Criminal Psychology
Chapter 6
From Dangerousness to Risk Assessment
Talbot
Kellogg Community College
Risk Assessment - Dangerousness

The process of conceptualizing various
hazards in order to make the judgments
about their likelihood and the need for
various preventative measures.
Three types of Predictions



Clinical Prediction – prediction based on
clinical experience.
Actuarial Prediction – prediction is based
on a statistical scheme or formula.
Anamnestic Prediction – prediction is
based upon how a particular person has
acted in the past.
Risk Assessment - Dangerousness


The process of conceptualizing various
hazards in order to make the judgments
about their likelihood and the need for
various preventative measures.
Dangerousness



What is it?
Dangerousness as a dichotomous variable.
Statistical measures and correlations.

Mental illness and violence.
Risk Assessment - Violence

Violence – Defined?


Force/ Energy
Types of violence




Sexual Offending?
Domestic Violence
Workplace Violence
School Violence
Risk Assessment - Violence


Continuum
Tools for Risk Assessment





Psychopathy Checklist Revised
Violence Risk Appraisal Guide
Rapid Risk Assessment of Sexual Recidivism
Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide
JACA Principle
Three types of predictors

Static Predictors – features of an individual
that are not changeable (e.g. alcohol abuse,
major mental disorders).

Dynamic Predictors – things that change
over time and situation (e.g. psychotic
symptoms, anger control, neg. emotions).

Risk Management Predictors – focus on
the nature of the situation or environment
in which the person lives or will live (e.g.
lack of supervision, lack of support, access to weapons).
Risk Assessment
Predict the Prediction

What is it? Elements of Prediction











Measurability – How measurable is the outcome?
Vantage – Are you in a position to view the indicators?
Context – Is the context of the situation clear to you?
Imminence – How soon is the event in question?
Experience – Do you have specific experience with the topic?
Comparable Events – Are there any on which to base the
judgment?
Objectivity – Can you consider either outcome?
Investment – To what degree are you vested in the outcome?
Replicability – Can you pre-test the situation?
Knowledge – Do you have accurate information about the issue?
PINs (Pre-Incident Indicators) – Do you have access to any
reliable PINS?
Why do it?

Makes a prediction of an individual’s future
acts. Consistent with psychology’s role in
a variety of settings and self proclaimed
goals.
How do we do it?

JACA



Justification
Alternatives/ Options
Consequences
Good
 Bad


Access
Justification - 1st hurdle


Does the individual have subjective
justification? Or have they justified a
reason that they should do the aggressive
act?
“I warned her what would happen and she
did it anyway.”
Alternatives



Do they have options other than acting
out aggressively?
i.e. “I am calling my lawyer and will have
your job” vs. “No one can help now!”
The second is a much more threatening
response.
Consequences


Does the individual identify any rewards or
negative consequences to being
aggressive or violent?
Examples of concerning responses would
include “I can do jail time.” or “I might
get caught but it would feel good!”
Access


Does the individual have access to
carrying out the threat?
We typically assume access is present.
Just because we don’t think they will
actually build a nuclear bomb, they might
Google search and find they have
everything for a pipe bomb.
Threat Level Determination





0 elements present – no threat
1 element present – mild threat
2 elements present – moderate threat
3 elements present – severe threat
4 elements present – profound or
imminent threat.
Risk Assessment Guidance Paper
& Scoring Rubric

For this assignment the student will review the threatening letter/ case study provided in course information. The
student will then prepare a written assessment of the level of risk or threat present (mild, moderate, severe, or
profound). A variety of threat assessment tools are available, however the one to be used for this assignment is
the JACA principle developed by Gavin DeBecker. A full explanation can be found in his book, The Gift of Fear and
is summarized in the PP presentation located in BB under course information.
This assignment should be written as a letter to the administration of the company for which Laura works (ESL
Electronics), and who we are assuming, provided you with this letter and the question, “Should we be worried?”.
Laura is an employee who was given the provided letter from Rick, another employee.
Your response should:
identify and explain the tool (with proper citations) which was employed,
summarize the case study or letter reviewed,
describe the JACA principle (in understandable and general terms)
identify how various parts of the letter fit or do not fit the JACA principles and specifically which ones,
and determine the current level of threat present (in your opinion). Back this determination up with information
from the letter/ case study and risk assessment used.
A description of “Risk Assessment” and it benefits and limitations should also be included.
2 – 4 pages

Scoring Rubric












Appropriate choice and use of Assessment Tool – 25 pts
Appropriate Discussion/ Description of the Assessment Tool – 25 pts
Description of Risk Assessment (benefits & limitations) – 25 pts
Clear and concise reporting of final assessed risk – 25 pts
Case Study
Intuition


What if you don’t have the information to
perform a standardized risk assessment?
Fear standard – Intuition



DeBecker recommends one “follow their gut
feeling when other information is not
available.” Gift of Fear
Why is it not used?
Why and when might it be encouraged?