Evaluating Risk Assessment Instruments for Intimate Partner Stalking and Intimate Partner Violence

Jacomina Gerbrandij, B. Rosenfeld, Alicia Nijdam-Jones, Michele M Galietta
{"title":"Evaluating Risk Assessment Instruments for Intimate Partner Stalking and Intimate Partner Violence","authors":"Jacomina Gerbrandij, B. Rosenfeld, Alicia Nijdam-Jones, Michele M Galietta","doi":"10.1037/tam0000101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research indicates that most stalking victims are harassed by a prior intimate partner and that this group of victims is at a higher risk for violence than other stalking victims. Furthermore, many researchers found a relationship between prior intimate partner stalking (IPS) and intimate partner violence (IPV). The present study focused on identification of overlapping and unique risk factors among IPS and IPV offenders. This was done by examining the accuracy and utility of abridged versions of the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) and the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM) in a sample of 158 low-risk offenders charged with crimes targeting an intimate partner. Follow-up ranged from one to 8.5 years; outcome variables were renewed (or continued) stalking and violent reoffending. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves indicated that both instruments had weak, nonsignificant predictive validity for both violent or stalking reoffending when considered in isolation. However, each instrument added significantly to the logistic regression model when predicting stalking recidivism when entered after the PCL:SV and relevant covariates, but neither improved predictive accuracy when added after the other was already in the model. Neither instrument added to logistic regression models predicting violent reoffending. Analysis of individual items revealed that items measuring distress and violations of supervision (SAM) and violations of court orders (B-SAFER) were the most consistent predictors of renewed stalking but not violence. The findings of this study question the utility of these tools for predicting violent reoffending but provide qualified support for the prediction of stalking.","PeriodicalId":217565,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Threat Assessment and Management","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Threat Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Research indicates that most stalking victims are harassed by a prior intimate partner and that this group of victims is at a higher risk for violence than other stalking victims. Furthermore, many researchers found a relationship between prior intimate partner stalking (IPS) and intimate partner violence (IPV). The present study focused on identification of overlapping and unique risk factors among IPS and IPV offenders. This was done by examining the accuracy and utility of abridged versions of the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) and the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM) in a sample of 158 low-risk offenders charged with crimes targeting an intimate partner. Follow-up ranged from one to 8.5 years; outcome variables were renewed (or continued) stalking and violent reoffending. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves indicated that both instruments had weak, nonsignificant predictive validity for both violent or stalking reoffending when considered in isolation. However, each instrument added significantly to the logistic regression model when predicting stalking recidivism when entered after the PCL:SV and relevant covariates, but neither improved predictive accuracy when added after the other was already in the model. Neither instrument added to logistic regression models predicting violent reoffending. Analysis of individual items revealed that items measuring distress and violations of supervision (SAM) and violations of court orders (B-SAFER) were the most consistent predictors of renewed stalking but not violence. The findings of this study question the utility of these tools for predicting violent reoffending but provide qualified support for the prediction of stalking.
研究表明,大多数跟踪受害者都受到过前任亲密伴侣的骚扰,这类受害者比其他跟踪受害者遭受暴力的风险更高。此外,许多研究者还发现了亲密伴侣跟踪行为与亲密伴侣暴力行为之间的关系。本研究的重点是识别IPS和IPV罪犯之间重叠和独特的危险因素。这是通过在158名被控以亲密伴侣为目标犯罪的低风险罪犯样本中检查《配偶攻击风险评估简表》(B-SAFER)和《跟踪评估和管理指南》(SAM)的删节版的准确性和实用性来完成的。随访时间为1至8.5年;结果变量是再次(或继续)跟踪和暴力再犯。受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线表明,当单独考虑暴力或跟踪再犯时,这两种工具的预测效度都很弱,不显著。然而,当PCL:SV和相关协变量加入后,这两种工具在预测跟踪累犯时显著增加了逻辑回归模型,但当另一种工具已经加入模型时,这两种工具都没有提高预测准确性。这两种工具都没有加入预测暴力再犯的逻辑回归模型。对个别项目的分析显示,衡量焦虑和违反监管(SAM)以及违反法院命令(B-SAFER)的项目是最一致的跟踪行为的预测因素,而不是暴力行为。这项研究的结果对这些工具在预测暴力再犯方面的效用提出了质疑,但为预测跟踪行为提供了合格的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信