The Predictive Validity of the Risk Screener Violence (RS-V) for Adults in Prison Regarding Postrelease Violent Recidivism: A File-Based Study

• Published date: 01 May 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241230003
• Author: Marjam V. Smeekens,Michiel De Vries Robbé,Arne Popma,Maaike M. Kempes
• Date: 01 May 2024

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2024, Vol. 51, No. 5, May 2024, 667 –686.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241230003

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2024 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

667

THE PREDICTIVE VALIDITY OF THE RISK

SCREENER VIOLENCE (RS-V) FOR ADULTS IN

PRISON REGARDING POSTRELEASE VIOLENT

RECIDIVISM

A File-Based Study

MARJAM V. SMEEKENS

The Netherlands Institute for Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology (NIFP), The Netherlands

Leiden University (LEI), The Netherlands

MICHIEL DE VRIES ROBBÉ

The Netherlands Institute for Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology (NIFP), The Netherlands

Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre, The Netherlands

McMaster University, Canada

ARNE POPMA

Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre, The Netherlands

MAAIKE M. KEMPES

The Netherlands Institute for Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology (NIFP), The Netherlands

Leiden University (LEI), The Netherlands

Within the prison system, it is often not feasible to administer comprehensive risk assessment for all incarcerated persons

because of limited time and resources. To enhance prison safety and facilitate the structured evaluation of concerns about

violence risk for all individuals, the Risk Screener Violence (RS-V) was developed. The goal of this study was to evaluate

whether the RS-V (N= 571) is able to retrospectively predict postrelease violent (re)offending for males (81%) and females

(19%). The RS-V was scored with excellent interrater reliability and demonstrated medium to large predictive validity for all

follow-up periods. Surprisingly, the predictive validity for females was even stronger than for males. This study demonstrates

that the RS-V offers a promising new method for the efficient screening of concerns regarding violent behavior among incar-

cerated males and females. Further prospective studies in prison practice will have to consolidate these findings.

Keywords: violence risk assessment; prison; recidivism; gender differences; predictive validity

AUTHORS’ NOTE: This research project was funded by the Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency, part of the

Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security. This manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under

consideration by another journal. The authors of the submitted manuscript have no conflict of interest to

declare. However, it should be mentioned that co-author Michiel de Vries Robbé is also author of the Risk

Screener Violence (RS-V) tool. He does not receive financial benefits from the tool. Correspondence concern-

ing this article should be addressed to Marjam V. Smeekens, The Netherlands Institute for Forensic Psychiatry

and Psychology (NIFP), Herman Gorterstraat 5, Utrecht 3511 EW, The Netherlands; e-mail: m.smeekens@dji.

minjus.nl.

1230003CJBXXX10.1177/00938548241230003Criminal Justice and BehaviorSmeekens et al. / Screening for Violence Risk

research-article2024

668 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

INTRODUCTION

The reoccurrence of criminal behavior is a widely known problem within society as well

as within the prison system. Worldwide, reconviction rates range from 20% to 63% within

2 years after release from prison (Yukhnenko et al., 2020). Within the Netherlands, almost

half (47%) of the ex-detainees is reconvicted for criminal activity within 2 years postrelease,

while 27% is also reincarcerated (Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency, 2022). The preven-

tion of reoffending by ex-detainees requires ongoing attention from governmental institu-

tions and the criminal justice system, especially when it comes to violent crimes, as these

types of crimes have a great impact on victims and society at large. The goal of the current

study is to investigate the extent to which a newly developed risk screening tool is able to

predict actual violent (re)offending. If this is the case, application of the tool could offer

improved insight regarding violence risk and contribute to violence prevention.

RISK ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE PRISON SETTING

To counteract and prevent future (violent) criminal behavior, custodial settings use risk

assessment instruments to estimate the likelihood of an individual committing a new

offense. These instruments generally contain risk factors that are known to be associated

with the occurrence of criminal behavior, and in particular violent behavior (Bonta &

Andrews, 2016). Risk assessment instruments are often composed of static risk factors,

historical vulnerabilities unchangeable through intervention such as past offenses and age

at first offense, and dynamic risk factors, changeable through intervention such as substance

misuse and impulsivity (Plaisier & Van Ditzhuijzen, 2008). Commonly used risk assess-

ment instruments within prisons are, for example, the Level of Service/Case Management

Inventory (LS/CMI; Andrews et al., 2004), aimed at general recidivism, and the Historical,

Clinical, Risk Management Version 3 (HCR-20V3; Douglas et al., 2013), which is specifi-

cally aimed at determining the risk of violence. Other comprehensive tools frequently used

in the prison system that exclusively focus on predicting violence are the Violence Risk

Scale (VRS; Wong & Gordon, 2006), and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG;

Harris et al., 1993).

Besides risk factors, protective factors have become widely used for gaining a more

complete overview of the risk level of an offender. Protective factors are assumed to be

associated with a decrease of offending (De Vogel et al., 2012) and are deemed vital for an

accurate evaluation of risk (De Vries Robbé & Willis, 2017). An increasingly commonly

used risk assessment instrument, both in forensic psychiatry and within prison settings, that

exclusively focuses on measuring protective factors is the Structured Assessment of

Protective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF; De Vogel et al., 2012). A recent meta-analy-

sis showed that its protective factors have incremental predictive validity when used in

combination with a risk-focused tool (Burghart et al., 2023). Therefore, the SAPROF is

often administered in conjunction with the HCR-20V3 or the LS/CMI, to create a compre-

hensive assessment of risks and strengths for each individual. Another example of an inte-

grated focus on risks and strengths is the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability

(START; Webster et al., 2004), which is applied for short-term risk evaluations in forensic

psychiatry.

Conducting risk evaluation, on one hand, increases insight into underlying and some-

times persistent criminogenic factors of an individual and, on the other hand, contributes to