Assessment and Management of Risk for Intimate Partner Violence by Police Officers Using the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide

  • Henrik Belfrage
  • Susanne Strand
  • Jennifer E. Storey
  • Andrea L. Gibas
  • P. Randall Kropp
  • Stephen D. Hart
Original Article

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a crime that is present in all countries, seriously impacts victims, and demands a great deal of time and resources from the criminal justice system. The current study examined the use of the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide, 2nd ed. (SARA; Kropp, Hart, Webster, & Eaves, 1995), a structured professional judgment risk assessment and management tool for IPV, by police officers in Sweden over a follow-up of 18 months. SARA risk assessments had significant predictive validity with respect to risk management recommendations made by police, as well as with recidivism as indexed by subsequent contacts with police. Risk management mediated the association between risk assessment and recidivism: High levels of intervention were associated with decreased recidivism in high risk cases, but with increased recidivism in low risk cases. The findings support the potential utility of police-based risk assessment and management of IPV, and in particular the belief that appropriately structured risk assessment and management decisions can prevent violence.

Keywords

Intimate partner violence Risk assessment Risk management SARA Police 

References

  1. Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. J. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7–27. doi:10.1177/0011128705281756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews, D. A., & Dowden, C. (2006). Risk principle of case classification in correctional treatment: A meta-analytic investigation. International of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 88–100. doi:0.3138/cjccj.49.4.439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aroian, L. A. (1944/1947). The probability function of the product of two normally distributed variables. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 265–271. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177730442.
  5. Baldry, A. C., & Winkel, F. W. (Eds.). (2007). Intimate partner violence prevention and intervention: The risk assessment and management approach. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Belfrage, H. (2008). Police-based structured spousal violence risk assessment: The process of developing a police version of the SARA. In A. C. Baldry & F. W. Winkel (Eds.), Intimate partner violence prevention and intervention: The risk assessment and management approach (pp. 33–44). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.Google Scholar
  8. Belfrage, H., & Strand, S. (2008). Structured spousal violence risk assessment: Combining risk factors and victim vulnerability factors. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 7, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonomi, A. E., Thompson, R. S., Anderson, M., Reid, R. J., Carrell, D., Dimer, J. A., et al. (2006). Intimate partner violence and women’s physical, mental, and social functioning. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 30, 458–466. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2006.01.015.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, J. C. (1995). Prediction of homicide by battered women. In J. C. Campbell (Ed.), Assessing dangerousness: Violence by sexual offenders, batterers, and child abusers (pp. 96–113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, J. C. (2002). Health consequences of intimate partner violence. Lancet, 359, 1331–1336. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08336-8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Campbell, J. C., Glass, N., Sharps, P. W., Laughon, K., & Bloom, T. (2007). Intimate partner homicide: Review and implications of research and policy. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 8, 246–269. doi:10.1177/1524838007303505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, J., & DuMont, J. (2003). Intimate partner violence and health: A critique of Canadian prevalence studies. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 94, 52–58.Google Scholar
  14. Douglas, K. S., & Kropp, P. R. (2002). A prevention-based paradigm for violence risk assessment: Clinical and research applications. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 617–658. doi:10.1177/009385402236735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garcia-Moreno, C., Jansen, H., Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., & Watts, C. H. (2006). Prevalence of intimate partner violence: Findings from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence. Lancet, 368, 1260–1269. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69523-8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodman, L. A. (1960). On the exact variance of products. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 55, 708–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hart, S. D. (1998). The role of psychopathy in assessing risk for violence: Conceptual and methodological issues. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3, 121–137.Google Scholar
  18. Hart, S. D. (2001). Assessing and managing violence risk. In K. S. Douglas, C. D. Webster, S. D. Hart, D. Eaves, & J. R. P. Ogloff (Eds.), HCR-20 violence risk management companion guide (pp. 13–25). Burnaby, BC: Mental Health Law & Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar
  19. Heilbrun, K. (1997). Prediction versus management models relevant to risk assessment: The importance of legal decision-making context. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 347–359. doi:10.1023/A:1024851017947.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heise, L., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Violence by intimate partners. In E. G. Krug, L. L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A. B. Zwi, & R. Lozano (Eds.), World report on violence and health (pp. 87–121). Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  21. Hilton, Z. H., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2010). Risk assessment for domestically violent men: Tools for criminal justice offender intervention, and victim services. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hilton, Z. H., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., Lang, C. L., Cormier, C. A., & Lines, K. J. (2004). A brief actuarial assessment for the prediction of wife assault recidivism: The Ontario domestic assault risk assessment. Psychological Assessment, 16, 267–275. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.16.3.267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kernic, M. A., Wolf, M. E., & Holt, V. L. (2000). Rates and relative risk of hospital admission among women in violent intimate partner relationships. American Journal of Public Health, 90, 1416–1420. doi:10.2105/AJPH.90.9.1416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kropp, P. R. (2004). Some questions regarding spousal assault risk assessment. Violence Against Women, 10, 676–697. doi:10.1177/1077801204265019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kropp, P. R. (2008). Intimate partner violence risk assessment and management. Violence and Victims, 23, 202–220. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.23.2.202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kropp, P. R., & Gibas, A. (2010). The spousal assualt risk assessment guide (SARA). In R. K. Otto & K. S. Douglas (Eds.), Handbook of violence risk assessment (pp. 227–250). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Kropp, P. R., & Hart, S. D. (2000). The spousal assault risk assessment (SARA) guide: Reliability and validity in adult male offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 101–118. doi:10.1023/A:1005430904495.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., & Belfrage, H. (2004). Bedömning av risk för upprepat partnervåld (SARA:SV): Användarmanual. Sundsvall, Sweden: Rättspsykiatriska regionkliniken, Landstinget Västernorrland.Google Scholar
  29. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., & Belfrage, H. (2005). Brief spousal assault form for the evaluation of risk (B-SAFER): User manual. Vancouver, Canada: Proactive Resolutions Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., & Belfrage, H. (2008). Bedömning av risk för upprepat partnervåld (SARA:SV) Version 2: Användarmanual. Sundsvall, Sweden: Rättspsykiatriska regionkliniken, Landstinget Västernorrland.Google Scholar
  31. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., & Belfrage, H. (2010). Brief spousal assault form for the evaluation of risk (B-SAFER), Version 2: User manual. Vancouver, Canada: Proactive Resolutions Inc.Google Scholar
  32. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Eaves, D. (1994). Manual for the spousal assault risk assessment guide. Vancouver, BC: British Columbia Institute on Family Violence.Google Scholar
  33. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Eaves, D. (1995). Manual for the spousal assault risk assessment guide (2nd ed.). Vancouver, BC: British Columbia Institute on Family Violence.Google Scholar
  34. Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Eaves, D. (1999). Spousal assault risk assessment guide (SARA). Toronto: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.Google Scholar
  35. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. (1993). Estimation of mediated effects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17, 144–158. doi:10.1177/0193841X9301700202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Plichta, S. B. (2004). Intimate partner violence and physical health consequences: Policy and practice implications. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1296–1323. doi:10.1177/0886260504269685.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shepard, M. (1992). Predicting batterer recidivism five years after intervention. Journal of Family Violence, 7, 167–178. doi:10.1007/BF00979025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  41. Storey, J. E., & Hart, S. D. (in press). How do police respond to stalking? An examination of the risk management strategies and tactics used in a specialized anti-stalking law enforcement unit. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. doi:10.1007/s11896-010-9081-8.
  42. Thompson, R. S., Bonomi, A. E., Anderson, M., Reid, R. J., Dimer, J. A., Carrell, D., et al. (2006). Intimate partner violence: Prevalence, types, and chronicity in adult women. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 30, 447–457. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2006.01.016.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Full report of the prevalence, incidence and consequences of violence against women (Rep. No. NCJ 183781). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  44. Tolman, R. M., & Rosen, D. (2001). Domestic violence in the lives of women receiving welfare. Violence Against Women, 7, 141–158. doi:10.1177/10778010122182361.Google Scholar
  45. Trujillo, M. P., & Ross, S. (2008). Police response to domestic violence: Making decisions about risk and risk management. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 454–473. doi:10.1177/0886260507312943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Williams, K. R., & Houghton, A. B. (2004). Assessing the risk of domestic violence reoffending: A validation study. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 437–455. doi:10.1023/B:LAHU.0000039334.59297.f0.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henrik Belfrage
    • 1
    • 3
  • Susanne Strand
    • 1
    • 3
  • Jennifer E. Storey
    • 2
  • Andrea L. Gibas
    • 2
  • P. Randall Kropp
    • 2
    • 4
  • Stephen D. Hart
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Health Sciences, Section for CriminologyMid Sweden UniversitySundsvallSweden
  2. 2.Department of PsychologySimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada
  3. 3.Forensic Psychiatric CentreSundsvallSweden
  4. 4.British Columbia Forensic Psychiatric Services CommissionVancouverCanada
  5. 5.Faculty of PsychologyUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations