Examining the Factor Structure of a Risk Assessment Inventory in Young Offenders: FER-R, Risk and Resource Assessment Form

The FER-R, Risk and Resource Assessment Form, is a multidimensional inventory of structured professional judgment that assesses criminogenic risks and resources for the design and management of individualized intervention plans with criminally sanctioned adolescents. The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the FER-R, reviewing its factorial structure to contribute evidence of convergent and discriminant construct validity in a sample of adolescents sentenced for crimes in Chile. For each domain (risks and resources) with its respective facets, a unidimensional bifactor structure (CFA-BF) was obtained, with adequate indices of fit that confirmed its construct validity, while the convergent validity was demonstrated with the YLS/CMI and the divergent validity with two MACI scales. The FER-R adds factorial validity to the evidence of the previously reported predictive validity, making it a robust inventory for the evaluation of young offenders, and a relevant tool to manage differentiated interventions in Chile, with a high potential for use in Latin America. The importance of finding a suitable balance in assessing risks and protective factors is discussed, in order to manage interventions adjusted to the needs of the adolescents to promote their criminal desistance.

Improving Criminal Responsibility Determinations Using Structured Professional Judgment

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).

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

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.

Police are Influenced by Anchoring and Risk When Allocating Resources for Scenario-based Intimate Partner Violence Cases

Sixty-six police officers were given four intimate partner violence (IPV) scenarios to rate for risk of future violence. At the start of the experiment, participants were provided with either a low-risk or high-risk “anchor” scenario of police attending an IPV incident. Next, participants were given three counterbalanced scenarios: high, medium, and low risk. Half the participants were given a structured professional judgment tool to guide their decisions. Participants given the low-risk anchor rated the following scenarios as being of greater risk than those given the high-risk anchor. Participants were consistent in identifying high-, medium-, and low-risk scenarios and the tool made no difference to these ratings. Participants were more confident in their higher risk judgments than their lower risk judgments. Officers distributed a disproportionately high amount of resources to the high-risk offenders and the results suggest that police officers can make decisions consistent with Risk-Need-Responsivity principles. However, anchoring effects and working in a context where violence is more severe and frequent has the potential to bias perceptions and make officers less sensitive to risk.

Structured Professional Judgment to Assist the Evaluation and Safety Planning of Suicide Risk: The Risk of Suicide Protocol (RoSP)

Background: The Risk of Suicide Protocol (RoSP) is a structured professional judgment (SPJ) scheme designed in line with NICE guidelines to improve clinicians' ability to evaluate and manage suicide risk.Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of RoSP in two settings: (1) unexpected deaths of people in the community who were known to mental health services; and (2) an inpatient hospital specializing in the assessment and treatment of patients with personality disorder.Method: In Study 1, information from a database of unexpected deaths (N = 68) within an NHS health board was used to complete a RoSP assessment (blind to cause of death) and information from the Coroner's Court was used to assign people to suicide vs. natural causes/accidental death. In Study 2, patients (N = 62) were assessed on the RoSP upon admission to hospital and their self-injurious behaviors were recorded over the first 3 months of admission.Results: (1) Evaluations using RoSP were highly reliable in both samples (ICCs 0.93–0.98); (2) professional judgment based on the RoSP was predictive of completed suicide in the community sample (AUC = 0.83) and; (3) was predictive of both suicide attempts (AUC = 0.81) and all self-injurious behaviors (AUC = 0.80) for the inpatient sample.Conclusion: RoSP is a reliable and valid instrument for the structured clinical evaluation of suicide risk for use in inpatient psychiatric services and in community mental health services. RoSP's efficacy is comparable to well-established structured professional judgment instruments designed to predict other risk behavior (e.g., HCR-20 and the prediction of violence). The use of RoSP for the clinical evaluation of suicide risk and safety-planning provides a structure for meeting NICE guidelines for suicide prevention and is now evidence-based.

Assessing Potentially Violent Extremists

This chapter describes the way investigative psychologists of the Dutch National Police assess behavior of potentially violent extremists. Investigative psychologists in the Netherlands have adopted structured professional judgment as the best framework to do so. The different phases investigative psychologists go through in practice while assessing the risk of violence for these potential extremists are set out. Specifically, the following steps are explored: intake and triage, information gathering, conducting a behavioral timeline, risk assessment, risk formulation, scenario thinking, and advice. Lastly, the future challenges in this field of operations are discussed.

Threat Assessment of Targeted Honor-Based Violence

Honor-based violence can be defined as “any actual attempted or threatened physical harm of a family member with honor as a principle motive.” In its most extreme form it is manifested as murder of a family member (most often a woman or girl), or an intimate partner of a family member, because of the perpetrator’s belief that the victim has brought dishonor on the family. This chapter describes PATRIARCH, a structured professional judgment tool for assessing risk and threat of honor-based violence. The tool includes 15 factors, comprising the nature and pattern of the honor-based violence behavior, perpetrator risk factors, and victim vulnerability factors. The use of the tool in practice is described using a case example where the factors are exemplified and a summary risk formulation and a safety plan are made.

Intimate Partner Violence, Stalking, and Femicide

Professionals are commonly asked to address the risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) in criminal justice, civil court, health care, workplace, and post-secondary settings. This chapter reviews the literature addressing risk factors for IPV and the state of the art for threat assessment tools for this form of violence. Special attention is given to the topics of stalking and killing of intimate partners. While these issues are related to the more general problem of IPV, they require some unique considerations in conducting threat assessments. The chapter concludes that there remain difficulties in the field in defining “threat,” determining the role of the victim in threat assessment, and implementing effective risk management strategies. Promising practices in assessing and managing stalking are presented along with a model for formulating risk in high-lethality situations. Finally, a case study is presented to illustrate a structured professional judgment (SPJ) approach to threat assessment in this context.