Forensic application of static and dynamic risk factors: Is it the right time?

Author:

Abbott Brian

Abstract

It is common, accepted clinical practice to conduct risk assessments of individuals who commit sexual offenses using the combination of sexual violence risk actuarial measures and dynamic risk factors. This assessment approach has utility when identifying treatment targets, assessing progress in sexual offender treatment, and forming risk management plans. Little research has examined this method in forensic contexts such as deciding whether individuals who suffer from mental disorders are likely to engage in sexually dangerous behavior as defined by sexually violent predator or persons (“SVP”) involuntary civil confinement laws in the USA. In particular, it is uncertain whether the combination of sexual violence risk actuarial measures and dynamic risk factors (DRF) produces sufficiently reliable, relevant, and probative evidence for the trier of fact to properly evaluate the SVP legally defined likelihood of sexual dangerousness. This article explores the efficacy of combining actuarial measures of sexual violence risk and dynamic risk factors as applied in SVP risk assessments based on some commonly observed forensic practices among evaluators. Based on the analysis, recommendations for forensic practice and future research are offered.

Publisher

Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID)

Reference68 articles.

1. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater: Is it time for clinical judgment to supplement actuarial risk assessment?;The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law,2011

2. Sexually violent predator risk assessments with the violence risk appraisal guide-revised: A shaky practice

3. Abracen, J., & Looman, J. (2015). Treatment of high-risk sexual offenders: An integrated approach. Malden, MA, USA: Wiley-Blackwell.

4. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC, USA: American Educational Research Association.

5. American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3