Judicial decision thresholds for violence risk management

John Monahan, Eric Silver

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

43 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To affect violence risk management decisions, it is necessary to apply a decision threshold to the estimates that actuarial violence risk assessments generate. Despite widespread agreement that the choice of decision threshold is a matter of policy rather than of science, no one has actually asked policy makers about their choices. A survey was conducted asking 26 judges where they would set the decision threshold for instituting short-term civil commitment as a “danger to others.” The five risk assessment options communicated to the judges were the Risk Classes obtained in the MacArthur Study. Results showed great variability among judges. As a group, however, judges chose Risk Class 3 – a 0.26 likelihood of committing a violent act – as their decision threshold for short-term civil commitment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-6
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Forensic Mental Health
Volume2
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2003

Fingerprint

Risk Management
Violence
Administrative Personnel
Surveys and Questionnaires

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Phychiatric Mental Health
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

@article{410280bcefaa484b90b42e67c9a2dd8d,
title = "Judicial decision thresholds for violence risk management",
abstract = "To affect violence risk management decisions, it is necessary to apply a decision threshold to the estimates that actuarial violence risk assessments generate. Despite widespread agreement that the choice of decision threshold is a matter of policy rather than of science, no one has actually asked policy makers about their choices. A survey was conducted asking 26 judges where they would set the decision threshold for instituting short-term civil commitment as a “danger to others.” The five risk assessment options communicated to the judges were the Risk Classes obtained in the MacArthur Study. Results showed great variability among judges. As a group, however, judges chose Risk Class 3 – a 0.26 likelihood of committing a violent act – as their decision threshold for short-term civil commitment.",
author = "John Monahan and Eric Silver",
year = "2003",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/14999013.2003.10471174",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "1--6",
journal = "International Journal of Forensic Mental Health",
issn = "1499-9013",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

Judicial decision thresholds for violence risk management. / Monahan, John; Silver, Eric.

In: International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, Vol. 2, No. 1, 01.01.2003, p. 1-6.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Judicial decision thresholds for violence risk management

AU - Monahan, John

AU - Silver, Eric

PY - 2003/1/1

Y1 - 2003/1/1

N2 - To affect violence risk management decisions, it is necessary to apply a decision threshold to the estimates that actuarial violence risk assessments generate. Despite widespread agreement that the choice of decision threshold is a matter of policy rather than of science, no one has actually asked policy makers about their choices. A survey was conducted asking 26 judges where they would set the decision threshold for instituting short-term civil commitment as a “danger to others.” The five risk assessment options communicated to the judges were the Risk Classes obtained in the MacArthur Study. Results showed great variability among judges. As a group, however, judges chose Risk Class 3 – a 0.26 likelihood of committing a violent act – as their decision threshold for short-term civil commitment.

AB - To affect violence risk management decisions, it is necessary to apply a decision threshold to the estimates that actuarial violence risk assessments generate. Despite widespread agreement that the choice of decision threshold is a matter of policy rather than of science, no one has actually asked policy makers about their choices. A survey was conducted asking 26 judges where they would set the decision threshold for instituting short-term civil commitment as a “danger to others.” The five risk assessment options communicated to the judges were the Risk Classes obtained in the MacArthur Study. Results showed great variability among judges. As a group, however, judges chose Risk Class 3 – a 0.26 likelihood of committing a violent act – as their decision threshold for short-term civil commitment.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0041854780&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0041854780&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/14999013.2003.10471174

DO - 10.1080/14999013.2003.10471174

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0041854780

VL - 2

SP - 1

EP - 6

JO - International Journal of Forensic Mental Health

JF - International Journal of Forensic Mental Health

SN - 1499-9013

IS - 1

ER -