scholarly journals Improving Criminal Responsibility Determinations Using Structured Professional Judgment

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marvin W. Acklin ◽  
Joseph P. Velasquez
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Forensic Assessment ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Forensic Psychologists ◽  
Structured Professional Judgment ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
User Friendly

Forensic psychologists commonly utilize unstructured clinical judgment in aggregating clinical and forensic information in forming opinions. Unstructured clinical judgment is prone to evaluator bias and suboptimal levels of inter-rater reliability. This article proposes Structured Professional Judgment (SPJ) methods as a potential remedy. Following a review of canonical forensic assessment models, the prevalence of bias in forensic judgments, and inter-rater agreement in criminal responsibility (CR) determinations, this article presents a SPJ model for CR evaluations translated from violence risk assessment methodology. A systematic user-friendly methodology is described, applying procedural checklists, application of a mental state at time of the offense (MSO) model using structured data collection methods, aggregation of empirical evidence guidelines, and post-hoc hypothesis testing using the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH). A case study describes application of the procedural and CR decision model in a complex homicide case. The model demonstrates the power and efficacy of the application of SPJ to forensic decision-making and is relevant to other types of forensic assessment (e.g., competency to stand trial, post-acquittal release decision-making).

A Prevention-Based Paradigm for Violence Risk Assessment

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 617-658 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin S. Douglas ◽  
P. Randall Kropp
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Clinical Prediction ◽  
Violence Risk Assessment ◽  
Validation Procedure ◽  
Actuarial Prediction ◽  
Structured Professional Judgment ◽  
Risk Assessment And Management

The rationale for this article was to outline and describe an emerging model of prevention-based violence risk assessment and management and to discuss attendant clinical and research implications. This model draws on structured professional judgment rather than on actuarial prediction or unstructured clinical prediction. Its purpose is to prevent violence through the assessment of relevant violence risk factors and the application of risk management and intervention strategies that flow directly from these factors. The authors discuss the nature of the clinical tasks that stem from the model as well as a four-step validation procedure required to evaluate it.

Risk Assessment of Stalkers

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 590-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Randall Kropp ◽  
Stephen D. Hart ◽  
David R. Lyon
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Limited Time ◽  
Violence Risk Assessment ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Targeted Violence ◽  
Time Periods ◽  
Structured Professional Judgment ◽  
The Relationship

Risk assessment of stalkers is difficult due to the diversity of stalking-related behaviors and the lack of research. The authors discuss three problems. First, stalking is a form of targeted violence, that is, violence directed at specific people known to the perpetrator. Second, stalking may include acts that are implicitly or indirectly threatening. Third, stalking can persist for many years, even decades. In contrast, most research on violence risk assessment ignores the relationship between victim and perpetrator, defines violence solely in terms of physical harm, and tracks perpetrators for limited time periods. The authors conclude that these problems make it impossible to rely on actuarial approaches when assessing risk for stalking at the present time, although it is possible to use structured professional judgment. They discuss some basic principles that can be used to guide stalking risk assessment within the framework of structured professional judgment.

Treatment Evaluation in Forensic Psychiatry. Which One Should Be Used: The Clinical Judgment or the Instrument-based Assessment of Change?

2021 ◽  
pp. 0306624X2110239
Author(s):  
Erwin Schuringa ◽  
Marinus Spreen ◽  
Stefan Bogaerts
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Psychiatric Patient ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Forensic Psychiatry ◽  
Treatment Evaluation ◽  
Behavioral Changes ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Forensic Treatment ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
Structured Professional Judgment

In forensic psychiatry, it is common practice to use an unstructured clinical judgment for treatment evaluation. From risk assessment studies, it is known that the unstructured clinical judgment is unreliable and the use of instruments is recommended. This paper aims to explore the clinical judgment of change compared to the calculated change using the Instrument for Forensic Treatment Evaluation (IFTE) in relation to changes in inpatient violence This study shows that the clinical judgment is much more positive about patient’s behavioral changes than the calculated change. And that the calculated change is more in accordance with the change in the occurrence of inpatient violence, suggesting that the calculated change reflects reality closer than the unstructured clinical judgment. Therefore, it is advisable to use the IFTE as a base to make a structured professional judgment of the treatment evaluation of a forensic psychiatric patient.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document