Summary
psychological assessment final exam summary
- Course
- Institution
psychological assessment final exam summary
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
eutkuqvz
Reviews received
Content preview
Psychological Assessment part 2 Summary- The use of the HCR-20V3 in Dutch forensic psychiatric practice
Violence risk assessment provides insight into risk and protective factors and concrete guidelines
for risk management and treatment-> prevent violent recidivism. The structured professional
approach (SPJ)-> collection, reviewing, combining, weighting and integrating risk factors.
Historical, Clinical, Risk management-20 Version 2-> assessment of risk for future violence,
has good reliability and validity. Its revised version is HCR-20V3 (improved applicability and
increase in usefulness in daily practice).
Violence Risk Assessment in the Van der Hoeven Kliniek-> Most patients go because of
TBS-order (disposal to be treated on behalf of the state, to reduce violence risk).
Implementation of the SPJ Model-> Since 2001, the HCR-20 is routinely coded at
different phases in treatment. A researcher/diagnostician, a sociotherapist, and a treatment
supervisor independently code the HCR-20 for each case, they later discuss their conclusions to
come to a final agreement (prolong TBS-order or not, 5-point scale). The test items consist of
next year context and “what if” context items for potential risks of ending treatment right away
(explanation of the necessity of treatment). HCR-20; the Structured Assessment of Protective
Factors for violence risk and The Female Additional Manual (since men and women differ in
violence, this scale aims to assess gender-specific risks)-> added onto the HCR-20.
Research Findings in the Van der Hoeven Kliniek-> strong support for the SPJ model.
good interrater reliability and strong predictive validity for violent recidivism and incidents of
violence during treatment for male violent and sexual offenders predicted significantly better
than the unstructured clinical judgment. protective factors measured with the SAPROF->
incremental predictive validity (instead of risk factors alone). SAPROF and HCR-20 are
sensitive to change. Prospective study-> lower risk and higher protective during later stages in
treatment.
Dutch Involvement in the Development of the HCR-20V3-> Beta testing-> strengths of
HCR-20V3: the updated literature, sharpened item descriptions, improved terminology,
enhanced relevance to risk management, and sub-items for better capturing the complex nature
of several risk factors at the clinical level. Negatives: increased overlap between several items,
the more complex coding scheme and ambiguity in some of the coding instructions.
Pilot Study-> retrospective, based on discharged non-sexual male offenders, Summary
Risk Ratings for Case Prioritization / Future Violence (SRRs) three and five-point scale,
three independent raters (inter-rater reliability), good predictive validity.
Survey-> participants thought of HCR-20V3 positively,(additional value for risk
management, ‘more specific’, ‘applicable’, ‘improvement’, and ‘takes some time getting used
to’.)
, Case Study-> “Case studies that demonstrate how HCR-20V3 can lead to clear, testable
formulations, and successful risk management, would be of great benefit to clinicians who use,
or are learning to use, this instrument” (Douglas et al., 2013)
● Step 1: Case information. Illegal work of the father, unaffectionate mother, early
substance abuse, rebellious behaviour, physical assault and theft, property
offences in adulthood, seeing a friend get shot, marriage followed by abuse of
partner, in prison threat to rape and murder wife, After his prison sentence, he was
admitted to the forensic psychiatric hospital (antisocial personality disorder with
borderline and narcissistic traits and substance dependency, 31.6 on Psychopathy
Checklist-Revised). Psychotherapy displayed progress, soon allowed frank to live
alone with some supervision. Soon after substance abuse occurred again so he
was treated with disulfiram. He got a new girlfriend but that resulted in problems
and alcohol abuse, after the breakup he displayed progress. Once he could
rationalise about the effects of his past behaviour on people he felt pain, reported
depressive moods and suicidal thoughts. He was prescribed mood-stabilizing
medication and started with Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing
(EMDR) to help with the memories of the shot friend. Treatment had a positive
effect.
● Step 2: Presence of risk factors. antisocial and violent behaviour from
adolescence, history of problematic social relationships in general,
● Step 3: Relevance of risk factors. Relationships (a. Intimate as well as b.
Non-intimate), Substance Use, Antisocial, Psychopathic, and Dissocial
Personality Disorder, Treatment or Supervision Response (Compliance), Affective
Instability and Stress / Coping were coded as present and highly relevant.
● Step 4: Risk formulation. facilitate the clinician’s conceptualization of the roots
of a person’s problems with an eye toward intervention. Evaluators consider risk
factors and combine them into a meaningful framework(addiction problems and
related antisocial tendencies, borderline traits in Frank’s personality). Protective
factors-> Work, Social Network, Professional Care and Supervision, Coping,
Self-control and Attitudes towards Authority, Leisure Activities
● Step 5: Risk scenarios. what might a person do in the future, and why? addiction
problems, risk of intimate partner violence, impulsive and reactive violence
● Step 6: Management strategies. The Risk-Need- Responsivity (RNR) model->
translating the results from steps 2, 3, 4 and 5 into a risk management plan. The
Risk Principle -> high-risk cases should receive high-intensity risk management
(high risk for frank in violent recidivism) The Need Principle-> management
efforts should target dynamic risk factors deemed important for lowering the risk
for a specific patient (criminogenic needs)-> addiction problems; his impulsive,
antisocial lifestyle and related antisocial attitudes, poor self-control and anger
, management and limited coping skills. strengthening important protective factors,
such as Frank’s voluntary work and social network. The Responsivity
Principle-> programs should be delivered in a manner that matches the learning
styles of those receiving them (structured, cognitive-behavioural and social
learning approaches)-> solid monitoring or surveillance (routine meetings,
gathering information from other observants like family) for frank since warm
therapeutic relationships will not work with his psychopathy. treatment->
improve deficits in psychosocial adjustment or functioning. supervision->
restrictions of rights and freedom (Frank was not allowed to use alcohol or drugs).
Victim safety planning-> improving a potential victim’s (dynamic and static)
security.
● Step 7: Conclusory opinions. Frank-> moderate risk for engaging in violent
behaviour towards others. risks of imminent violence and of serious physical
harm ->low. treatment needed to be prolonged
- The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: a meta-analysis of recidivism
studies
sexual recidivism is associated with: (a) deviant sexual interests (illegal or abnormal) and (b)
antisocial orientation/lifestyle instability (individuals will not commit sexual crimes unless
they are willing to hurt others, can convince themselves that they are not harming their victims,
or feel unable to stop themselves). Sexual offence is related to negative family background,
problems forming affectionate bonds with friends and lovers, and attitudes tolerant of sexual
assault. Static factors ->long-term recidivism prediction. dynamic (changeable) risk factors->
understanding (and changing) recidivism, also called “criminogenic needs”, “stable dynamic risk
factors” or “causal psychological risk factors”. A meta-analysis studied topics related to sexual
offense (child molester, exhibitionism, exhibitionist…). Offenders from studies were the
subjects, and they were coded in the categories of 1. Sexual deviancy, 2. Antisocial orientation,
3. Sexual attitudes, 4. Intimacy deficits, 5. Adverse childhood environment, 6. General
psychological problems and 7. Clinical presentation. On average, the observed sexual recidivism
rate was 13.7%, the violent nonsexual recidivism rate was 14.3%, the violent recidivism rate
(including sexual and nonsexual violence) was 14.3% and the general (any) recidivism rate was
36.2%. strongest predictors of sexual recidivism were those related to sexual deviancy (d. .30)
, and antisocial orientation. General problems with self-regulation were the biggest predictor of
recidivism.
sexual offenders are more likely than other groups to respond to stress through sexual acts and
fantasies. Moffitt’s (1993) distinction between adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent
delinquents (behaviour problems in childhood, engage in interpersonal violence, many sexual
partners). In therapy, the lack of relationship (low victim empathy, low motivation for treatment)
may be linked to the difficulty of assessing sincere remorse in criminal justice settings. On
average, sexual offenders who attend treatment are less likely to recidivate than are comparison
groups.
- Lecture 2.1: Forensics and Psychological Assessment
Tarassof v. regents-> intentions to harm and murder after rejection romantically, resulting in
success. Risk assessment has gained social (recidivism), political (decision of release), practical
(clinical insight) and ethical (methods) importance.
Risk assessment aims->
❏ Gain insight into different types of offenders
❏ Prevent recidivism
❏ Provide guidelines for treatment
❏ Structure discussions among professionals
❏ Protect the rights of person and society
Risk assessment success is highly dependent on the situation (no 100% guarantee). Quality of
assessment depends on the information provided, instruments and the professional.
Risk assessment-> assessing the risk of future violent or non-violent behaviour. (will they do it
again). Aims to minimize false positives and negatives. It is important to know the base rate of
recidivism (10 year follow up shows 22% of recidivism in a study). The number is different for
different types of offences (heterogeneous groups). Assessment is done by studying risk factors.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller eutkuqvz. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.43. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
59063 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 15 years now