Violence risk assessment (VRA) is an essential forensic focus, driven by courts and workplaces tasked with identifying individuals who may pose a risk of harm to others, in the hope that identification and intervention will decrease the number of violent acts. Structured professional judgment (SPJ) VRA tools have improved the predictive validity of violence risk assessments in correctional and mental health populations. These tools are designed by selecting and categorizing risk factors that reflect the biological, psychological, sociological, contextual, and environmental (BPSCE) theory of human violence. However, although SPJ based VRA tools are used in everyday workplaces to make important risk and employment decisions, no tool has been tested for inter-rater reliability and predictive validity in these environments. Therefore, this quantitative postdictive study tested the extent of these properties to close a gap in the existing empirical literature related to SPJ VRA tools, while also providing insight into the degree of influence the environmental element of the BPSCE theory may have. Using the HCR-20v3, the latest version of the most utilized SPJ VRA tool in the world, a sample of 40 known outcome (violent and non-violent) case summaries, representing a range of untested workplace environments, were evaluated by coders blind to outcome. The results were statistically significant for both inter-rater reliability (ICC = .72, 95% CI: .58-.83, p < .001.) and predictive validity (AUC = .70, 95% CI: .61-.80, p < .001.), and demonstrated a good level of reliability and a moderate level of predictive validity, similar to levels of these measures found for the HCR-20v3 with other samples from more restrictive environments. These findings suggest that the environmental element of the BPSCE theory of human violence is not as influential as other elements of this theory, as operationalized in this SPJ VRA tool, while also providing new empirical evidence that the HCR-20v3 can be used ethically in standard workplace environments. It is recommended that further research replicating these results with larger samples and comparison of these findings with those from previously untested SPJ VRA tools that have been especially designed for use in common workplaces would be beneficial.
|School Location:||United States -- Arizona|
|Source:||DAI-B 77/08(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Social psychology, Organizational behavior|
|Keywords:||Hcr-20v3, Structured professional judgment, Threat management, Violence risk assessment, Workplace violence|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be