Research and Academics Division.
Psychol Assess. 2013 Sep;25(3):951-65. doi: 10.1037/a0032878. Epub 2013 May 6.
The violence risk appraisal guide (VRAG) was developed in the early 1990s, and approximately 60 replications around the world have shown its utility for the appraisal of violence risk among correctional and psychiatric populations. At the same time, authorities (e.g., Dawes, Faust, & Meehl, 1989) have argued that tools should be periodically evaluated to see if they need to be revised. In the present study, we evaluated the accuracy of the VRAG in a sample of 1,261 offenders, fewer than half of whom were participants in the development sample, then developed and validated a revised and easier-to-score instrument (the VRAG-R). We examined the accuracy of both instruments over fixed durations of opportunity ranging from 6 months to 49 years and examined outcome measures pertaining to the overall number, severity, and imminence of violent recidivism. Both instruments were found to predict dichotomous violent recidivism overall and at various fixed follow-ups with high levels of predictive accuracy (receiver operating characteristic areas of approximately .75) and to significantly predict other violent outcomes.
暴力风险评估指南（VRAG）于 20 世纪 90 年代早期开发，全球约有 60 项复制研究表明其可用于评估矫正和精神科人群的暴力风险。与此同时，当局（例如 Dawes、Faust 和 Meehl，1989）认为工具应定期进行评估，以确定是否需要进行修订。在本研究中，我们在 1261 名罪犯样本中评估了 VRAG 的准确性，其中不到一半是开发样本的参与者，然后开发并验证了一个经过修订且更容易评分的工具（VRAG-R）。我们在从 6 个月到 49 年的固定机会持续时间内检查了这两种工具的准确性，并检查了与整体暴力累犯次数、严重程度和紧迫性相关的结果指标。这两种工具都被发现可以预测总体的二分暴力累犯，以及在各种固定随访中具有很高的预测准确性（接收者操作特征区域约为.75），并显著预测其他暴力结果。
