The Violence Risk Scale (VRS) uses ratings of static and dynamic risk predictors to assess violence risk, identify targets for treatment, and assess changes in risk following treatment. The VRS was rated pre- and posttreatment on a sample of 150 males, mostly high-risk violent offenders many with psychopathic personality traits. These individuals attended a high-intensity institution-based cognitive–behavioral–oriented violence reduction treatment program in Canada and were then followed up for approximately 5 years postrelease to determine court adjudicated community violent recidivism. VRS scores significantly predicted violent recidivism. Measurements of risk reduction using dynamic VRS predictors were significantly correlated with reduction of violent recidivism after controlling for various potential confounds. The results suggest that, in a high-risk group of offenders with significant psychopathic traits, the VRS demonstrated predictive validity and the dynamic predictors can be used to assess treatment progress, which is linked to a specific criterion variable, thus, fulfilling the criteria for causal dynamic predictors set forth by Kraemer et al.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
2.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.WormithJ. S. (2004). Level of Supervision/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI): An offender assessment system. User’s guide. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
3.
BelfrageH.DouglasK. S. (2002). Treatment effects on forensic psychiatric patients measured with the HCR-20 violence risk assessment scheme. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1, 25-36.
4.
BontaJ. (1996). Risk-needs assessment and treatment. In HarlandA. T. (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (pp. 18-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
7.
Di PlacidoC.SimonT. L.WitteT. D.GuD.WongS. C. P. (2006). Treatment of gang members can reduce recidivism and institutional misconduct. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 93-114. doi:10.1007/s10979-006-9003-6
8.
DouglasK. S.KroppP. R. (2002). A prevention-based paradigm for violence risk assessment: Clinical and research applications. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 617-658.
9.
DouglasK. S.SkeemJ. (2005). Violence risk assessment: Getting specific about being dynamic. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 347-383. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.11.3.347
10.
HansonR. K.HarrisA. J. R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sexual offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35.
11.
HansonR. K.HarrisA. J. R.ScottT.HelmusL. (2007). Assessing the risk of sexual offenders on community supervision: The dynamic supervision project (User Report 2007-05). Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
12.
HansonR. K.ThorntonD. (1999). Static-99: Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders (User Report 99-02). Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
13.
HareR. D. (1991). The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
14.
HareR. D. (2003). The Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (2nd ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
15.
HarrisG. T.RiceM. E. (2003). Actuarial assessment of risk among sex offenders. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 989, 198-210.
16.
HarrisG. T.RiceM. E.QuinseyV. L. (1993). Violent recidivism in mentally disordered offenders: The development of a statistical prediction instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 315-335.
17.
HarrisG. T.RiceM. E.QuinseyV. L.LalumièreM. L.BoerD.LangC. (2003). A multi-site comparison of actuarial risk instruments for sex offenders. Psychological Assessment, 15, 413-425. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.15.3.413
18.
HemphillJ. F.HowellA. J. (2000). Adolescent offenders and stages of change. Psychological Assessment, 12, 371-381.
19.
HudsonS. M.WalesD. S.BakkerL.WardT. (2002). Dynamic risk factors: The Kia Marama evaluation. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 103-119. doi:10.1177/107906320201400203
20.
KirkpatrickT.DraycottS.FreestoneM.CooperS.TwiseltonK.WatsonN.. . . MadenT. (2010). A descriptive evaluation of patients and prisoners assessed for dangerous and severe personality disorder. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 21, 264-282.
21.
KraemerH. C.KazdinA. E.OffordD. R.KesslerR. C.JensenP. S.KupferD. J. (1997). Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 337-343.
22.
LangtonC. M.BarbereeH. E.HarkinsL.PeacockE. J. (2006). Sex offenders’ response to treatment and its association with recidivism as a function of psychopathy. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 18, 99-120. doi:10.1007/s11194-006-9004-5
23.
LevesqueD. A.GellesR. J.VelicerW. F. (2000). Development and validation of a stages of change measure for men in batterer treatment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 175-199.
24.
LoomanJ.AbracenJ.SerinR.MarquisP. (2005). Psychopathy, treatment change, and recidivism in high-risk, high-need sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 549-568. doi:10.1177/0886260504271583
25.
MadenA. (2006). DSPD: Origins and progress to date. British Journal of Forensic Practice, 8(4), 24-28.
26.
McGuireJ. (2008). A review of effective interventions for reducing aggression and violence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences, 363, 2577-2597. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0035
27.
National Institute of Clinical Excellence. (2009, January). Antisocial personality disorder: Treatment, management and prevention (NICE clinical guideline 77). London, England: National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health, British Psychological Society and Royal College of Psychiatrist.
28.
NuffieldJ. (1982). Parole decision making in Canada: Research towards decisions guidelines. Ottawa, Canada: Ministry of Supply and Services.
29.
OlverM.WongS. C. P. (in press). Assessing sexual violence risk and evaluating change with the Violence Risk Scale- Sexual Offender version. In PhenixA.HobbermanH. (Eds.), Sexual offenders: Diagnosis, risk assessment and management. New York, NY: Springer.
30.
OlverM. E.WongS. C. P.NicholaichukT.GordonA. (2007). The validity and reliability of the Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offender version: Assessing sex offender risk and evaluating therapeutic change. Psychological Assessment, 19, 318-329. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.3.318
31.
ProchaskaJ. O.DiClementeC. C. (1986). Toward a comprehensive model of change. In MillerW.HeatherN. (Eds.), Treating addictive behaviors (pp. 3-27). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
32.
ProchaskaJ. O.DiClementeC. C.NorcrossJ. C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications to the addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, 47, 1102-1114.
33.
Public Safety Canada. (2010). Corrections and conditional release statistical overview annual report 2010. Ottawa: Author.
34.
SnowdenP.KaneE. (2003). Personality disorder: No longer a diagnosis of exclusion. Psychiatric Bulletin, 27, 401-403. doi:10.1192/pb.27.11.401
35.
SoperD. S. (n.d.). Post-hoc statistical power calculator for multiple regression [Online software]. Retrieved from http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc3
36.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
37.
TierneyD. W.McCabeM. P. (2005). The utility of the trans-theoretical model of behavior change in the treatment of sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17, 153-170.
38.
WebsterC. D.DouglasK. S.EavesD.HartS. D. (1997). Assessing risk of violence to others. In WebsterC. D.JacksonM. A. (Eds.), Impulsivity: Theories, assessment, and treatment of the offender (pp. 251-277). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
39.
WilloughbyT.PerryG. P. (2002). Working with violent youth: Application of the transtheoretical model of change. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 36, 312-326.
40.
WongS. (1988). Is Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist reliable without the interview?Psychological Reports, 62, 931-934.
41.
WongS.GordonA. E. (1999-2003). The Violence Risk Scale. Unpublished manuscript, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
42.
WongS.OlverM. E.NicholaichukT. P.GordonA. (2003). The Violence Risk Scale: Sexual Offender version (VRS-SO). Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada: Regional Psychiatric Centre and University of Saskatchewan.
43.
WongS. C. P.GordonA. (2004). A risk-readiness model of post-treatment risk management. Issues in Forensic Psychology, 5, 152-163.
44.
WongS. C. P.GordonA. E. (2006). The validity and reliability of the Violence Risk Scale: A treatment-friendly violence risk assessment tool. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 12, 279-309. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.12.3.279
45.
WongS. C. P.GordonA.GuD. (2007). Assessment and treatment of violence-prone forensic clients: An integrated approach. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(Suppl.), s66-s74. doi:10.1192/bjp.190.5.s66
46.
WongS. C. P.ParharK. (2011). Evaluation of the predictive validity of the Violence Risk Scale in a paroled offender sample: A seven-year prospective study. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 22, 790-808. doi:10.1080/14789949.2011.623172
47.
WongS. C. P.Van der VeenS.LeisT.DenkhausH.GuD.LiberE.MiddletonH. (2005). Reintegrating seriously violent and personality disordered offenders from a super-maximum security institution into the general offender population. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49, 362-375. doi:10.1177/0306624X05274501
48.
YangM.WongS. C. P.CoidJ. (2010). The efficacy of violence prediction: A meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment instruments. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 740-767. doi:10.1037/a0020473
