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

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 62-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian R. Abbott
2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grant T. Harris ◽  
Marnie E. Rice

Two studies herein address age, the passage of time since the first offense, time spent incarcerated, or time spent offense free in the community as empirically justified postevaluation adjustments in forensic violence risk assessment. Using three non-overlapping samples of violent offenders, the first study examined whether any of three variables (time elapsed since the first offense, time spent incarcerated, and age at release) were related to violent recidivism or made an incremental contribution to the prediction of violent recidivism after age at first offense was considered. Time since first offense and time spent incarcerated were uninformative. Age at release predicted violent recidivism but not as well as age at first offense, and it afforded no independent incremental validity. For sex offenders, age at first offense improved the prediction of violent and sexual recidivism. In the second study, time spent offense-free while at risk was related to violent recidivism such that an actuarial adjustment for the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide could be derived. The results support the use of adjustments (based on the passage of time) to actuarial scores, but only adjustments that are themselves actuarial.


2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 129-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reena Khiroya ◽  
Tim Weaver ◽  
Tony Maden

Aims and MethodWe surveyed the usage and perceived utility of standardised risk measures in 29 forensic medium secure units (a 62% response rate).ResultsThe most common instruments were Historical Clinical Risk–20 (HCR–20) and Psychopathy Checklist – revised (PCL–R); both were rated highly for utility. the Risk Matrix 2000 (RM2000), Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG) and Static-99 were the most common sex offender assessments, but the Sexual Violence Risks–20 (SVR–20) was rated more positively for its use of dynamic factors and relevance to treatment.Clinical ImplicationsMost medium secure units use structured risk assessments and staff view them positively. As HCR–20 and PCL–R/PCL–SV (Psychopathy Checklist – Screening Version) are so widely used they should be the first choices considered by other services.


2008 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Zoe Hilton ◽  
Grant T. Harris ◽  
Marnie E. Rice ◽  
Ruth E. Houghton ◽  
Angela W. Eke

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (12) ◽  
pp. 1543-1549 ◽  
Author(s):  
John F. Edens ◽  
Brittany N. Penson ◽  
Jared R. Ruchensky ◽  
Jennifer Cox ◽  
Shannon Toney Smith

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document