Issues In Forensic Psychology - Predicting Future Violence

ISSUES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY
Predicting Future Violence

Throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980's, attempts at predicting future violence amounted to spectacular failures. Relying on their clinical judgment and standardized tests, psychologists were mistaken in their predictions appoximately 80% of the time.
The 1990s, however, saw the development of what is known as the "Second generation" of research related to predicting future violence. These "second generation" studies reported the development of actuarial procedures for assessing an individual's risk of future violence. Compared to the subjective impressions associated with clinical judgment and many psychological tests, actuarial procedures are much more objective.
Any reasonably well-informed psychologist recognizes the superiority of actuarial procedures - compared to clinical judgment - when attempting to predict future violence. Psychologists who persist in relying on clinical judgment - neglecting to recognize the clear superiority of actuarial procedures for assessing violence risk - are demonstrating how woefully ill-informed they are.
At this time, there are various actuarial procedures that have been developed for assessing violence risk. They include the Assessing Risk for Violence procedure (HCR-20), the Minneosta Sexual Offender Screening Tool (MnSOST), the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sexual Offense Recidivism (RRASOR), the Sexual Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG), the Sexual Violence Risk-20 procedure (SVR-20), and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG).
Despite the important work being done in developing procedures such as the HCR-20, the RRASOR, and the SORAG, they currently remain at an experimental stage of development. As experimental procedures, therefore, they cannot yet support expert testimony in a legal proceeding.
The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) is another procedure frequently used in assessing violence risk. The PCL-R, however, was developed on a population of Canadian prisoners. Consequently, using the PCL-R with U.S. minority populations is especially ill-advised.
Without the necessary research clearly identifying the levels of accuracy - and the rates of error - associated with procedures such as the HCR-20, the RRASOR, and the PCL-R, they cannot legitimately support the expert testimony of a psychologist in a legal proceeding.

If you are interested in issues related to assessing violence risk, you may want to order the following publication authored by Dr. Campbell.

"Challenging the Evidentiary Reliability of Sexual Predator Evaluations." Paper presented to the Seventh International Conference of the National Child Abuse Defense and Resource Center, October 1998. This a 24-page, single-spaced outline with 67 literature citations. (Order article #16, cost $15.00).

Home Page | Available Publications | Curriculum Vitae | Professional History