MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1002/bsl.2364

Медицинская библиотека · Behavioral sciences & the law · 2018

Predicting physically violent misconduct in prison: A comparison of four risk assessment instruments.

Abbiati Milena, Palix Julie, Gasser Jacques, Moulin Valérie

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Violence in correctional facilities is an important issue for both prisoners and prison staff. Risk assessment instruments have demonstrated their accuracy in predicting the risk of (re) offending and institutional violence in psychiatric settings, but less is known about their ability to predict violent misconduct in prison. The present study applied four risk assessment instruments (Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk, Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, Psychopathy checklist - Revised, and Violent Risk Appraisal Guide) to 52 violent offenders in a Swiss prison in order to evaluate the instruments' predictive validities. Outcomes were instances of physically violent, other and any misconduct as recorded in prison files during the 12 months following the prisoners' assessments. Approximately 15% of offenders committed physically violent misconduct and approximately 42% committed any misconduct. The results show that mainly dynamic assessment tools are as good predictors of physically violent misconduct as mainly static assessment tools. Targeting dynamic factors could increase the effectiveness of interventions to reduce the risk of physical violence in prison.

Для цитирования: Abbiati Milena, Palix Julie, Gasser Jacques, Moulin Valérie. Predicting physically violent misconduct in prison: A comparison of four risk assessment instruments.. Behavioral sciences & the law. 2018. DOI: 10.1002/bsl.2364.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.