Actuarial Versus Clinical Assessments Of Dangerousness

By T. R. Litwack. 2001

255 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a396d50510d9bb46ab7343383502aa6f91dffc17

How researchers see this paper

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

In Clinical Psychology

1. Michael C. Seto
2. Leam A. Craig
3. A. Beech
4. L. Harkins
5. D. Thornton
6. K. Browne
7. R. Hutchinson
8. G. Sjöstedt

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Michael C. Seto
2. Leam A. Craig
3. A. Beech
4. L. Harkins
5. D. Thornton
6. K. Browne
7. G. Sjöstedt
8. R. Hutchinson

Citations in the corpus

• The Relationship of Statistical and Psychological Risk Markers to Sexual Reconviction in Child Molesters (2007, background): “…(Barbaree, Seto, Langton, & Peacock, 2001; Hanson & Thornton, 2000, Harris et al., 2002), they have been criticized for being atheoretical, and there continues to be some debate about the application of these instruments (Craig, Browne, Beech, & Stringer, 2004; Litwack, 2001; Rogers, 2000).”
• Actuarial Assessment of Risk for Reoffense Among Adult Sex Offenders (2007, background): “However, as Litwack (2001) points out, actuarial risk assessment instruments can include items tapping information that require clinical expertise (e.g., Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders diagnoses or assessments of psychopathy using the Psychopathy Checklist [PCL-R; Hare,…”
• Risk-Needs Assessment in Juvenile Justice (2011, methodology): “Assessment tools created using the actuarial framework, although a significant improvement over unstructured clinical judgment, are not without their limitations (Dvoskin & Heilbrun, 2001; Grubin & Wingate, 1996; Litwack, 2001).”
• Risk Assessment: What is Being Predicted by Actuarial Prediction Instruments? (2002, background): “As has been pointed out by Litwack (2001), very few studies have directly compared clinical versus actuarial approaches using the same population.”
• Violence Risk Factors in Stalking and Obsessional Harassment (2004, background): “, a variable may be more relevant for some offenders than others), a problem that has been increasingly recognized in the risk assessment literature (Litwack, 2001).”
• Sexual offenders with learning disabilities: risk, recidivism and treatment (2005, background): “…accuracy of clinical judgement and actuarial measures has been debated (Grubin, 1999) and although actuarial approaches are not without its critics (Litwack, 2001; Silver & Miller, 2002), it is widely accepted that actuarial risk measures outperform clinical judgement (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon,…”