The ability to predict the likelihood of violent behavior is an important task that is not constrained by cultures, borders, or geographic regions. This qualitative study analyzed 15 semi-structured interviews with forensic professionals to understand violence risk assessment (VRA) processes and procedures in Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico. Participants reported a range of procedures for assessing violence risk, including the use of structured VRA tools. Most evaluators considered common risk factors, but several culturally relevant risk and protective factors emerged from the interviews. Perceived strengths and limitations of VRA measures were explored. Findings may inform risk assessments with culturally diverse adults.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgnewR. (2007). Pressured into crime: An overview of general strain theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
2.
AgoffC.RajsbaumA.HerreraC. (2006). Perspectivas de las mujeres maltratadas sobre la violencia de pareja en México [Women’s perceptions on intimate partner violence in Mexico]. Salud Pública De México, 48, s307–s314. doi:10.1590/S0036-36342006000800011
3.
AlanizM. L. (1996). Husband's level of drinking and egalitarianism in Mexican-American families. Substance Use & Misuse, 31(6), 647–661. doi:10.3109/10826089609045832
4.
AlcantaraM. (2005). Politics and society in Latin America at the start of the new millennium. Social Forces, 83(4), 1659–1670. doi:10.1353/sof.2005.0051
5.
AlegriaM.VilaD.WooM.CaninoG.TakeuchiD.VeraM.ShroutP. (2004). Cultural relevance and equivalence in the NLAAS instrument: Integrating etic and emic in the development of cross-cultural measures for a psychiatric epidemiology and services study of Latinos. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 13(4), 270–288. doi:10.1002/mpr.181
6.
AndreasP. (1999). When policies collide: Market reform, market prohibition and the narcotization of the Mexican economy. In FrimanH. R.AndreasP. (Eds.), The illicit global economy and state power (pp. 125–142). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
7.
Aparcero, M., Nijdam-Jones, A., Rosenfeld, B., & García-López, E. (2019). Sex offender risk assessment in Latin America: An exploratory study. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. doi:10.1037/pro0000271
8.
ArbachK.BondarukA.CarubelliS.VegarM. F. P.SinghJ. (2017). Evaluación forense de la peligrosidad: Una aproximación a las prácticas profesionales en Latinoamérica [Forensic assessment of dangerousness: An approach to professional practices in Latin America]. PSIENCIA. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencia Psicológica, 9(1), 1–15. doi:10.5872/psiencia/9.1.23
9.
AriasE. D.GoldsteinD. M. (2010). Violent pluralism: Understanding the new democracies of Latin America. In AriasE. D.GoldsteinD. M. (Eds.), Violent democracies in Latin America (pp. 1–34). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
10.
BéjarB. O. (2009). Machismo y violencia contra la mujer [Machismo and violence against women]. Investigaciones Sociales, 13(23), 301–322.
11.
BergerR. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. doi:10.1177/1468794112468475
12.
BirtL.ScottS.CaversD.CampbellC.WalterF. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation?Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. doi:10.1177/1049732316654870
13.
BoerD. P.HartS. D.KroppP. R.WebsterC. D. (1997). Manual for the Sexual Violence Risk-20: Professional guidelines for assessing risk of sexual violence. Vancouver, Canada: Institute Against Family Violence.
14.
BottS.GuedesA.GoodwinM.Adams MendozaJ. (2012). Violence against women in Latin America and the Caribbean: A comparative analysis of population-based data from 12 countries. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization.
15.
BouzatG. (2010). Inequality, crime and security in Argentina. SELA (Seminario en Latinoamérica de Teoría Constitucional y Política) Papers. 91. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yls_sela/91
16.
BoxerP.MorrisA. S.TerranovaA. M.KithakyeM.SavoyS. C.McFaulA. F. (2008). Coping with exposure to violence: Relations to emotional symptoms and aggression in three urban samples. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 17(6), 881–893. doi:10.1007/s10826-008-9196-z
17.
BoxerP.SchappellA.MiddlemassK.MercadoI. (2011). Cognitive and emotional covariates of violence exposure among former prisoners: Links to antisocial behavior and emotional distress and implications for theory. Aggressive Behavior, 37(5), 465–475. doi:10.1002/ab.20405
18.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
19.
CámaraS. (2015). Justicia social y derecho penal: individualización de la sanción penal por circunstancias socioeconómicas del penado (arts. 66.1.6, 20.7 CP y 7.3 LORRPM) [Social justice and criminal law: individualization of criminal sanctions due to socio-economic circumstances of the prisoner. Anuario de Derecho Penal y Ciencias Penales, 68(1), 237–275. Retrieved from https://www.boe.es/publicaciones/anuarios_derecho/abrir_pdf.php?id=ANU-P-2015-10023700275
20.
CancinoA.J. (1999). Las causales de justificación en la doctrina y en la legislación penal colombiana [The grounds for justification in Colombian doctrine and criminal law] (Vol. 1). Bogotá, Colombia: Ediciones Jurídicas.
21.
CarlsonJ. A. (2010). Avoiding traps in member checking. The Qualitative Report, 15(5), 1102–1113.
22.
ChiodaL. (2017). Stop the violence in Latin America: A look at prevention from cradle to adulthood. Washington, DC: World Bank.
23.
Clauss-EhlersC. S.LeviL. L. (2002). Violence and community, terms in conflict: An ecological approach to resilience. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, 11(4), 265–278. doi:10.1023/A:1016804930977
24.
CookA. N.HartS. D. (2017). Violence risk assessment across nations and across cultures: Legal, clinical, and scientific considerations. In RoeschR.CookA. N. (Eds.), Handbook of forensic mental health services (pp. 131–152). New York, NY: Routledge.
25.
CreswellJ. W.MillerD. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
CuestaJ.ÑopoH.PizzolittoG. (2011). Using pseudo‐panels to measure income mobility in Latin America. Review of Income and Wealth, 57(2), 224–246. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4991.2011.00444.x
28.
de VogelV.de RuiterC.BoumanY.de Vries RobbéM. (2009). Guidelines for the assessment of protective factors for violence risk. English Version. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Forum Educatief.
29.
de VogelV.de Vries RobbéM.de RuiterC.BoumanY. H. A. (2011). Assessing protective factors in forensic psychiatric practice: Introducing the SAPROF. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 10(3), 171–177. doi:10.1080/14999013.2011.600230
30.
Dedoose Version 8.0.42. (2018). Web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data. Los Angeles, CA: Socio Cultural Research Consultants, LLC.
31.
Diaz-GuerreroR.SzalayL. B. (1991). Understanding Mexicans and Americans: Cultural perspectives in conflict. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media, LLC.
32.
DouglasK. S.HartS. D.WebsterC.BelfrageH. (2013). HCR-20 (Version 3): Assessing risk for violence. Burnaby, BC, Canada: Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
33.
FarissC. J. (2014). Respect for human rights has improved over time: Modeling the changing standard of accountability. American Political Science Review, 108(2), 297–318. doi:10.1017/S0003055414000070
34.
FassT. L.HeilbrunK.DematteoD.FretzR. (2008). The LSI-R and the COMPAS: Validation data on two risk-needs tools. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(9), 1095–1108. doi:10.1177/0093854808320497
35.
FeredayJ.Muir-CochraneE. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. doi:10.1177/160940690600500107
36.
FolinoJ. O.VillalbaD. K.SinghJ. P. (2016). Violence risk assessment in Latin America. In SinghJ. P.BjørklyS.FazelS. (Eds.), International Perspectives on Violence Risk Assessment (pp. 181–191). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
37.
GalantiG. A. (2003). The Hispanic family and male-female relationships: An overview. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 14(3), 180–185. doi:10.1177/1043659603014003004
38.
García-RipollM. (2006). Ilicitud, culpa y estado de necesidad [Illegality, guilt and state of need].Madrid, Spain: Librería Dykinson.
39.
GoldsteinD. M. (2005). Flexible justice: Neoliberal violence and ‘self-help’security in Bolivia. Critique of Anthropology, 25(4), 389–411. doi:10.1177/0308275X05058656
40.
GuerraN. G.Rowell HuesmannL.SpindlerA. (2003). Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development, 74(5), 1561–1576. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00623
41.
HareR. D. (2003). The hare psychopathy checklist-revised (2nd ed.). Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
42.
HartS. D. (2001). Assessing and managing violence risk. In DouglasK. S.WebsterC. D.HartS. D.EavesD.OgloffJ. R. P. (Eds.), HCR-20 violence risk management companion guide (pp. 13–25). Burnaby, British Columbia: Mental Health, Law, & Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
43.
HartS. D.DouglasK. S.WebsterC. (2001). Risk management using the HCR-20: A general overview focusing on historical factors. In DouglasK. S.WebsterC.HartS. D.EavesD.OgloffJ. R. P., (Eds.), HCR-20 violence risk management companion guide (pp. 13–25). Burnaby, Canada: Mental Health, Law, & Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
44.
HelfrichH. (1999). Beyond the dilemma of cross-cultural psychology: Resolving the tension between etic and emic approaches. Culture & Psychology, 5(2), 131–153. doi:10.1177/1354067X9952002
45.
Hesse-BiberS. N.LeavyP. (2010). The practice of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
46.
HofstedeG. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
47.
JütersonkeO.MuggahR.RodgersD. (2009). Gangs, urban violence, and security interventions in Central America. Security Dialogue, 40(4–5), 373–397. doi:10.1177/0967010609343298
48.
KennedyT. M.CeballoR. (2013). Latino adolescents' community violence exposure: After‐school activities and familismo as risk and protective factors. Social Development, 22(4), 663–682. doi:10.1111/sode.12030
49.
KroppP. R.HartS. D.WebsterC. W.EavesD. (1994). Manual for the spousal assault risk assessment guide. Vancouver, Canada: British Columbia Institute on Family Violence.
50.
KroppP. R.HartS. D.WebsterC. W.EavesD. (1995). Manual for the spousal assault risk assessment guide (2nd ed.). Vancouver, Canada: British Columbia Institute on Family Violence.
LegardR.KeeganJ.WardK. (2003). In-depth interviews. In RitchieJ.LewisJ. (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 138–169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
53.
LeguízamoA.LeeS. C.JeglicE. L.CalkinsC. (2017). Utility of the Static-99 and Static-99R with Latino sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 29(8), 765–785. doi:10.1177/1079063215618377
54.
LevittH. M.BambergM.CreswellJ. W.FrostD. M.JosselsonR.Suárez-OrozcoC. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA publications and communications board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 26–46. doi:10.1037/amp0000151
55.
MarinG.MarinB. V. (1991). Research with hispanic populations. Newbury Park, CASage Publications, Inc.
McEvoyC.HidegG. (2017). Global violent deaths. 2017: Time to decide. Geneva, Switzerland: Small Arms Survey, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.
MertonR. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682. doi:10.2307/2084686
60.
MorrowS. L. (2007). Qualitative research in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 209–235. doi:10.1177/0011000006286990
61.
MosherD. L.SirkinM. (1984). Measuring a macho personality constellation. Journal of Research in Personality, 18(2), 150–163. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(84)90026-6
62.
NeergaardM. A.OlesenF.AndersenR. S.SondergaardJ. (2009). Qualitative description - the poor cousin of health research?BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(1), 52–56. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-52
63.
NeffJ. A.PrihodaT. J.HoppeS. K. (1991). Machismo,” self-esteem, education and high maximum drinking among Anglo, Black and Mexican-American male drinkers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52(5), 458–463. doi:10.15288/jsa.1991.52.458
64.
Ng‐MakD. S.SalzingerS.FeldmanR. S.StueveC. A. (2004). Pathologic adaptation to community violence among inner‐city youth. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74(2), 196–208. doi:10.1037/0002-9432.74.2.196
65.
Ng‐MakD. S.StueveA.SalzingerS.FeldmanR. (2002). Normalization of violence among inner‐city youth: A formulation for research. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 72(1), 92–101. doi:10.1037/0002-9432.72.1.92
66.
OliverD. G.SerovichJ. M.MasonT. L. (2005). Constraints and opportunities with interview transcription: Towards reflection in qualitative research. Social Forces, 84(2), 1273–1289. doi:10.1353/sof.2006.0023
67.
O'SheaL. E.MitchellA. E.PicchioniM. M.DickensG. L. (2013). Moderators of the predictive efficacy of the historical, clinical and risk management-20 for aggression in psychiatric facilities: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(2), 255–270. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.016
68.
Prados de la EscosuraL. (2007). Inequality and poverty in Latin America: A long-run exploration. In HattonT. J.., ÓRourkeK. H.TaylorA. M. (Eds.), The new comparative economic history (pp. 291–315). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
69.
RodgersD. (2006). Living in the shadow of death: Gangs, violence and social order in urban Nicaragua, 1996–2002. Journal of Latin American Studies, 38(2), 267–292. doi:10.1017/S0022216X0600071X
70.
SaldañaJ. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
71.
Sánchez RodríguezG. (2008). Violencia machista y medios de comunicación. El tratamiento informativo de los delitos relacionados con el maltrato a mujeres. [Gender violence and media. The informative processing of offences related with violence against woman]. Comunicación y Hombre, 4, 155–167. doi:10.32466/eufv-cyh.2008.4.97.155-167
72.
SchlagerM. D.SimourdD. J. (2007). Validity of the level of service inventory—revised (LSI-R) among African American and Hispanic male offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(4), 545–554. doi:10.1177/0093854806296039
73.
SchnakenbergK. E.FarissC. J. (2014). Dynamic patterns of human rights practices. Political Science Research and Methods, 2(1), 1–31. doi:10.1017/psrm.2013.15
74.
SinghJ. P.DesmaraisS. L.HurducasC.Arbach-LucioniK.CondemarinC.DeanK.OttoR. K. (2014). International perspectives on the practical application of violence risk assessment: A global survey of 44 countries. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 13(3), 193–206. doi:10.1080/14999013.2014.922141
75.
SinghJ. P.GrannM.FazelS. (2011). A comparative study of violence risk assessment tools: A systematic review and metaregression analysis of 68 studies involving 25,980 participants. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(3), 499–513. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.11.009
76.
SkeemJ. L.MonahanJ. (2011). Current directions in violence risk assessment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(1), 38–42. doi:10.1177/0963721410397271
77.
TongA.SainsburyP.CraigJ. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
78.
TongcoM. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 5, 147–158. doi:10.17348/era.5.0.147-158
79.
TriandisH. C. (1992). Cross-cultural research in social psychology. In GranbergD.SarupG. (Eds.), Social judgment and intergroup relations: Essays in honor of Muzafer Sherif (pp. 229–243). New York, NY: Springer.
80.
Valencia TrianaS. (2014). Teoría transfeminista para el análisis de la violencia machista y la reconstrucción no-violenta del tejido social en el México contemporáneo [Transfeminist theory for the analysis of male violence and the nonviolent reconstruction of the social fabric in contemporary Mexico. Universitas Humanística, 78, 65–88. doi:10.11144/Javeriana.UH78.ttpa
81.
VarelaJ. G.BoccacciniM. T.MurrieD. C.CapertonJ. D.GonzalezE. (2013). Do the Static-99 and Static-99R perform similarly for White, Black, and Latino sexual offenders?International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 12(4), 231–243. doi:10.1080/14999013.2013.846950
82.
WalkerJ. S. (2005). The Maudsley violence questionnaire: Initial validation and reliability. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(1), 187–201. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.04.001
83.
WalkerJ. S.GudjonssonG. H. (2006). The Maudsley violence questionnaire: Relationship to personality and self-reported offending. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(4), 795–806. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.009
84.
WangF.ArnoldM. T. (2008). Localized income inequality, concentrated disadvantage and homicide. Applied Geography, 28(4), 259–270. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.07.004
85.
WebsterC. D.DouglasK. S.EavesD.HartS. D. (1998). The HCR–20: Assessing risk for violence (Version 2). Burnaby, Canada: Simon Fraser University and Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission of British Columbia.
86.
WhittemoreR.ChaseS. K.MandleC. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 522–537. doi:10.1177/104973201129119299
87.
YanowD.Schwartz-SheaP. (2006). Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe Inc.
