLOGICAL MODEL
CHARACTERISTICS OF PERPETRATORS
CHARACTERISTICS OF COUPLES
RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
PART FOUR: Policy and Practice
15 Assessment of Hostage Situations and Their Perpetrators
MODEL OF CRISIS NEGOTIATION
PERPETRATOR MOTIVATIONS
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS IN RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
CONSIDERATIONS IN RESPONSE TO PERPETRATORS’ BEHAVIOR, CHARACTERISTICS, AND TRAITS
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
16 Assessing the Sexually Abused Child as a Witness
INTRODUCTION
EXTENT OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
RELATIONSHIP WITH PERPETRATOR
LONG‐TERM EFFECTS OF SEXUAL ABUSE
VALIDITY OF THE CHILD’S DISCLOSURE
NON‐DISCLOSURE OF SEXUAL ABUSE AS A CHILD
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
17 Working with Young Offenders
INTRODUCTION
WHO BECOMES DELINQUENT?
LIFE‐COURSE PERSISTENT OFFENDERS
RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE
ASSESSMENT
TREATMENT DESIGN
TREATMENT MANAGEMENT
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
18 The Ethics of Risk Assessment
INTRODUCTION
ETHICS AND HUMAN RIGHTS
RISK ASSESSMENT MEASURES
THE RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 08
Table 8.1 Predicting violence: Comparison of areas under the curve for the most widely researched risk assessments (Farrington, Jolliffe, & Johnstone 2008).
Chapter 10
Table 10.1 Widely used personality and criminogenic factor assessments.
Table 10.2 Case formulation model: traits and links with offending (Jones, 2011a).
Chapter 12
Table 12.1 Two‐way classification of family violence with example of major forms (from Browne & Herbert, 1997, p. 9).
Table 12.2 Severity of maltreatment (adapted from Browne & Herbert, 1997; Browne, 2002).
Table 12.3 Global risk factors for child maltreatment. (Adapted from World Health Organization, 2006.)
Table 12.4 Relative risk of child maltreatment for children with disabilities compared to children without a disability (X 1). (Adapted from Kendall‐Tackett, Lyon, Taliaferro, & Little, 2005, and based on data on 50,278 US children from Sullivan & Knutson, 2000.)
Table 12.5 The number of families and the relative risk of child abuse and neglect associated with family characteristics screened at birth.*
Chapter 13
Table 13.1 Risk factors associated with child abuse.
Table 13.2 Demographic factors and concerns of parents involved in childcare proceedings.
Table 13.3 Percentage of parents (N=375) in childcare proceedings with significant personality characteristics and clinical syndromes.
Table 13.4 Percentage of parents (N=371) involved in childcare proceedings achieving low or high scores for approach and avoidance coping strategies.
Table 13.5 Percentage of parents achieving significant scores in relation to parenting stress of children (N=202), measured on a short form protocol.
Table 13.6 Percentage of parents achieving significant scores in relation to parenting stress of children (N=223), measured on a long form protocol.
Table 13.7 Percentage of parents (N=362) obtaining low (below 25th percentile) and high (above 75th percentile) scores in relation to the experience and expression of angry feelings.
Table 13.8 Recommendations made for treatment/psychotherapeutic interventions following psychological assessment of parents in childcare proceedings (N=317).
Table 13.9 Disposal of children (N=110) in family proceedings.
Chapter 14
Table 14.1 Summary of IPV perpetrator subtype characteristics proposed by Holtworth‐Munroe and Stuart (1994).
Chapter 16
Table 16.1 Rate of children on child protection plans or registers, per 10,000 children aged 0–17, at March 31, 2014 (July 31 for Scotland). (From Bywaters et al., 2016.)
Table 16.2 Percentage of children in England, Northern Ireland, and Wales on child protection plans or registers in year to March 31, 2014, by form of maltreatment. (Adapted from Bywaters et al., 2016.)
Table 16.3 Characteristics of true and unsubstantiated cases of child sexual abuse in the family. (Adapted from Green & Schetky, 1988.)
List of Illustrations
Chapter 03
Figure 3.1 Factors identified as linked to violence in the literature.
Chapter 08
Figure 8.1 Number of cases and percentage violent in each risk class.
Chapter 09
Figure 9.1 Case example: Assessing mental capacity in Mr B.
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 Framework for the assessment of children and families (Department of Health et al., 2000).
Figure 12.2 Integrated management of child abuse and neglect for children under five.
Chapter 15
Figure 15.1 Behavioral Influence Stairway Model.
Chapter 17
Figure 17.1 Characteristics of effective treatments.
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
iii
iv
vii
viii
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
xvii
1
2
3
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
137
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
233
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
317
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
Assessments in Forensic Practice: A Handbook
Edited by
Kevin D. Browne, Anthony R. Beech, Leam A. Craig, and Shihning Chou
This edition first published 2017© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
Editorial Offices350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148‐5020, USA9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UKThe Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services, and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley‐blackwell.
The right of Kevin D. Browne, Anthony R. Beech, Leam A. Craig, and Shihning Chou to be identified as the authors of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.
Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data
Names: Browne, Kevin D., editor. | Beech, Anthony R., editor. | Craig, Leam A., editor. | Chou, Shihning, editor.Title: Assessments in forensic practice : a handbook / edited by Kevin D. Browne, Anthony R. Beech, Leam A. Craig and Shihning Chou.Description: Chichester, West Sussex ; Malden, MA : John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2017. | Includes bibliographical references and index.Identifiers: LCCN 2016046916| ISBN 9780470019016 (cloth) | ISBN 9780470019023 (pbk.) | ISBN 9780470515853 (pdf) | ISBN 9781118314555 (ePUB)Subjects: LCSH: Forensic psychiatry–Handbooks, manuals, etc.Classification: LCC RA1151 .A84 2017 | DDC 614/.15–dc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016046916
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Cover image: (Hands) © Image Source/Gettyimages; (Texture) © da‐kuk/GettyimagesCover design: Wiley
About the Editors
Kevin D. Browne, PhD, CPsychol (Foren), FSB, EuroPsy is Director of the Centre for Forensic and Family Psychology and Director of Forensic Psychology Programmes in the Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, UK. As a Registered and Chartered Forensic Psychology Practitioner, he has written books and articles extensively in the areas of family violence, child maltreatment, institutional care, and deinstitutionalization of children and has been working as a consultant to UNICEF and WHO. In the past, he was Head of the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Child Care and Protection (2006 to 2009) and the Chief Executive of the High Level Group for Children in Romania (2003 to 2006). He acts as an expert witness to civil and criminal courts in the assessment of parenting, child maltreatment, sexual and violent offenses in the home, and matters concerning child rights, care, and protection.
Anthony R. Beech, DPhil, FBPsS is the Head of the Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology at the University of Birmingham, UK. He has authored over 180 peer‐reviewed articles, over 50 book chapters, and six books in the area of forensic science/criminal justice. His particular areas of research interests are risk assessment; the neurobiological bases of offending; reducing online exploitation of children; and increasing psychotherapeutic effectiveness of the treatment given to offenders. In 2009 he received the Significant Achievement Award from the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers in Dallas, Texas, and the Senior Award from the Division of Forensic Psychology, British Psychological Society, for recognition of his work in this area.
Leam A. Craig, BA (Hons), MSc, PhD, MAE, CSci, CPsychol, FBPsS, FAcSS, EuroPsy is a consultant forensic and clinical psychologist and partner at Forensic Psychology Practice Ltd. He is Professor (Hon) of Forensic Psychology, the Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology, University of Birmingham, and Visiting Professor of Forensic Clinical Psychology, School of Social Sciences, Birmingham City University, UK. He is a Chartered and Registered (Forensic and Clinical) Psychologist, a Chartered Scientist, and holder of the European Certificate in Psychology. He is a Full Member of The Academy of Experts. He is a Fellow of the British Psychological Society, Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences and recipient of the Senior Academic Award from the Division of Forensic Psychology for distinguished contributions to academic knowledge in forensic psychology. He has previously worked in forensic psychiatric secure services, learning disability hospitals, and consultancy to prison and probation services throughout England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, specializing in high‐risk complex cases. He is currently a Consultant to the National Probation Service on working with offenders with personality disorders. He has previously been instructed by the Catholic and Church of England Dioceses, South African Police Service, and the United States Air Force as an expert witness. He acts as an expert witness to civil and criminal courts in the assessment of sexual and violent offenders and in matters of child protection. In 2015 he co‐authored a Ministry of Justice research report into the use of expert witnesses in family law. He sits on the editorial boards of several international journals. He has published over 80 articles and chapters in a range of research and professional journals. He has authored and edited 10 books focusing on the assessment and treatment of sexual and violent offenders, offenders with intellectual disabilities, and what works in offender rehabilitation. He is a series editor for the What Works in Offender Rehabilitation book series published by Wiley‐Blackwell. His research interests include sexual and violent offenders, personality disorder and forensic risk assessment, and the use of expert witnesses in civil and criminal courts.
Shihning Chou, PhD is an assistant professor and forensic psychologist. She is the Deputy Director of the Centre for Forensic and Family Psychology, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham and has carried out research on international adoption, deinstitutionalization of children, and parenting interventions. Her practice focuses on psychological and risk assessment in parenting, childcare and protection, and family violence. Her current research interests lie in the development of offending/harmful behavior and psychological vulnerability, childhood victimization, child‐to‐parent violence, psychological sequelae, and recovery and family well‐being after political violence. She is also interested in forensic occupational and health issues such as the impact of staff and situational variables on patients/residents.
Contributors
Karen Bailey, CPsychol is a principal forensic psychologist in Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust and trained to facilitate Safeguarding Children training within the trust. Her practice focuses on psychological and risk assessment in parenting, childcare and protection, family violence, child abuse, and neglect. Her experience also includes risk assessments of sexual and violent offenders via the Prison and Probation Services and preparation of expert witness reports of mandatory and discretionary life-sentenced and indeterminate sentenced prisoners. She has experience of providing oral evidence at lifer Parole Board reviews as well as in Family Courts and has presented research at conferences on child abuse and neglect and the role of criminality in poor parenting.
Taljinder Basra, DClinPsy is a HCPC registered clinical and forensic psychologist employed at Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust, working in the Severe and Complex Care Directorate. He has several years’ experience in assessing risk in parents suspected of neglect and/or abuse, and offenders in a mental health hospital and in the community. He has also been involved in training and teaching risk-related topics to mental health professionals and university graduates in both the UK and India. His research has included investigating the demographic, personality styles, coping strategies, anger, and parental stress differences between abusive and neglectful parents. He is currently interested in exploring the role and prevalence of self-conscious emotions, such as shame in inpatient adult mental health service users who are in forensic settings.
Anthony R. Beech, DPhil, FBPsS is the Head of the Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology at the University of Birmingham, UK. He has authored over 180 peer-reviewed articles, over 50 book chapters, and six books, all in the area of forensic science/criminal justice. His particular areas of research interests are risk assessment; the neurobiological bases of offending; reducing online exploitation of children; and increasing psychotherapeutic effectiveness of the treatment given to offenders. In 2009 he received the Significant Achievement Award from the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers in Dallas, Texas, and the Senior Award from the Division of Forensic Psychology, British Psychological Society, for recognition of his work in this area.
Louise Bowers, ForenPsyD is a chartered and registered forensic psychologist and a director of the Forensic Psychologist Service Ltd. Louise splits her time between giving expert evidence (Crown Court and Parole Board), providing therapy, delivering training, university lecturing, and working for the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC). She was the first psychologist appointed to the Parole Board (2003–2010), where she was instrumental in developing the role of forensic psychology on the board. Louise’s doctorate research was an investigation of offense supportive cognition in young adult sexual offenders. Previous roles have included senior positions within the HM Prison Service, the NHS, and with a range of private providers of forensic services.
Kevin D. Browne, PhD, CPsychol FIBiol is the Head of the Centre for Forensic and Family Psychology at the University of Nottingham, UK. He has written extensively in the areas of family violence, institutional care, and deinstitutionalization of children, and has been working as a consultant to UNICEF. In the past, he has also been a temporary advisor to the World Health Organization on child health and the Chief Executive of the High Level Group for the Children in Romania. He was the Head of the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Child Care and Protection from 2006 to its closure in 2009.
Shihning Chou, PhD is an assistant professor and forensic psychologist. She is the Deputy Director of the Centre for Forensic and Family Psychology, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham and has carried out research on international adoption, deinstitutionalization of children, and parenting interventions. Her practice focuses on psychological and risk assessment in parenting, childcare and protection, and family violence. Her current research interests lie in the development of offending/harmful behavior and psychological vulnerability, childhood victimization, child-to-parent violence, psychological sequelae, and recovery and family well-being after political violence. She is also interested in forensic occupational and health issues such as the impact of staff and situational variables on patients/residents.
Franca Cortoni, PhD, CPsych is a clinical and forensic psychologist. She is an associate professor at the School of Criminology of the Université de Montréal and a research fellow at the International Centre for Comparative Criminology. Since 1989, she has worked with and conducted research on male and female sexual offenders. Dr Cortoni has published extensively and made numerous presentations at national and international conferences on sexual offender issues. Among others, she has co-edited a book on female sexual offenders and a book on criminal violence (published in French). She is also a member of the editorial board of Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment and of the Journal of Sexual Aggression.
Leam A. Craig, PhD, CPsychol FBPsS, FAcSS is a consultant forensic and clinical psychologist and partner at Forensic Psychology Practice Ltd. He is Professor (Hon) of Forensic Psychology at the Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology, University of Birmingham, and Visiting Professor of Forensic Clinical Psychology at the School of Social Sciences, Birmingham City University, UK. He is a Fellow of the British Psychological Society, Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences and recipient of the Senior Academic Award from the Division of Forensic Psychology for distinguished contributions to academic knowledge in forensic psychology. He is a chartered and registered (forensic and clinical) psychologist, a chartered scientist, holder of the European Certificate in Psychology and a Full Member of the Academy of Experts. He is currently a Consultant to the National Probation Service on working with offenders with personality disorders. He has previously been instructed by the Catholic and Church of England Dioceses, the South African Police Service, and the United States Air Force as an expert witness. He has published over 80 research articles in a range of research and professional journals along with 10 books. He is a series editor for the What Works in Offender Rehabilitation book series published by Wiley-Blackwell. His research interests include sexual and violent offenders, personality disorder and forensic risk assessment, and the use of expert witnesses in civil and criminal courts. He sits on the editorial boards of several international journals.
Louise Dixon, PhD is a forensic psychologist who has specialized in the prevention of and intervention in violent behavior for over a decade, with a particular focus on the family, children, and young people. She is currently a reader at Victoria University at Wellington. She specializes in the prevention of interpersonal aggression and violence. Primarily, her research has centered on the study of intimate partner violence and abuse, and the overlap with child maltreatment in the family. Louise has received funding from prestigious UK research councils such as the Economic and Social Research Council, Higher Education Funding Council for England, and the Police Knowledge fund. She is a series editor for the What Works in Offender Rehabilitation book series published by Wiley-Blackwell.
Simon Duff, PhD is a chartered and registered forensic psychologist working academically at the Centre for Forensic and Family Psychology, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham and clinically at the Mersey Forensic Psychology Service in Liverpool. He has carried out research concerned with aspects of stalking, sexual offending, working memory, and hypnosis. His practice focuses on working with individuals who have sexually abused children, and individuals with sexual fetishes that have led to prosecution. His current research interests lie in stalking, sexual offending, fetishes, non-offending partners of men who have offended against children, and aspects of denial.
Caroline Friendship, PhD is a chartered and registered forensic psychologist who is a psychologist member of the Parole Board and also works in private practice. Her current roles involve the risk assessment of prisoners and the provision of research consultancy services to criminal justice organizations. Previous posts include Principal Psychologist with Her Majesty’s Prison Service and Principal Research Officer for the Home Office (now Ministry of Justice). She has written over 20 peer-reviewed publications relating to the use of reconviction as an outcome measure and evaluating offending behavior programs.
Eleanor M. Gittens, PhD is a recognized teacher in Forensic and Investigative Psychology. She has carried out research on the spatial behavior of offenders, criminal careers, violence, and violent offenders. Her current research interests lie in the development of criminal behavior and the progression of the criminal career; offender and geographical profiling; investigative interviewing; and intelligence-led policing.
Lynsey F. Gozna, PhD is a Chartered Psychologist and Scientist, Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society and a member of the National Arson Prevention Forum in the UK. She is a Teaching Fellow in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester and an Honorary Visiting Fellow at the University of Lincoln, UK. Her research interests relate to interviewing in forensic settings to enhance the effectiveness of practitioners making high stake judgements of risk incorporating consideration of personality, motive, and mind set across a range of offence types. Recently she has been investigating the concept of revenge including how this applies to offending behaviour and accompanying decision-making in the context of forensic mental health. She additionally works in a multi-agency child sexual exploitation team where she has been developing the CAPTIVE psychological formulation model to enhance the intervention, investigation and management of cases.
Ruth M. Hatcher, PhD is a lecturer in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester, a chartered forensic psychologist (British Psychological Society), and a registered psychologist (Health and Care Professions Council). She has 15 years’ experience conducting forensic psychological research and has managed a number of research projects including evaluations of offending behavior programs (for the Ministry of Justice and the Northern Ireland Office). In addition, she has been involved in evaluations for bodies such as the Home Office, Ministry of Justice, Leicestershire Probation Area, and the Department for Education and Skills in Ireland. She has published numerous peer-reviewed publications, book chapters, and books.
Clive R. Hollin, PhD is Emeritus Professor at the University of Leicester, UK. He wrote the best-selling textbook Psychology and Crime: An Introduction to Criminological Psychology (2nd ed., 2013, Routledge); and also The Psychology of Interpersonal Violence (2016, Wiley-Blackwell). In all, he has published 21 books alongside over 300 other academic publications; he was for 20 years lead editor of Psychology, Crime, & Law. Alongside various university appointments, he has worked as a psychologist in prisons, the Youth Treatment Service, special hospitals, and regional secure units. In 1998 he received the Senior Award for Distinguished Contribution to the Field of Legal, Criminological, and Forensic Psychology from the British Psychological Society.
Kevin Howells, PhD is Emeritus Professor at the University of Nottingham and a clinical psychologist who has worked both as a practitioner and an academic in the forensic field. He has worked in forensic and mental health services in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. He has been a professor at the Universities of Birmingham, South Australia, and Nottingham and was Head of the Peaks Academic and Research Unit at Rampton Hospital. He has published extensively in the fields of anger and aggression, violent and sexual offending, and mental disorder in relation to offending behavior. He is a Fellow of the British Psychological Society and a chartered clinical and forensic psychologist.
Roger B. Hutchinson, MSc, CPsychol is a consultant psychologist, and a director of Forensic Psychology Practice Ltd. He initially trained as a botanist and worked as a research technician before qualifying as a clinical psychologist in 1981. He has worked within the NHS primarily in developmental pediatrics, neuropsychology, learning disability, and forensic services, becoming the clinical director of a large learning disability service which won national awards for “best patient environment,” “best mental health team,” and “risk management team of the year.” He has an NHS management qualification and also trained as a Master NLP Practitioner. His has specialist interests in profound disability and complex needs, lecturing throughout the world in the area of Snoezelen and multisensory activity. Through his work as an expert witness he continues to try to ensure that people with a disability are afforded equality of choice and opportunity.
Carol A. Ireland, PhD is a chartered psychologist, forensic psychologist, and chartered scientist. She acts as an advisor in crisis/conflict situations and is lead trainer and developer of training for a high-secure psychiatric hospital. Carol currently acts as a consultant for the police as a national advisor for critical incidents. She also works at the University of Central Lancashire, where she is the Director of Studies for the MSc in Forensic Psychology. She is one of the lead trainers for the International Organisation of Forensic Practitioners. She has written over 50 publications, including journal articles, book chapters, and books, mainly on offending, consultancy, and crisis (hostage) negotiation.
Vicki Jackson-Hollis, PhD is an evaluation officer at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC). In this role she designs and conducts qualitative and quantitative evaluations exploring the delivery and outcomes of intervention programs to prevent child maltreatment. She has carried out a body of research into the victimization of children and young people in the school and community environments (extrafamilial victimization), exploring its characteristics, impact, and the risk factors for victimization. She is particularly interested in the role of victimization in the development and continuation of offending behavior in young people. While completing a PhD in Applied Forensic Psychology at the University of Nottingham, she was also involved in an EU Daphne funded study of child abandonment involving nine European countries.
Lawrence Jones, CPsychol is the Head of Psychology at Rampton Hospital, Nottinghamshire Health Care Trust and an honorary associate professor at the University of Nottingham. He has worked in community prison and health settings with offenders and is qualified as a clinical and a forensic psychologist. He has published on a range of subjects including therapeutic communities, offense paralleling behavior, case formulation, and working with people with personality disorder diagnoses who have sexually offended, and teaches on the Leicester and Sheffield clinical psychology doctorates and the Nottingham forensic psychology course.
William R. Lindsay, PhD, FBPS, FIASSID, FAcSS is Consultant Clinical and Forensic Psychologist and Clinical Director in Scotland for Danshell Healthcare. He is Professor of Learning Disabilities at the University of Abertay, Dundee and Honorary Professor at Deakin University, Melbourne. He has published over 300 research articles and book chapters, published five books, held around 2 million pounds in research grants, and given many presentations and workshops on cognitive therapy and the assessment and treatment of offenders with intellectual disability. His current research and clinical interests are in dynamic risk assessment, sex offenders, personality disorder, alcohol-related violence, and CBT, all in relation to intellectual disability.
James McGuire, PhD is Professor of Forensic Clinical Psychology at the University of Liverpool, where he was also Director of the Doctorate in Clinical Psychology program 1995–2013. Prior to that he worked in a high-security hospital and has carried out psycho-legal work involving the assessment of individuals for criminal courts for hearings of the Mental Health Review Tribunal and the Parole Board. He has conducted research in prisons, probation services, juvenile justice, and other settings on aspects of psychosocial rehabilitation with offenders, and has published widely on this and related issues. He has acted as a consultant to criminal justice agencies in a number of countries.
Eugene Ostapiuk, MSc, CPsychol is a consultant forensic clinical psychologist (retired) and Honorary Professor at the University of Birmingham School of Psychology and Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology. He has worked in the public sector and in private practice, specializing in working with families in crisis, psychological assessment of risk, and evaluation of parenting skills in family proceedings. He has been associated with postgraduate teaching in social learning theory, behavioral interventions with offenders, consultancy, and with professional training courses in forensic and clinical psychology at the Universities of Leicester and Birmingham, and has published in these areas.
Kerry Sheldon, PhD, DClinPsy is a HCPC Registered Principal Clinical Psychologist in an Older People’s NHS Integrated Mental Health Service. Her practice currently focuses on older people with organic and/or functional disorders within community and inpatient settings. Her career includes working for the probation service, managing a NHS research department, teaching undergraduate and postgraduate psychology, criminology and forensic psychology as well as consultancy work for Pearson’s Education Limited. Dr Sheldon has carried out research on men who download child abuse images from the Internet, personality disorders, the effects of pornography, as well as a number of service evaluations. She has a number of publications including Sheldon, K. (2012). Internet Sex Offences, In B. Winder & P. Banyard (Eds.) In A Psychologist’s Casebook of Crime: From Arson to Voyeurism. Palgrave Macmillan; Sheldon, K. Davies, J., Howells, K (Eds.) (2011). Research Methods for Forensic Practitioners, Willan Publishing; Sheldon, K and Howitt, D. (2007). Child Pornography and the Internet. John Wiley & Sons.
Ian Stringer, MSc, CPsychol is a consultant psychologist, and a director of Forensic Psychology Practice Ltd. He is an honorary research fellow in the Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology, University of Birmingham. He graduated in Clinical Psychology in 1985. His career has included work in a specialist residential unit for children (up to ten years of age) with severe behavioral problems; a long-stay adult mental health hospital for adults with chronic mental illness; special hospitals; regional secure units, and youth treatment services. His work has included children with extreme emotional and behavioral problems; adolescent offenders and adolescents with behavioral problems; sex offenders (including risk assessments for clergy of various denominations, screening both while in training and after subsequent offending), and violent and aggressive people across a wide age range (childhood to old age). He is currently a consultant to both the Youth Offender Service and the National Probation Service in the development of a transition framework, and the development of a framework for the assessment of personality disordered offenders, and management programs and treatment frameworks. He has published in the areas of assessing risk in sexual offenders and treating sexual offenders with intellectual disabilities.
Peter Sturmey, PhD is Professor of Psychology at the Graduate Center and Queens College, City University of New York. He has published over 200 journal articles, 50 book chapters, and nearly 20 books mostly related to behavior analysis, staff and parent training, developmental disabilities, case formulation, and severe challenging behavior.
James Vess, PhD has over 30 years of clinical and research experience with offender populations in the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. He served in a variety of clinical, supervision, and program evaluation roles at Atascadero State Hospital, a high-security forensic treatment facility in California, and has held academic positions at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand and Deakin University in Australia. His research has focused on assessment, risk management, and public policy relating to violent and sexual offenders. He is currently a senior psychologist specialist with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Tony Ward, PhD, DipClinPsyc is Professor of Clinical Psychology at Victoria University of Wellington. He was director of the Kia Marama treatment center for sex in Christchurch, New Zealand and has taught clinical and forensic psychology at the Universities of Canterbury, Victoria, Melbourne, and Deakin. Professor Ward’s current research interests include offender rehabilitation and desistance, restorative justice and ethical issues in forensic psychology, and theoretical psychopathology and cognition in offenders. He is the creator of the Good Lives Model of offender rehabilitation and gives numerous workshops, keynote addresses, and consultations around the world on this model. He has published over 350 academic articles and is an adjunct professor at the Universities of Birmingham and Kent.
Kate Whitfield, PhD is a senior lecturer in Forensic Psychology at Sheffield Hallam University. She has carried out research on critical and major incident management, crisis negotiation, and child abandonment in Europe. Her current research interests relate to online offending and victimization, organizational concerns in forensic settings, preventing violence against children, and leadership during critical incidents.
Phil Willmot, PhD is a consultant forensic and clinical psychologist with the Men’s Personality Disorder Service and Mental Health Service, Rampton Hospital and a Senior Fellow of the Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham. He has previously worked in a number of public sector prisons where he specialized in the assessment, treatment, and management of high-risk offenders, particularly sexual offenders. His research interests include the mechanisms of change in the treatment of personality disorder, and developing treatment programs for offenders who have committed a combination of sexual, violent, and firesetting offenses.
Pamela M. Yates, PhD has worked as a clinician and researcher in various capacities since 1987. She has worked with adults and youths, including sexual offenders, violent offenders, individuals with substance abuse problems, and victims of violence, and has developed accredited offender treatment programs. Her research and publications include offender rehabilitation, assessment and treatment of sexual offenders, program evaluation, risk assessment, treatment effectiveness, psychopathy, and sexual sadism. She has written extensively on the Self-Regulation and Good Lives Models of sexual offender intervention.
1Introduction
KEVIN D. BROWNE, ANTHONY R. BEECH, LEAM A. CRAIG AND SHIHNING CHOU
Research and practice in forensic psychology involves a wide range of activities within secure and community settings. Secure settings include Her Majesty’s Prison Service, private prisons, Local Authority homes for young people and secure units for adult and young offenders with mental health issues and/or personality disorders run by the National Health Service (NHS) or private organizations. Furthermore, there are similar secure services offered to adults or young people with intellectual disabilities who are also deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. Community settings involve psychologists working with the police, social services, youth offending services, and community health services, especially in the areas of violence in the community, domestic violence, child abandonment, abuse, and neglect.
The aim of psychological interventions in forensic settings is to reduce the possibility of harmful behavior directed toward self or others or that threatens the rights and safety of adults and children. This involves the prevention of violent and antisocial behavior and helps with the detection and identification of those perpetrators who have already committed a violent or antisocial offense. These activities are usually carried out in community settings.
Forensic psychologists working in secure settings are usually working with people who have already committed an act of violence and/or antisocial behavior. The aim of their work is to assess the factors that led to their index offense and ameliorate or reduce the chances of the same behavior being repeated within the secure setting or after release. Risk factors associated with violent and antisocial acts include mental health problems, addiction and substance misuse, intellectual disabilities, personality disorders, and adverse experiences in childhood.
Hence, one of the most frequent activities of a forensic psychologist, in both community and secure settings, is to carry out “psychological assessments” in relation to the risk of violent and antisocial behavior (including acquisitive crime) and the formulation of criminogenic needs that direct interventions in terms of treatment and rehabilitation. The formulation balances the assessment of dynamic risk and background static risk factors, with protective factors that may help prevent people in conflict with the law from reoffending.
Furthermore, forensic psychologists advise law enforcement agencies and the criminal justice system on behavioral assessment in the investigation of offenders, eyewitness testimony, psychological influences on jury decision‐making, and the preparation of vulnerable children and adults in court.
Similar to clinical psychologists, forensic psychologists must be proficient and competent in skills such as clinical/forensic assessment, interviewing and observation, written and verbal communication, and psychological report writing. Often, they are invited as expert witnesses into court and/or to make case presentations informing courts about an offender’s ability to stand trial, about Parole Board hearings, and about the multidisciplinary teams who are making decisions about the future placement of offenders.
With respect to victims of crime, forensic psychologists are involved in the assessment of re‐victimization and victim support, child custody evaluations, parenting assessments, counseling services to victims, and the assessment of post‐traumatic stress disorder and its relation to the victim to offender concept.
The criminal justice system and the professionals, policymakers, politicians, and the general public often see offenders and victims as a strict dichotomy, that is a person is either a victim or an offender. However, in reality, the distinction is blurred if current and life histories are taken into account. In fact, the majority of offenders have been previously victimized and a significant proportion of victims later develop behavior harmful to themselves or to others. This can be within their family environment only or it can be within the family and the community.
STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK
This book contains four sections, covering the assessment of various client groups in different legal and professional contexts.
Part One
covers psychological and risk assessment in investigations and in the criminal justice system:
Risk assessment and formulation
Violent offenders and murderers
Sexual offenders
Firesetters
Parole assessments
Behavioral assessment in investigative psychology.
Part Two
focuses on the assessment of clients in mental health and specialist health services:
Assessing risk of violence in mentally disordered offenders
Assessing mental capacity in offenders with intellectual and developmental disabilities
Offenders with personality disorders
Offenders and substance abuse.
Part Three
covers the assessment of violence in the family and the community and its relevance to prevention:
Community approaches to the assessment and prevention of intimate partner violence and child maltreatment
Parental assessments in childcare proceedings
Perpetrators of domestic violence.
Part Four
engages readers in discussions on policies and practice issues in forensic assessment:
Assessment of hostage situations and their perpetrators
Assessing the sexually abused child as a witness
Working with young offenders
Ethics of risk assessment.
PART ONECriminal Justice Assessments
2Case Formulation and Risk Assessment
PETER STURMEY AND WILLIAM R. LINDSAY
INTRODUCTION
Effective and appropriate assessment is the cornerstone of offender management and treatment. Thus, mental health professionals often assess risk of recidivism and conduct case formulations to identify the most effective intervention for a specific offender. Risk assessment and case formulation are interdependent clinical activities. Case formulations may result in interventions which produce both beneficial changes in offender behavior and may also subsequently impact risk assessment. For example, teaching an offender generalized problem solving and vocational and alcohol management skills that are based on the formulation of their case may well reduce the offender’s risk and may result in an increased likelihood of less restrictive placement. Alternatively, an inappropriate, ineffective, or iatrogenic treatment plan may result in increased offender risk and result in an increased likelihood of restrictive placement and continued costs of incarceration and of treatment. For example, an inappropriate cognitive treatment plan might inadvertently teach an offender to minimize his or her problems by teaching that person to describe his or her private verbal behavior in a manner consonant with treatment progress, even though his or her private verbal behavior has not truly changed. Thus, risk assessment and formulation for treatment planning are two central aspects of the assessment of offenders.
This chapter will provide an overview of risk assessment and case formulation within the context of offender services. The first section will describe risk assessment and illustrate the application of the risk assessment of offenders. The second section will describe case formulation generally and its application to offenders, and will specifically illustrate its application to persons with personality disorders. The final section will summarize outstanding issues in risk assessment and case formulation when working with offenders.
RISK ASSESSMENT
Risk assessment refers to the evaluation of a risk and the likely cost of such risk. Diverse fields such as economics and public health, and ensuring the safety of food, use risk analysis. Thus, in forensic psychology risk analysis involves the estimation of the costs of reoffending and violence to others, and the costs of such risks to individuals and society. Traditionally, forensic risk assessment involves assessment of static/historical risks and dynamic risks. Static/historical risk assessment contains unchangeable factors in the person’s history and, since one cannot change one’s history, the value of a static risk assessment for a particular individual will never reduce but will increase if they commit another offense. Dynamic risk assessment refers to the assessment of variables that are more open to change through clinical intervention and other variables.
Static/Historical Risk Assessment
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, it became clearer that clinical judgment was extremely poor in predicting who would and would not reoffend in cases where there was a judicial or mental health review (Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1998; Steadman, Fabisiak, Dvoskin, & Holohean, 1987). There were many reports in the literature concerning the poor predictive validity of clinical judgment when clinical judgment is unsupported by any actuarial prediction (Elbogen, 2002; Litwack, 2001; Quinsey et al., 1998). Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, research appeared using statistical prediction instruments applied to forensic issues. In relation to general criminal recidivism, predictive accuracy, based on actuarial prediction, rose to around 60–80% (Andrews & Bonata, 2010). Research on the prediction of violent and sexual recidivism also produced a range of promising variables (Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1993; Monahan, 1981). Harris et al. (1993) studied 695 men submitted to a maximum security psychiatric institution for varying lengths of time. These authors followed up all but a few of the participants and compared recidivists (N=191) with non‐recidivists (N= 427) on a range of variables which might predict future violence. These variables subsequently formed the basis of several of the risk assessment instruments used at present. For example, work on the Historical/Clinical/Risk Management (HCR‐20) (Webster, Eaves, Douglas, & Wintrup, 1995), cites Harris et al. (1993) as evidence for eight of the ten historical actuarial variables in the HCR‐20.
In Harris et al. (1993), several childhood variables emerged as showing highly statistically significant differences between recidivists and non‐recidivists, such as childhood aggression and maladjustment in early schooling, being expelled or suspended from school, and being arrested before the age of 16 years. All of these variables can be considered to be indications of violence and disruption in childhood, and this cluster of predictive variables has continued to feature in all subsequent historically based risk assessments. Another childhood predictor was whether or not the individual had been separated from their parents prior to the age of 16 years. All these predictors may perhaps be assessed reliably and accurately, at least under some circumstances; however, these variables may be thought of as proxies for learning experiences. For example, although separation from parents prior to the age of 16 years is a fairly easy item to assess, it probably points to a range of developmental and attachment difficulties which the individual may have experienced associated with parental separation, the subsequent effects of that separation, and pathways to offending.
In relation to adult variables, Harris et al. (1993) found that employment history, previous violence, absconding from institutions, failure of prior conditional release, and whether or not the individual had previously been in a relationship all distinguished recidivists from non‐recidivists. Again, these variables were incorporated into subsequent assessments.
In relation to the index offense, perpetrator age distinguished the groups and this variable was retained in subsequent assessments. The Psychopathy Checklist – Revised score (Hare, 1991) was higher and a diagnosis of personality disorder was more common in the recidivist group.
While considering the Harris et al. (1993) study, it is worth noting the somewhat counterintuitive predictors which had not been included in some later risk assessments. For example, victim injury was significantly lower in the recidivist group. The percentages of offenses against women and in which the perpetrator knew the victim were also lower in the recidivist group. In other words, more violent offenses, offenses against strangers, and offenses against women were more frequent in those who did not reoffend. Interestingly, a diagnosis of schizophrenia occurred more than twice as often in the non‐recidivist than the recidivist group. Harris et al. (1993) also included two proximal or dynamic variables including pro‐criminal values and attitudes unfavorable to convention, which were both more common in the recidivist group.
These authors then combined these variables into a successful predictive instrument that included the following variables: separation from parents when under 16 years, whether or not the person had been married, elementary school maladjustment, failure in prior conditional release, age at index offense, diagnosis of personality disorder, alcohol abuse history, victim injury in the index offense, diagnosis of schizophrenia, whether or not there had been a female victim, and offense history. The Psychopathy Checklist – Revised was also included in the item list. This risk assessment was called the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) (Quinsey et al., 1998). Because of its extensive empirical derivation, the VRAG and its accompanying assessment for sexual offenses, the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG), have become standard instruments against which other risk assessments have been compared for predictive accuracy. Both the VRAG and SORAG have been cross‐validated on a variety of forensic psychiatric populations and prisoner samples (Harris, Rice, Quinsey, & Cormier, 2015). These authors found that the VRAG predicted those who would and those who would not perpetrate a future violent offense with significant accuracy and a medium to large effect size, and produced significantly more accurate predictions than unstructured clinical judgment.
Around the same time, Structured Clinical Judgment was developed by Webster et al. (1995) in the form of the Historical/Clinical/Risk Management – 20 Items (HCR‐20) Assessment. This is the most widely used Structured Clinical Judgment and is organized into three sections: historical (ten items), clinical (five items), and risk (five items). The clinician rates each item on a three‐point scale: 0, no evidence of the variable; 1, some evidence of the variable; 2, clear evidence of the variable. The total score is the sum of the items. The authors do not generally recommend making decisions on the basis of the total score; rather, they recommended that the items are structured in order to help the consideration of a comprehensive range of variables with a view to arriving at a final judgment. In this way, actuarial, historical variables are combined with an assessment of current clinical status and consideration of future risk variables.
The HCR‐20 has been revised more recently to accommodate changes in clinical practice. The HCR‐20 V3 (Douglas, Hart, Webster, & Belfrage, 2013) is a much expanded manual that accommodates shifts that have occurred in clinical and forensic practice, and principally incorporates greater attention to formulation and risk management plans. The HCR‐20 V3 describes a seven‐step process of gathering case information, evaluating the presence of the 20 risk factors, evaluating the relevance of risk factors, developing a risk formulation, developing future scenarios relevant to the person being assessed, considering risk management strategies, and concluding on the seriousness and imminence of the risk. The 20 items have also changed significantly since first published according to clinical experience and new research over the years.
Several groups of researchers have compared the predictive accuracy of both the VRAG and the HCR‐20 (original versions) on a range of databases. Generally, studies have used Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) to evaluate the significance of risk prevention. A ROC curve is a two‐dimensional plot of the true positives on the y‐axis and false positive on the x‐axis. Researchers use the Area Under the Curve (AUC) to measure the accuracy of a prediction. An AUC of .7 indicates a significant prediction with a medium effect. For example, Kroner and Mills (2001) followed up 79 male offenders who had been convicted of various violent offenses, excluding sexual offenses. In their comparison of predictive accuracy, they found that the VRAG achieved an AUC value of .75 and the HCR‐20 had an AUC value of .72. Both of these are significantly better than chance with a medium to large effect size, and there was no meaningful difference between the AUCs for each measure. Barbaree, Seto, Langton, and Peacock (2001) compared the predictive accuracy of the VRAG, SORAG, and Static‐99 (Hanson & Thornton, 1999). The Static‐99 is an actuarial assessment for future sexual offending. These authors employed a Canadian database of 215 sex offenders who had been released from prison for an average of 4.5 years. They found that the VRAG, SORAG, and Static‐99 successfully predicted general recidivism and sexual recidivism.
As has been indicated, the HCR‐20 has a highly respectable scientific background in common with other risk assessments. Structured Clinical Judgment, in the form of the HCR‐20, is the most frequently used form of risk assessment. It has now been subject to a considerable quantity of research work in a range of settings for offenders in both correctional and mental health facilities. Since it has a range of clinical scales, it is unsurprising that much of the research has been carried out in forensic psychiatric settings or with mentally disordered offenders. For example, Grann, Belfrage, and Tengstrom (2000) conducted a two‐year follow‐up of 404 forensic patients who had committed violent offenses. They found that the HCR‐20 H scale (historical section) predicted violence significantly for both offenders with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (AUC = .71) and offenders with personality disorder (AUC = .71). In a two‐year follow‐up of 70 psychiatric patients who had committed violent acts, Dolan and Khawaja (2004) reported that the HCR‐20 total score significantly predicted self or collateral reports of violence (AUC = .76) and documented incidents of reoffending (AUC = .71).
Work on the HCR‐20 has begun to investigate a range of other variables with mentally disordered offenders. Douglas and Ogloff (2003) investigated the relationship between rater confidence and accuracy of the prediction of risk. They followed up 100 forensic psychiatric patients, 79% of whom had a violent index offense. In addition to completing HCR‐20 judgments, raters were asked to indicate their confidence in the judgment on a 10‐point scale. They found that the AUC value for the high confidence group was much greater than for the low confidence group for predicting any violence.
The HCR‐20 has also been employed with female participants. In a comparison of male and female forensic patients, Strand and Belfrage (2001) found no difference in scale or total scores between the two groups. The only significant gender differences were on individual items: males scored higher on previous violence, violence at a young age, substance use, and negative attitudes, with females scoring higher on personality disorder, impulsivity, and stress. On the other hand, de Vogel and de Ruiter (2005) compared 42 women and 42 men in a forensic psychiatric service and found that the HCR‐20 was a better violence predictor for men (AUCs for total scaled score ranged between .75 and .88) than for women (AUCs ranged from .52 to .63). Grevatt, Thomas‐Peter, and Hughes (2004) investigated the extent to which the HCR‐20 predicted short‐term violence within six months of admission to a forensic unit. Although the H scale and total score were poor predictors of short‐term violence, the clinical (C) scale significantly predicted any incidents (AUC = .72) and verbal abuse (AUC = .81). They also found that the C and risk (R) scales reduced significantly in response to treatment in hospital.
In a follow‐up to Barbaree et al. (2001), Langton, Barbaree, Seto, Peacock, Harkins, and Hanson (2007) extended the original database to include 468 sexual offenders followed up for an average of 5.9 years. Langton and colleagues found that the VRAG was a significant predictor of serious violent incidents (AUC = .73), while the Static‐99 significantly predicted future sexual incidents (AUC = .75). They found that all instruments had predictive validity for the types of incidents for which they were designed. Harris et al. (2015) made a further evaluation of the VRAG and SORAG, predicting serious violent and sexual recidivism in a sample of 396 sexual offenders. For serious violent recidivism, both the VRAG and the SORAG were found to have AUC values of .73, and for sexual recidivism corresponding AUC values were .65 and .66, respectively. Therefore, the various studies are consistent, showing the VRAG and HCR‐20 to have predictive values that are significant with a medium to large effect size.
