The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide: Reliability and Validity in Adult Male Offenders

By P. Kropp, StephenD. Hart. 2000

368 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Health, Sociology and Political Science

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

1. R. Mann
2. Shadd Maruna
3. Robert Holdford
4. N. Hilton
5. K. Henning
6. M. Rice
7. Cynthia Rudin
8. Grant T. Harris

In Health

1. Shadd Maruna
2. R. Mann
3. M. Rice
4. Grant T. Harris
5. V. de Vogel
6. Robert Holdford
7. N. Hilton
8. K. Henning

In Sociology and Political Science

1. V. de Vogel
2. M. Rice
3. Grant T. Harris
4. J. Wormith
5. N. Hilton
6. K. Douglas
7. G. Vincent
8. John F. Chapman

Citations in the corpus

• Interpretable classification models for recidivism prediction (2015, background): “Crime-specific applications include risk assessment tools for domestic violence (see, e.g., the Spousal Abuse Risk Assessment of Kropp and Hart 2000), sexual violence (see, e.g., Hanson and Thornton 2003, Langton et al. 2007), and general violence (see, e.g., Historical Clinical and Risk Management…”
• Minimization, Denial, and Victim Blaming by Batterers (2006, methodology): “The small sample sizes used in the studies, the use of retrospective file reviews for rating predictor variables (e.g., Grann & Wedin, 2002; Kropp & Hart, 2000), and the use of different measures for assessing the predictors and recidivism may account for some of this variability.”
• Comparative Validity Analysis of Multiple Measures of Violence Risk in a Sample of Criminal Offenders (2005, background): “…risk factors, as well as the Douglas et al. / COMPARATIVE VALIDITY ANALYSIS 481 validity of these judgments in both retrospective and prospective studies (i.e., Douglas et al., 1999; Kropp & Hart, 2000; for book reviews, see Arbisi, 2003; Buchanan, 2001; Cooper, 2003; Mossman, 2000; Witt, 2000).”
• The HCR‐20 in personality disordered female offenders: a comparison with a matched sample of males (2005, background): “The same was found for the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment guide (SARA; Kropp, Hart, Webster, & Eaves, 1999), an SPJ guideline for the assessment of domestic violence (Kropp & Hart, 2000).”
• Risk-Needs Assessment in Juvenile Justice (2011, background): “…using trained research assistants or forensic clinicians and other structured professional judgment tools (e.g., Douglas et al., 2005; Guy, 2008; Kropp & Hart, 2000), the SRRs in this data set did not add incremental validity to the numeric total scores in the prediction of recidivism outcomes.”
• A fundamental attribution error? Rethinking cognitive distortions † (2006, methodology): “…retrospectively and longitudinally have been unable to identify any strong link between the acceptance of rationalizations at Time One and criminal behaviour measured at Time Two (see e.g. Barbaree & Marshall, 1988; Hanson & Wallace-Capretta, 2000; Henning & Holdford, 2006; Kropp & Hart, 2000).”
• Identifying Three Types of Violent Offenders and Predicting Violent Recidivism While on Probation: A Classification Tree Analysis (2004, background): “Other researchers have developed violent risk assessment tools for special populations such as domestic batterers (for a review see Dutton & Kropp, 2000; Kropp & Hart, 2000 ).”
• Assessing Risk for Violence in Adolescents Who Have Sexually Offended (2008, background): “Given that a number of studies have demonstrated that structured professional judgments made based on the administration of a well-validated risk assessment tool show a high degree of accuracy in predicting future violence (e.g., Douglas, Ogloff, & Hart, 2003; Kropp & Hart, 2000; Worling, 2004), t”
• Sixty-Six Years of Research on the Clinical Versus Actuarial Prediction of Violence (2006, methodology): “statistical optimization methods in their development, subsequent evaluations have reported that total scores predict the outcomes of interest (de Vogel, de Ruiter, van Beek, & Mead, 2004; Douglas et al., 2005; Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004; Hilton et al., 2004; though see Kropp & Hart, 2000 ), alt”
• The Predictive Validity of a General Risk/Needs Assessment Inventory on Sexual Offender Recidivism and an Exploration of the Professional Override (2012, background): “It has proven to be effective in the prediction of general and domestic violence (e.g., HCR20 [Webster et al., 1997]; Spousal Assault Risk Assessment guide [SARA; Kropp, Hart, Webster, & Eaves, 1999; Kropp & Hart, 2000]; Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk [Kropp & Hart, 2004]).”