100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Risk Assessment - Summary, Tilburg University R106,96   Add to cart

Summary

Risk Assessment - Summary, Tilburg University

 18 views  1 purchase
  • Course
  • Institution

A summary of the course Risk Assessment. The summary consists of the lectures given and the papers. If you have any questions, you can message me :)

Preview 4 out of 61  pages

  • June 10, 2024
  • 61
  • 2023/2024
  • Summary
avatar-seller
Lecture 1
Definition
 Probability calculation that a harmful behavior or event will occur, and involves an
assessment about the frequency of the behavior (or event), its likely impact and who it will
affect
 The attempt to predict the likelihood of future offending in order to identify individuals in
need of intervention
 Risk assessment is also
o Risk management: interventions to manage the risk or to reduce risk
 Why?




History
 1876 – Lombroso
o Criminals have certain characteristics
 Large protruding jaws
 Deeper eyes
 Low forehead
 Large chin
 High cheekbones
 Hawklike nose
 1928 – Burgess: first risk assessment tool
o Developed tools to determine the risk of re-offense of offenders being released from
the Illinois prison system
o Actuarial in nature
o Marital status, criminal and employment history and institutional misconduct
o Based on analyses of data for 3000 individuals paroled in Chicago
o 76% high risk status recidivated within 5 years
 1950 – no problem
 1960 – Baxstrom
o 967 dangerous psychiatric patients transferred to regular psychiatric hospitals
o 121 patients subsequently released into society
o Followed-up Steadman & Cocozza (1978)
o After 4 years of follow-up
 2,7% sent back to forensic psychiatric hospital
 Patients in society
 17% arrested
 7% convicted
 1970 – doubt

, o The state of the art regarding predictions of violence is very unsatisfactory. The ability
of psychiatrists or any other professionals to reliably predict future violence is
unproved
o Psychiatry and the presumption of expertise: flipping coins in the courtroom
 Expertise of the expert
 2 groups of subjects
o Teachers
o Experienced forensic psychiatrists
 Questions regarding recidivism based on file information
 Results
o IRR teachers low
o But better than IRR psychiatrists
o Averagely large similarity between psychiatrists and teachers
o The more information available, the more conservative in
judgment
 1980 – Monahan
o Psychiatrists and psychologists are accurate in no more than 1 out of 3 predictions of
violent behavior
 1990 – research RNR model
o Martien Philipse
o Dutch TBS system enjoyed great respect in the world at that time
 Praised for their innovative approach to forensic patients
 Research: how the Dutch behavioral experts from the forensic field made
their risk assessments in practice
 None of the predictors suggested by the clinicians were predictive
 There were also no link at all between the clinical assessment of relapse risk
and actual recidivism
 2000 – integration in to practice

Risk, need and responsivity model – Andrews & Bonta
 Evidence based practice: interventions should be based on results from scientific research
into the effectiveness of those interventions
 Risk principle = offenders with a higher risk of recidivism benefit most from more intensive
treatment
o Who to treat?
 Match the treatment intensity with the client’s risk of recidivism
o The risk of recidivism is central; not the disorder
o Misalignment of treatment intensity may increase the risk of recidivism
o When you apply the same treatment for high and low risk groups, the treatment
effect is greater in high risk groups
 Need principle = only those factors associated with reduction of recidivism should be
addressed during treatment
o What to treat?
 Focus on the treatment on the criminogenic needs that are actually related
to criminal behavior and therefore require attention
 Each individual has his own combination of factors that led to the crime
 These criminogenic needs are the dynamic risk factors related to the crime
 Dynamic risk factors are modifiable by treatment interventions, so focus of
treatment is on these high dynamic risks
o Why?

,  Adequate treatment of criminogenic needs is associated with a 19%
reduction in recidivism; targeting an intervention to non-criminogenic needs
is associated with a slight increase of 1%
 Responsivity principle = interventions should be tailored to the offender’s characteristics,
such as motivational level, personal circumstances and learning style
o How to treat?
 Match the treatment and the type of interventions to the client’s learning
style and learning abilities
o External responsivity = type of treatment, characteristics of the therapist, availability
of adequate interventions, possibilities offered by the treatment environment
(stability, quality of life, mobility)
o Internal responsivity = take into account the individual characteristics of a client:
intellect, personality, disorder, treatment motivation, learning style
o Responsive treatment is associated with a 23% reduction in recidivism

Criminogenic needs – central 8
 Divided by big four and moderate four
 History of antisocial behavior
o Risk: early and ongoing involvement in a number and variety of antisocial acts in a
variety of settings
o Dynamic need: work on non-criminal alternative behaviors in high-risk situations
 Antisocial personality pattern
o Risk: thrill seeking, low self-control, restless, aggressive
o Dynamic need: work on problem-solving skills, self-management skills, anger
management and coping skills
 Antisocial cognitions
o Risk: attitudes, values, beliefs and rationalization that support criminal behavior;
cognitive-emotional conditions of anger, resentment and pride; criminal vs anti-
criminal identity
o Dynamic need: reduce antisocial cognitions, recognize risky ways of thinking and
feeling, develop alternative and less risky ways of thinking and feeling, adopt a
renewed and/or anti-criminal identity
 Antisocial peers
o Risk: close contacts with criminal others and relative social isolation with non-
criminal others; direct social support for crime
o Dynamic need: reduce contacts with criminal others, build contacts/links with non-
criminal others
 Family/marital relationships
o Risk: two important elements are: education and/or care, and control and/or
supervision
o Dynamic need: reduce conflict, build positive relationships, improve control and
oversight
 School and/or job
o Risk: low levels of achievement and satisfaction at school and/or work
o Dynamic need: improve performance, rewards and satisfaction
 Prosocial recreational activities
o Risk: low levels of engagement and satisfaction in non-criminal leisure activities
o Dynamic need: improve engagement, rewards and satisfaction
 Substance abuse
o Risk: abuse of alcohol and/or drugs

, o Dynamic need: reduce drug abuse, reduce personal and interpersonal support for
addictive behavior, develop alternatives to drug abuse

Non-criminogenic needs
 Less research done and insufficiently proven
 Relevant non-criminogenic needs for general offending behavior are
o Self-esteem
o Emotional problems
o Psychiatric disorder
o Health
 These dynamic factors are not directly related to recidivism reduction but can indirectly
contribute to reducing dynamic risk
 Other (non-?)criminogenic needs that according to Serin et al. (2013) appear to be directly
related to recidivism reduction
o Decrease in negative emotions
o Successful treatment process from the client himself

Lecture 2
Predictive validity




 Sensitivity = proportion of recidivists
previously assessed as high risk
o Retrospective measure
 Specificity = proportion of non-recidivists
previously assessed as low risk
o Retrospective measure
 Area under the curve (AUC)
o Receiver operating
characteristics (ROC)-analysis
o Used to classify future recidivists
vs non recidivists
o AUC = 1,00 = perfect
discrimination = perfect prediction
o Interpretation (Rice & Harris)
 .56 - .64 = small
 .64 – 71 = moderate
 .71 > = strong
o 2 types of information needed
 Risk scores
 A dichotomous outcome
o Most commonly reported measure in the literature
o Retrospective measure
o Chance that a random recidivist gets a higher score than a random non-recidivist
o An AUC value is therefore the trade-off between
 Sensitivity (true positive rate
 1 – specificity

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

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

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

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 this summary from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller sabinevandenbrom. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy this summary for R106,96. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

67474 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now

Start selling
R106,96  1x  sold
  • (0)
  Buy now