Abstract
Since the 1970s, a wide body of research has suggested that the accuracy of clinical risk assessments of violence might be increased if clinicians used actuarial tools. Despite considerable progress in recent years in the development of such tools for violence risk assessment, they remain primarily research instruments, largely ignored in daily clinical practice. We argue that because most existing actuarial tools are based on a main effects regression approach, they do not adequately reflect the contingent nature of the clinical assessment processes. To enhance the use of actuarial violence risk assessment tools, we propose a classification tree rather than a main effects regression approach. In addition, we suggest that by employing two decision thresholds for identifying high- and low-risk cases - instead of the standard single threshold - the use of actuarial tools to make dichotomous risk classification decisions may be further enhanced. These claims are supported with empirical data from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 83-100 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | Law and human behavior |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2000 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
- General Psychology
- Psychiatry and Mental health
- Law
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'A classification tree approach to the development of actuarial violence risk assessment tools'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver