Does Risk Formulation Help Independent Review Board Decisions on Release of Prisoners? A Qualitative Study With Parole Board Members in England and Wales.
Mary McMurran, Libby Payne, Alys Harrop, Nicola Bowes
{"title":"Does Risk Formulation Help Independent Review Board Decisions on Release of Prisoners? A Qualitative Study With Parole Board Members in England and Wales.","authors":"Mary McMurran, Libby Payne, Alys Harrop, Nicola Bowes","doi":"10.1002/cbm.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Parole Board for England & Wales makes decisions on the release or continued detention of people in prison. Psychological risk assessments (PRAs) assist in decision making and it is crucial that they are of good quality, including coherent and useful case formulations.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine Parole Board members' views on the accessibility, quality and usefulness of case formulations in PRAs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Interviews were conducted with 8 psychologist/psychiatrist members and 11 independent/judicial members.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Respondents valued formulations in identifying idiosyncratic risk factors and linking these to risk management strategies. Nevertheless, they identified challenges to their validity, with concerns about facts versus hypotheses. Particular problems were seen in the assessment of those denying their offending and in collaborative case formulation. Integrating information and hypothesising under what conditions a risk factor might be activated was seen as important. Ignoring ethnic and cultural factors was seen as commonplace.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The opinions of Parole Board users of PRAs provide information that could be used to improve the validity and usefulness of risk formulations, including adding to existing practice guidelines. A broader study of users' perceptions of PRAs as a whole, not just formulations, would be useful and research on impacts is desirable.</p>","PeriodicalId":47362,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.70001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The Parole Board for England & Wales makes decisions on the release or continued detention of people in prison. Psychological risk assessments (PRAs) assist in decision making and it is crucial that they are of good quality, including coherent and useful case formulations.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to examine Parole Board members' views on the accessibility, quality and usefulness of case formulations in PRAs.
Method: Interviews were conducted with 8 psychologist/psychiatrist members and 11 independent/judicial members.
Results: Respondents valued formulations in identifying idiosyncratic risk factors and linking these to risk management strategies. Nevertheless, they identified challenges to their validity, with concerns about facts versus hypotheses. Particular problems were seen in the assessment of those denying their offending and in collaborative case formulation. Integrating information and hypothesising under what conditions a risk factor might be activated was seen as important. Ignoring ethnic and cultural factors was seen as commonplace.
Conclusion: The opinions of Parole Board users of PRAs provide information that could be used to improve the validity and usefulness of risk formulations, including adding to existing practice guidelines. A broader study of users' perceptions of PRAs as a whole, not just formulations, would be useful and research on impacts is desirable.
期刊介绍：
Criminal Behaviour & Mental Health – CBMH – aims to publish original material on any aspect of the relationship between mental state and criminal behaviour. Thus, we are interested in mental mechanisms associated with offending, regardless of whether the individual concerned has a mental disorder or not. We are interested in factors that influence such relationships, and particularly welcome studies about pathways into and out of crime. These will include studies of normal and abnormal development, of mental disorder and how that may lead to offending for a subgroup of sufferers, together with information about factors which mediate such a relationship.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
