NCJ Number
185223
Journal
Law and Human Behavior Volume: 24 Issue: 5 Dated: October 2000 Pages: 595-605
Date Published
October 2000
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This analysis of risk assessment by forensic psychologists explains the problems involved in any uncritical acceptance of risk assessment and offers a preliminary list of relevant issues related to the assessment of the merits of risk assessment in their forensic practices.
Abstract
Forensic psychologists often receive requests to conduct evaluations of risk assessment. Risk assessment has considerable merits. However, recent applications to forensic psychology raise concerns about whether these evaluations are thorough and balanced. Forensic adult risk-assessment models emphasize risk factors and de-emphasize or disregard entirely the protective factors that form the other side of the equation. In addition, base-rate estimates may produce erroneous results if applied imprudently to forensic samples without regard to their unstable prevalence rates or the far-reaching effects of settings, referral questions, and evaluation procedures. Two basic questions to address when contemplating the use of risk assessment in forensic practice are whether the risk assessment is fair and balanced and whether it rests on relevant and well-established base rates. Thirteen issues to consider in relation to risk assessments involve their comprehensiveness, approaches to measurement, and the nature of the base-rate estimates. Table and 57 references (Author abstract modified)