The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide: Reliability and validity in adult male offenders.

Kropp, P. Randall; Hart, Stephen D.

doi:10.1023/a:1005430904495

Cited by 339 publications

(302 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

263

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Determining that observed change is real and not attributable to chance fi uctuations (e.g., the use of extreme group designs resulting in regression toward the rnean effects) or unreliability of rneasurernent caused by rater drift and poor inter-rater reliability is more troublesome. Researcherç must also ensure that pre-mature risk factors (Le., the factor in question changes for the worse before the scheduled assessment is conducted), attrition, cohort, maturation and history effects do not confound the results (Campbell & Kenny, 1999;Collin & Hom, 1991;Humphreys & Drasgow, 1989;Kropp & Hart, 2000;Lazarus, 1990, Menard, 1991. The obstacles to multi-wave research are cornplex.…”

Section: Methodoloqical Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The dynamic prediction of criminal recidivism: A three-wave prospective study.

Brown

Amand

Zamble

2009

Law and Human Behavior

138

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A three-wave, prospective panel design was used to assess the extent to which static and dynamic risk factors could predict criminal recidivism in a sample of 136 adult male offenders released from Canadian federal prisons. Static measures were assessed only once, prior to release while dynamic measures were assessed on three separate occasions: pre-release, 1 month, and 3 months post-release. Recidivism was coded during an average of 10.2-month follow-up period (SD = 19.2). A series of Cox regression survival analyses with time-dependent covariates and Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analyses were conducted to assess predictive validity. Although the combined static and time-dependent dynamic model (AUC = .89, CI = .81–.93) significantly (p < .01) outperformed the pure static model (AUC = .81, CI = .73– .87) the confidence intervals did overlap to some extent. Implications for dynamic risk assessment and management are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodoloqical Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However the SARA does represent a marked improvement over rnethods that are purely clinical in nature (see Kropp & Hart, 2000).…”

Section: Clinical Versus Mechanical Prediction: Dichotomy or Continuum?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The dynamic prediction of criminal recidivism: A three-wave prospective study.

Brown

Amand

Zamble

2009

Law and Human Behavior

138

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SARA was developed and validated by Kropp and Hart (2000). It is designed to assist professionals formulate appropriate case management strategies for domestic violence offenders and thus was used as a secondary assessment instrument in this project.…”

Section: Measurement: the Saramentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As described above, the SARA is essentially the only risk assessment instrument for repeat offending that has been validated (Kropp & Hart, 2000); therefore, it is used in the present analysis. Concurrent validation involves comparing SARA scoring of male perpetrators with DVSI scoring of the same perpetrators to determine the level of agreement between the two measures.…”

Section: Concurrent and Discriminant Validity Of The Dvsimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, rather than relying on strictly "objective" quantitative data, "subjective" clinically based observations have been incorporated into some of the most widely recognized actuarial assessment instruments (Swets et al, 2000), such as the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1993) or the iterative classification tree models developed in the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence (Monahan et al, 2001). One of the risk assessment instruments analyzed in the present study, the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide (Kropp & Hart, 2000), also blends quantitative and clinically based data. Further, rather than determining clinical decisions through a mechanical, formulaic application of probabilistic estimates of risk generated by actuarial assessments, such estimates are often merely one additional piece of information used to guide clinical decision making.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the Risk of Domestic Violence Reoffending: A Validation Study.

Williams

Houghton²

2004

Law and Human Behavior

118

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical Forensic Psychology

Douglas

Otto

Borum

2003

Handbook of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical forensic psychology can be defined as assessment, treatment, or consultation that revolves around clinical issues occurring in legal contexts. This chapter discusses methodological challenges and approaches that arise in three primary areas of clinical forensic psychology—descriptive forensic assessment (e.g., psycholegal capacities), predictive assessment (e.g., violence risk assessment), and evaluation of legally relevant constructs (e.g., psychopathic personality and malingering). Forensic assessment research is challenged by varying legal definitions, lack of gold standards for validation, insensitive predictor and outcome measures, dichotomous legal outcomes versus continuous psychological outcomes, low and varying outcome base rates, ethical constraints placed upon researchers by legal realities, and studying constructs defined partially by deceitfulness. Research of descriptive questions include literature surveys, polling experts, theory‐based development, and evaluating agreement between test classification and clinicians' assessments. Although postdictive and pseudoprospective designs are common in predictive research, they have shortcomings best overcome through use of prospective designs that include multiple measures and sources of data. Repeated‐measures prospective designs, case‐crossover designs, and naturally occurring field experiments offer novel opportunities to study predictive questions. Research on psycholegal constructs commonly relies on factor analytic and prototypical approaches to explicating psycholegal constructs. Simulation and analogue studies are often used to study constructs such as malingering.

show abstract

The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide: Reliability and validity in adult male offenders.

Abstract: We evaluated the reliability and validity of judgments concerning risk for violence

Cited by 339 publications

References 18 publications

The dynamic prediction of criminal recidivism: A three-wave prospective study.

The dynamic prediction of criminal recidivism: A three-wave prospective study.

Assessing the Risk of Domestic Violence Reoffending: A Validation Study.

Clinical Forensic Psychology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About