IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v16y2013i6p697-711.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the concurrent validity of the HCR-20 scales

Author

Listed:
  • Sandy Jung
  • Denise Ledi
  • Melissa K. Daniels

Abstract

The Historical, Clinical and Risk Management (HCR-20) violence risk assessment scheme was constructed to be applicable to a variety of populations, including civil and forensic psychiatric patients and correctional offenders. Research has demonstrated that the HCR-20 is strongly linked to forensic hospital readmissions and to increased risk for future violence. However, few studies have examined the psychometric properties of the HCR-20; of particular interest, the HCR-20 clinical and risk management (RM) items have had little cross-validation with other measures using independent samples. The present study is an archival examination of offenders who have been assessed at a forensic outpatient clinic and for whom the HCR-20 was used as part of the assessment. Concurrent validity was explored by correlating the Historical, Clinical and RM scales and its items with theoretically relevant constructs as measured by other psychometric measures, including the personality assessment inventory. A series of analyses to investigate the validity of the HCR-20 are reported using a small community forensic sample originally assessed at the presentence stage in the legal process. This research provides a much needed investigation of the concurrent validity for the scales and items of the HCR-20.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandy Jung & Denise Ledi & Melissa K. Daniels, 2013. "Evaluating the concurrent validity of the HCR-20 scales," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(6), pages 697-711, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:6:p:697-711
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2012.726247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2012.726247
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2012.726247?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:6:p:697-711. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.