Risk assessment instruments are used to help determine treatment readiness and improvement and to inform decisions regarding placement in inpatient and outpatient civil commitment, parole, probation, and community supervision (Doyle & Logan, 2012; McKeown, 2010; Singh, Grann, & Fazel, 2011). Risk assessment measures are based on empirically validated static and dynamic risk factors (Wilson, Desmarais, Nicholls, Hart, & Brink, 2013). The present study investigated the static Historical scale and dynamic Clinical and Risk Management scales of the HCR-20 and the dynamic Strengths and Vulnerabilities scales of the START. None of the HCR-20 or START scales were significantly correlated with physical aggression, verbal aggression, or revocation of conditional release. However, the dynamic scales of the HCR-20 and START showed stronger correlations with verbal aggression compared to the static Historical scale of the HCR-20. Additionally, higher scores on the Vulnerabilities scale were associated with more incidents of verbal aggression. Finally, the HCR-20 scales had stronger correlations with outcomes for females than for men. The results also bring into question the use of the START with a female population. Assessment instruments used to inform decisions must be valid for the predicted outcomes.
|File name||Date Uploaded||Visibility||File size|