The development and validation of the guidelines for stalking assessment and management

Kropp, P. Randall; Hart, Stephen D.; Lyon, David; Storey, Jennifer E.

doi:10.1002/bsl.978

Cited by 57 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Arguably, such background variables should inform the (combination of) interview methods used in a particular case. For instance, communication with stalkers should perhaps focus on restraining the perpetrators' behaviors (Kropp, Hart, Lyon, & Storey, 2011), whereas business-like conflicts are better solved by a rational discussion on the content of the conflict (Giebels & Taylor, 2010). Moreover, building trust may be critical in communication with persons with personality disorders (Bender, 2005), whereas repairing loss of INTERVIEWING TO MANAGE THREATS 21 face may be particularly important when interviewing persons from collectivistic cultures (Giebels & Taylor, 2012).…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interviewing to manage threats: Exploring the effects of interview style on information gain and threateners’ counter-interview strategies.

Geurts¹,

Ask²,

Granhag

et al. 2018

Journal of Threat Assessment and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is consensus about the importance to engage with, and if possible interview, individuals who threaten to cause harm. However, there exist little research on how to conduct such interviews. This paper contributes with an experimental approach on threat management interviewing. We explored what types of counter-interview strategies threateners employ, and we tested the efficacy of two common interview styles (direct interviewing vs. rapport-based interviewing). Participants (N = 120) were interviewed about a non-violent threat they had made (to press charges against their former employer) and reported what strategies they had used during the interview. No differences were found between the interview protocols for threat management outcomes (i.e., information gain, use of counter-interview strategies, and willingness to discuss or enact the threat). However, the study showed how threateners struck a deliberate balance between proving their stand and disguising implementation details. Critically, individuals with more serious intentions to enact the threat were more inclined to hide information from the interviewer. We argue that it is vital for threat management interviewers to i) understand what behaviors can be expected from the interviewee, and ii) learn about interview methods that can steer these behaviors towards information gain (which is beneficial to threat assessment) and towards de-escalation (which is the purpose of threat management). Public Significance Statement:This experimental study suggests that people who make or pose a threat behave semi-cooperative in threat assessment interviews: They provide information to explain or proof their case, but they conceal information on how they may implement the threat.The interview style (direct questioning vs. rapport-based questioning) had no effect on the amount of information they provided or on the number of counter-interview strategies they used.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interviewing to manage threats: Exploring the effects of interview style on information gain and threateners’ counter-interview strategies.

Geurts¹,

Ask²,

Granhag

et al. 2018

Journal of Threat Assessment and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Health care organizations are also responsible for maintaining appropriate legal and law enforcement contacts in order to facilitate this consultation as appropriate. Within this network, it is recommended that the system obtain the participation of a local clinical expert in behavioral threat assessment who has experience and training in the use of structured professional judgment measures, such as the Historical, Clinical, Risk Management-20 (HCR-20;Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997) or stalkingspecific violence risk assessment tools such as the guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM; Kropp, Hart, Lyon, & Storey, 2011), and the Stalking Risk Profile (SRP;MacKenzie et al, 2009). This would ensure valuable expertise in the immediate intervention and on-going management of stalking cases.…”

Section: Systemic Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stalking of the mental health professional: Reducing risk and managing stalking behavior by patients.

Carr

Goranson

Drummond

2014

Journal of Threat Assessment and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stalking is a prevalent issue that is often underreported and underdiscussed both in the general population and in clinical settings. Among mental health professionals, 6%-11% of providers will be stalked by a patient during their career. Stalking has a considerable negative impact on both the personal and professional lives of these individuals that is compounded by systemic and individual factors. Many health care organizations lack well-defined procedures on how to manage stalking, and mental health professionals have been found to have minimal training in how to address stalking behavior. Ethical guidelines across multiple health care disciplines emphasize avoiding harm and maintaining patient confidentiality. Although state licensing boards allow exceptions to confidentiality as mandated or permitted by law, these state laws may offer little protection to the mental health professional being stalked by his or her patient. Failing to address stalking behaviors could be detrimental to both current and future providers as well as preventing the stalker from receiving modification of problematic behavior. General models of stalking management have been offered in the past, but few address the specific challenges associated with the stalking of mental health professionals by their patients. The authors present 2 vignettes to demonstrate the common management challenges of these cases. The authors propose a dual pathway, 3-tiered model of stalking management that adopts a public health approach to guide interventions both on the individual provider and systemic level. Limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

“…Kropp, Hart, and Lyon were the leaders of the first major research group to develop a stalking risk management guide which they entitled Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM) . Developed for mental health clinicians as well as for criminal justice workers, the preliminary research with the SAM indicates that it has good validity when compared to known measures of violence propensity including the Psychopathy Checklist Screening Version (PCL:SV) and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) . Key domains considered by the SAM include the following: (i) nature of the stalking behavior; (ii) perpetrator risk factors; and (iii) victim vulnerability factors.…”

Section: The Stalking Situation: Violence and Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification Systems for Stalking Behavior

Racine

Billick

2013

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stalking is a complex behavioral phenomenon that is unique in that it necessarily involves a prolonged dyadic relationship between both a perpetrator and a victim. Since criminalization of stalking behavior in the 1990s, different conceptual typologies have attempted to classify this behavior to assess risk and aid in management decisions. The authors reviewed the current literature regarding the most recent and accepted stalking classification systems. The three predominant stalker typologies currently in use include Zona's stalker-victim types, Mullen's stalker typology, and the RECON stalker typology. Of these, the RECON classification system alone was developed in an attempt to separate stalkers into groups based on previously known risk factors for behaviorally based phenomenon such as propensity for violence. Understanding and simplifying these classification systems may enhance the potential that new research will lead to evidence-based management and treatment strategies in the stalking situation.

show abstract

The development and validation of the guidelines for stalking assessment and management

Cited by 57 publications

References 28 publications

Interviewing to manage threats: Exploring the effects of interview style on information gain and threateners’ counter-interview strategies.

Interviewing to manage threats: Exploring the effects of interview style on information gain and threateners’ counter-interview strategies.

Stalking of the mental health professional: Reducing risk and managing stalking behavior by patients.

Classification Systems for Stalking Behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About