Predicting physically violent misconduct in prison: A comparison of four risk assessment instruments

被引:17
作者
Abbiati, Milena [1 ]
Palix, Julie [1 ]
Gasser, Jacques [1 ]
Moulin, Valerie [1 ]
机构
[1] Lausanne Univ Hosp, Inst Legal Psychiat, Legal Psychiat & Psychol Res Unit, Lausanne, Switzerland
关键词
PROTECTIVE FACTORS; SITUATIONAL VARIABLES; INMATE MISCONDUCT; VICTIMIZATION; VALIDITY; AGGRESSION; MANAGEMENT-20; RECIDIVISM; ACCURACY; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1002/bsl.2364
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Violence in correctional facilities is an important issue for both prisoners and prison staff. Risk assessment instruments have demonstrated their accuracy in predicting the risk of (re) offending and institutional violence in psychiatric settings, but less is known about their ability to predict violent misconduct in prison. The present study applied four risk assessment instruments (Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk, Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, Psychopathy checklist - Revised, and Violent Risk Appraisal Guide) to 52 violent offenders in a Swiss prison in order to evaluate the instruments' predictive validities. Outcomes were instances of physically violent, other and any misconduct as recorded in prison files during the 12 months following the prisoners' assessments. Approximately 15% of offenders committed physically violent misconduct and approximately 42% committed any misconduct. The results show that mainly dynamic assessment tools are as good predictors of physically violent misconduct as mainly static assessment tools. Targeting dynamic factors could increase the effectiveness of interventions to reduce the risk of physical violence in prison.
引用
收藏
页码:61 / 77
页数:17
相关论文
共 76 条
  • [1] Validity and Predictive Accuracy of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk in Criminal Forensic Evaluations: A Swiss Cross-Validation Retrospective Study
    Abbiati, Milena
    Azzola, Agathe
    Palix, Julie
    Gasser, Jacques
    Moulin, Valerie
    [J]. CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2017, 44 (04) : 493 - 510
  • [2] Susceptibility (risk and protective) factors for in-patient violence and self-harm: prospective study of structured professional judgement instruments START and SAPROF, DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 in forensic mental health services
    Abidin, Zareena
    Davoren, Mary
    Naughton, Leena
    Gibbons, Olivia
    Nulty, Andrea
    Kennedy, Harry G.
    [J]. BMC PSYCHIATRY, 2013, 13
  • [3] The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment
    Andrews, DA
    Bonta, J
    Wormith, JS
    [J]. CRIME & DELINQUENCY, 2006, 52 (01) : 7 - 27
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2008, PERFORMANCE INDICATO
  • [5] [Anonymous], 1998, VIOLENT OFFENDERS AP
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2009, SAPROF GUIDELINES AS
  • [7] RISK FACTORS FOR VIOLENT BEHAVIOR IN PRISON INMATES A Cross-Cultural Contribution
    Arbach-Lucioni, Karin
    Martinez-Garcia, Marian
    Andres-Pueyo, Antonio
    [J]. CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2012, 39 (09) : 1219 - 1239
  • [8] Prediction of violence using the HCR-20: a prospective study in two maximum-security correctional institutions
    Belfrage, H
    Fransson, G
    Strand, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY, 2000, 11 (01): : 167 - 175
  • [9] Belfrage H., 2002, International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, V1, P25
  • [10] Myths and Realities of Prison Violence: A Review of the Evidence
    Byrne, James M.
    Hummer, Don
    [J]. VICTIMS & OFFENDERS, 2007, 2 (01) : 77 - 90