The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A classification tree approach to the development of actuarial violence risk assessment tools.
Abstract
Since the 1970s, a wide body of research has suggested that the accuracy of clinical risk assessments of violence might be increased if clinicians used actuarial tools. Despite considerable progress in recent years in the development of such tools for violence risk assessment, they remain primarily research instruments, largely ignored in daily clinical practice. We argue that because most existing actuarial tools are based on a main effects regression approach, they do not adequately reflect the contingent nature of the clinical assessment processes. To enhance the use of actuarial violence risk assessment tools, we propose a classification tree rather than a main effects regression approach. In addition, we suggest that by employing two decision thresholds for identifying high- and low-risk cases--instead of the standard single threshold--the use of actuarial tools to make dichotomous risk classification decisions may be further enhanced. These claims are supported with empirical data from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale.
Overall, J. E., & Gorham, D. R. (1962) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1962.10.3.799 · Cited by 11,090
Two scales for measuring patients’ perceptions for coercion during mental hospital admission
Gardner, W., Hoge, S. K., Bennett, N., Roth, L. H., Lidz, C. W., Monahan, J., & Mulvey, E. P. (1993) · Behavioral Sciences & the Law · doi:10.1002/bsl.2370110308 · Cited by 342 · cited 1×
“…for property crimes since the age .11*** of 18 as measured by official police records Perceived Co- MacArthur Perceived Coercion Scale .03 ercion (Gardner et al., 1993) Threats at Ad- Presence of argumentativeness and .06 mission threatening verbal statements at the time of admission to the…”
Method
Cited by
Elbogen, E. B., & Johnson, S. C. (2009) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2008.537 · Cited by 868
The efficacy of violence prediction: a meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment tools.
Yang, M., Wong, S. C. P., & Coid, J. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0020473 · Cited by 525
A Prevention-Based Paradigm for Violence Risk Assessment: Clinical and Research Applications
Douglas, K. S., & Kropp, P. R. (2002) · Criminal Justice and Behavior · doi:10.1177/009385402236735 · Cited by 286
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Bryant, J. D., Hamlett, C. L., & Seethaler, P. M. (2007) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440290707300303 · Cited by 163
(2003) · PubMed · Cited by 118
Metadata
- Authors
- Steadman, H. J., Silver, E., Monahan, J., Appelbaum, P. S., Clark Robbins, P., Mulvey, E. P., Grisso, T., Roth, L. H., & Banks, S.
- Venue
- Law and Human Behavior
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 83-100
- ISSN
- 0147-7307 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-661X
- OpenAlex
- W2119525967
- Cited by
- 397
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 32.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A classification tree approach to the development of actuarial violence risk assessment tools. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1023/a:1005478820425
- The paper
- Steadman, H. J., Silver, E., Monahan, J., Appelbaum, P. S., Clark Robbins, P., Mulvey, E. P., Grisso, T., Roth, L. H., & Banks, S. (2000). A classification tree approach to the development of actuarial violence risk assessment tools. Law and Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1005478820425
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.