Search

There has been an increasing interest in cross-cultural risk assessment over the past 5 years. Much of this has been driven by concerns that particular risk instruments may be biased against, or ill-suited to, non-White offending populations. A growing body of work has asserted that unique cultural-specific risk factors and experiences may not be adequately considered within current risk assessment frameworks which have led to calls to culturally alter/remodel risk instruments. While recognising the importance of generalizable risk instruments, this article outlines a number of realities that cross-cultural risk assessment researchers must contend with before embarking on projects to alter instruments. With specific regard to structured professional judgement risk instruments, the article notes that efforts to culturally amend instruments, could paradoxically reduce accuracy and increase bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advanced approaches to predicting offending are increasingly transpiring without the forensic psychology discipline's involvement – an area that it has piloted and influenced for many decades. Computer science experts have built an impressive decade-long literature base on risk assessment – a technical literature that is not only progressing at a fast pace, but appears to function independently, for the most part, from the forensic risk assessment literature. This paper outlines the potential utility of machine learning approaches and the broader 'algorithmic culture', for forensic risk assessment, and the implications their use (and non-use) may have for the discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Violence risk instruments are widely employed with at-risk minority clients in correctional and forensic mental health settings. However, the construction and subsequent validation of such instruments rarely, if at all, incorporate the perceptions, worldviews, life experiences, and belief systems of non-white communities. This study utilized a culturally informed qualitative approach to address the cross-cultural disparities in the forensic risk literature. Cultural perspectives on violence risk assessment were elicited from a sample of 30 American Indian and First Nations professionals from health, legal, and pedagogical sectors following an inspection of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth instrument. Generally, participants believed that the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth instrument was not culturally appropriate for use with American Indian and First Nations youth in its current form. Recurrent themes of concern included the instrument's negative labeling capacity, lack of cultural contextualization, individualized focus, and absence of cultural norms and practices. Recommendations to improve the cross-cultural applicability of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth are discussed within. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is emerging recognition that positive or pro-social characteristics may lessen criminal propensity. There are now several adult and youth forensic instruments that include protective or strength components. Yet evidence supporting the protective capacities of these instruments with youth offending populations is still developing. This study aimed to identity the prevalence of strength items on the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory tool, and their relationships with risk and re-offending for a cohort of 212 multi-cultural Australian juveniles in custody. The prevalence of strengths in the sample was low, and differed by cultural group. Young people who possessed a strength yielded lower instrument total and domain scores and were more likely to be afforded a lower level of risk compared to youth without a strength. Moreover, youth who possessed a strength were significantly more likely to desist from re-offending. This association remained after controlling for level of risk. Findings point to the importance of strengths when assessing a young person’s risk for re-offending. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 (HCR-20) is utilised internationally to assess an individual's risk for violence. Despite being widely administered in Australian correctional and forensic populations, the predictive validity of the HCR-20 instrument has never been explored in Australian settings. This retrospective study investigated the predictive validity of the HCR-20 for an Australian cohort of 136 forensic psychiatric patients. Findings support the relationship between the HCR-20 and violent offending post hospital discharge. The HCR-20 Total, Historical, and Risk Management scales shared moderate to large positive correlations with several reconviction categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Violence risk assessment tools are used around the world with people who have committed crimes to determine the risk factors that may have contributed to their offending. These tools can carry great consequences for people's liberty. Violence risk assessment tools are also used with Indigenous people who are overrepresented in the Canadian justice system. A major issue with these risk assessment tools is that they do not use a colonial lens to understand the underlying mechanisms of violence. Using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) as an example, we examined how colonialism underlies risk and protective ratings. Colonialism increases the probability that Indigenous youth will be rated higher on some risk factors on the SAVRY. Novel interventions to reduce Indigenous overrepresentation include addressing the colonial factors behind violence risk and protective factors. Given that colonialism underlies scores on risk assessment tools, service providers need to link risk ratings to colonialism in their service formulations, carefully attend to culturally relevant factors, and provide interventions and support that specifically address colonialism. Suggestions for future research that include Indigenous community involvement are also provided. A short case analysis, cultural formulation and treatment suggestions are provided as an illustration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forensic mental health practitioners are frequently asked to estimate the risk of future violence. Legal decisions concerning the sentencing, management and disposition of offenders often rely on the advice of such testimony. The burgeoning use of violence risk instruments in these settings undoubtedly injects a level of scientific rigour into forensic evaluations for courts and tribunals. Yet scrutiny of the inherent limitations of both risk instruments and the inferences and formulations drawn from them are often veiled by the discipline's endorsement for such approaches. Misconceptions about the validity and dependability of present-day risk assessments and expert infallibility persist. The furtive influences that shape both the (mis)interpretation and miscommunication of risk instruments in legal settings necessitate discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article outlines the current utility of Indigenous culturally specific risk factors for violence and the ramifications for cross-cultural risk prediction. The Indigenous culturally specific violence risk factor literature has provided a rich body of contextual information outlining Indigenous patterns of criminal behaviour. This information has the capacity to facilitate offender responsivity and treatment targets in addition to assisting clinicians identify the presence of risk markers among Indigenous clients. However, if intended for inclusion in risk prediction models, culturally specific risk items then require further quantitative analysis to establish robust associations and probability estimates for recidivistic outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few studies have explored the cross-cultural utility of youth violence risk instruments. Moreover both the discrimination and calibration performance indicators of such instruments are rarely investigated. This study aimed to address both gaps in the literature by exploring the predictive validity of the YLS/CMI instrument for an Australian multi-ethnic cohort of young offenders in custody. The YLS/CMI total score was able to discriminate between re-offenders and non-reoffenders for the overall sample; however, a breakdown across ethnicity showed only strong effects for Australian English Speaking Background youth. Despite an inability to distinguish re-offenders from non-reoffenders for both Culturally and Linguistically Diverse and Indigenous youth, the instrument was able to accurately predict recidivism for high-risk youth for all ethnic groups. Findings highlight the importance of adopting both calibration and discrimination indicators when assessing predictive validity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Validation literature on the predictive ability of North American youth violence risk assessment inventories is developing across international settings. Yet no information exists on the utility of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV),]and little research has been conducted on the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) across Australian young offender populations. The current study investigated the validity of the risk instruments on 213 young people in detention in Victoria, Australia. Findings indicated moderate to strong predictive accuracy for re-offence outcomes across the three inventories for the total sample and for males. The SAVRY was also able to identify the strength of protective factors for young female offenders. The inventories appear to be suitable prediction aides in the Australian youth justice context although further research is required to ascertain their applicability to Australian young female offenders. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: Violence risk assessment assumes a critical medico-legal role addressing offender/patient needs and informing forensic mental health decision making. Yet questions remain over the cross-cultural applicability of such measures. In their current form, violence risk instruments may not reflect the unique life and cultural experiences of Indigenous Australians rendering them culturally unsafe.Conclusions: To realize equitable forensic assessment, it is necessary to ascertain whether there are cultural differences across risk factors for violence and that risk instruments are validated as culturally appropriate. Greater cross-cultural rigour in forensic mental health risk assessment, research and practice is proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In light of the growing number of youth violence instruments at a clinician’s disposal, this study sought to investigate the interchangeability of two widely validated adolescent violence risk instruments. The concurrent and incremental validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) were evaluated in a young Australian custodial population. A significant degree of dimensional construct overlap between instruments was discovered. Both measures were similarly found to be moderately predictive of general and violent recidivism. Findings indicate that the instruments are potentially substitutable when used to evaluate future violence in these settings. Clinical implications for risk assessment practice are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risk assessment instruments are used to estimate risk of recidivism and aid in decision-making and treatment planning. However, many of these instruments, including the Level of Service/Risk, Need, Responsivity (LS/RNR), are validated on predominantly Western populations, and research has questioned whether the factors included in the LS/RNR adequately capture the experiences and needs of non-Western communities, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. The current study aimed to canvas the opinions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community justice workers as to the suitability of the LS/RNR for use with this population. A general qualitative methodology was adopted to gain in-depth information through the facilitation of a focus group, and data were analysed thematically. Whilst participants agreed that the LS/RNR risk factors are relevant to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander offenders, they reported that the instrument did not adequately capture relevant culturally specific considerations and made suggestions to improve the LS/RNR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of statistical learning methods has recently increased within the risk assessment literature. They have primarily been used to increase accuracy and the area under the curve (AUC, i.e., discrimination). Processing approaches applied to statistical learning methods have also emerged to increase cross-cultural fairness. However, these approaches are rarely trialed in the forensic psychology discipline nor have they been trialed as an approach to increase fairness in Australia. The study included 380 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander males assessed with the Level of Service/Risk Needs Responsivity (LS/RNR). Discrimination was assessed through the AUC, and fairness was assessed through the cross area under the curve (xAUC), error rate balance, calibration, predictive parity, and statistical parity. Logistic regression, penalized logistic regression, random forest, stochastic gradient boosting, and support vector machine algorithms using the LS/RNR risk factors were used to compare performance against the LS/RNR total risk score. The algorithms were then subjected to pre- and postprocessing approaches to see if fairness could be improved. Statistical learning methods were found to produce comparable or marginally improved AUC values. Processing approaches increased several fairness definitions (namely xAUC, error rate balance, and statistical parity) between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. The findings demonstrate that statistical learning methods may be a useful approach to increasing the discrimination and cross-cultural fairness of risk assessment instruments. However, both fairness and the use of statistical learning methods encompass significant trade-offs that need to be considered. Public Significance Statement: The purpose of this study is to investigate the use of algorithms in increasing fairness between cultural groups by utilizing a commonly used instrument that assesses the risk of reoffending. Although this preliminary study demonstrated positive findings in increasing cross-cultural fairness, various trade-offs emerged, including among different forms of fairness, that require thoughtful deliberation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risk assessment instruments are an important tool for assessing an offender's risk of recidivism. However, concerns have been raised regarding their applicability to different cultural groups, and it has been suggested that rater cultural bias may affect assessment. This study explored whether rater cultural bias impacted upon the scoring of the YLS/CMI-SRV and rater perceptions of offenders from diverse cultural backgrounds. Participants included a representative sample of postgraduate Australian Psychology students who were randomly assigned a vignette of a young offender from either a South Sudanese, Indigenous or Anglo-Australian background. No evidence of cultural bias was found in YLS/CMI-SRV scoring or rater perceptions of the offender. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Prior research has shown that Muslim individuals attribute cultural beliefs in explaining mental illness aetiology, which may impact help-seeking behaviours. However, little research has been conducted with Muslim-Australians, nor across different cultural groups within Muslim minority populations. This research explored relationships between ethnocultural identity, cultural attributions of mental illness, and treatment-seeking beliefs in a sample of 182 Muslim-Australians. Method: A multiple regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between ethnocultural identity and cultural belief use, as measured by the Cultural Beliefs about Mental Health Problems (CBMHP) scale. Analyses examined differences in endorsement of specific beliefs across ethnocultural groups.Results: Muslim-Australians from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds (Middle Eastern, European, Asian, and others) endorsed cultural beliefs more strongly than those from non-CALD, Anglo/Caucasian backgrounds. Both groups endorsed environmental and biological attributions for mental illness; however, supernatural explanations and both traditional/cultural treatments and Qur'anic recitation as effective psychological treatment methods were more strongly endorsed by CALD ethnocultural groups. Moreover, CALD Muslim-Australian respondents less strongly endorsed psychological counselling as effective. Findings also revealed differences in belief endorsement between ethnocultural groups. These findings provide insight into the intersection of culture with mental illness attributions and treatment-seeking behaviour. KEY POINTS Muslim-Australians appear to endorse biological and environmental explanations of mental illness to a similar extent, despite their ethnocultural identity; Muslim-Australians often employ cultural, religious, spiritual, and traditional attributions to explain mental illness aetiology; however, the extent to which Muslim-Australians use such attributions appears to differ depending on their ethnocultural background; Muslim-Australians from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds appear to more strongly adhere to cultural and religious-based explanations of mental illness (including supernatural phenomena) and more strongly endorse the effectiveness of traditional/religious treatment methods for mental ill-health than Muslim-Australians with non-CALD, Anglo-Caucasian ethnocultural backgrounds. Therefore, clinicians should be aware of such beliefs and should provide culturally appropriate and safe treatment interventions when working with Muslim-Australians from CALD backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risk assessment instruments are frequently employed in criminal justice settings to predict recidivism and inform treatment plans for offenders. Modern approaches to risk assessment, (i.e. Structured Professional Judgment and actuarial instruments), have been found to accurately predict recidivism for both juvenile and adult offenders, although concerns have been raised regarding their applicability to Non-White cultural groups. Furthermore, research has suggested that rater bias may impact upon risk assessment scoring in various aspects of the risk assessment process. This paper explores whether rater bias may offer an explanation for the differential application and predictive validity of risk assessment for some cultural groups. Firstly, literature examining the differential scoring of risk assessment instruments across cultures was explored. Following this, existing literature on rater variability in risk assessment – encompassing areas such as interrater reliability, adversarial allegiance, professional override and rater training – was synthesised. Despite the lack of research specifically examining rater cultural bias in risk assessment, this paper finds that the risk assessment process may be vulnerable to rater biases. At the very least, the notion of rater cross-cultural bias in risk assessment warrants further investigation, and suggestions for future research are offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]