Gray Nicola S, Fitzgerald Suzanne, Taylor John, Macculloch Malcolm J, Snowden Robert J
School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Psychol Assess. 2007 Dec;19(4):474-9. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.19.4.474.
Accurate predictions of future reconviction, including those for violent crimes, have been shown to be greatly aided by the use of formal risk assessment instruments. However, it is unclear as to whether these instruments would also be predictive in a sample of offenders with intellectual disabilities. In this study, the authors have shown that the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (V. L. Quinsey, G. T. Harris, M. E. Rice, & C. Cormier, 1998); the Psychopathy Checklist--Screening Version (S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995); and the History, Clinical, Risk Management--20 (C. D. Webster, K. S. Douglas, D. Eaves, & S. D. Hart, 1997) were all significant predictors of violent and general reconviction in this sample, and in many cases, their efficacy was greater than in a control sample of mentally disordered offenders without an intellectual disability.
事实证明,使用正式的风险评估工具能极大地辅助对未来再次定罪,包括对暴力犯罪的定罪进行准确预测。然而,尚不清楚这些工具在有智力残疾的罪犯样本中是否也具有预测性。在本研究中,作者表明《暴力风险评估指南》(V. L. 昆西、G. T. 哈里斯、M. E. 赖斯和C. 科米尔,1998年);《心理变态检查表——筛查版》(S. D. 哈特、D. N. 考克斯和R. D. 黑尔,1995年);以及《历史、临床、风险管理——20》(C. D. 韦伯斯特、K. S. 道格拉斯、D. 伊夫斯和S. D. 哈特,1997年)在该样本中都是暴力和再次定罪的重要预测指标,而且在许多情况下,它们的效力比在没有智力残疾的精神障碍罪犯对照样本中更大。