Risk Assessment of Stalkers
- 1 October 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Criminal Justice and Behavior
- Vol. 29 (5) , 590-616
- https://doi.org/10.1177/009385402236734
Abstract
Risk assessment of stalkers is difficult due to the diversity of stalking-related behaviors and the lack of research. The authors discuss three problems. First, stalking is a form of targeted violence, that is, violence directed at specific people known to the perpetrator. Second, stalking may include acts that are implicitly or indirectly threatening. Third, stalking can persist for many years, even decades. In contrast, most research on violence risk assessment ignores the relationship between victim and perpetrator, defines violence solely in terms of physical harm, and tracks perpetrators for limited time periods. The authors conclude that these problems make it impossible to rely on actuarial approaches when assessing risk for stalking at the present time, although it is possible to use structured professional judgment. They discuss some basic principles that can be used to guide stalking risk assessment within the framework of structured professional judgment.Keywords
This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Review of Domestic Violence Risk InstrumentsTrauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2000
- Assessing risk for violence among psychiatric patients: The HCR-20 violence risk assessment scheme and the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1999
- Violence risk assessment: Science and practiceLegal and Criminological Psychology, 1999
- Threat assessment: defining an approach for evaluating risk of targeted violenceBehavioral Sciences & the Law, 1999
- Sex and violence in a forensic population of obsessional harassers.Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1998
- The Victims of StalkingPublished by Elsevier ,1998
- Stalking Behaviors Within Domestic ViolenceJournal of Family Violence, 1997
- Improving the clinical practice of violence risk assessment: Technology, guidelines, and training.American Psychologist, 1996
- Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical–statistical controversy.Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1996
- Threatening and Otherwise Inappropriate Letters to Hollywood CelebritiesJournal of Forensic Sciences, 1991