[oajfp] new in OAJFP
- From: GREGORY DECLUE <gregdeclue@xxxxxx>
- To: "OAJFP@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <OAJFP@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 10:23:33 -0400
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE
Gamache, K., Platania, J., & Zaitchik, M. (2013). Evaluating future
dangerousness and need for treatment: The roles of expert testimony,
attributional complexity, and victim type. Open Access Journal of Forensic
Psychology, 5, 53-80.
http://forensicpsychologyunbound.ws/OAJFP/Volume_5__2013_files/Gamache%202013.pdf
http://forensicpsychologyunbound.ws/OAJFP/Volume_5__2013.html
http://forensicpsychologyunbound.ws/OAJFP/Home.html
Abstract
In the current study, we explored the effect of risk-assessment testimony,
attributional complexity, and victim type on participants’ perceptions of the
dangerousness of a sexually violent person and his need for treatment.
Participants read details of a hypo-thetical sexual assault of a female minor
and of an adult. Expert testimony of his risk assessment consisted of clinical
opinion versus structured-clinical judgment (SCJ) versus actuarial assessment.
Participants perceived clinical-opinion and SCJ testimony as equally
influential when forming judgments of future dangerousness. In the context of
treatment, however, participants relied on actuarial testimony when judging
potential for risk. In addition, attributional complexity (AC) moderated
perceptions of sexual risk. Overall, results point to the need for continued
refinement of assessment techniques when determining dangerousness and need for
treatment.
Key words: risk assessment, expert testimony, future dangerousness
Other related posts:
