The Adequacy and Accuracy of Sexually Violent Predator Evaluations: Contextualized Risk Assessment in Clinical Practice

Abstract

A critical issue for public policy and professional forensic practice is whether Sexually Violent Predator commitment is an empirically-validated determination. Utilizing a mixed factorial design, forensic psychologists and graduate students were asked to make predictions about offenders' likelihood of future sexual violence and their appropriateness for Sexually Violent Predator commitment. Forensic psychologists demonstrated adequate application of the relevant psycholegal standard, but made accurate predictions approximately one half of the time. Surprisingly, graduate students demonstrated a greater ability to discriminate between types of violent behavior (nonsexual versus sexual), but applied the relevant legal standard with less precision than forensic psychologists. Finally, the current results suggest that emotionallyevocative information in the form of victim statements biased psychologists' and students' predictions of future sexual violence and resulted in students' increased support for the offender's involuntary commitment. Implications are discussed in terms of professional practice and admissibility of psychological testimony in Sexually Violent Predator commitment cases.