Citation

Sutherland AA, Johnstone L, Davidson KM, Hart SD, Cooke DJ, Kropp PR, Logan C, Michie C, Stocks R. Int. J. Forensic Ment. Health 2012; 11(2): 119-133.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, Simon Fraser University - Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/14999013.2012.690020

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The RSVP is a set of structured professional judgment guidelines for assessing risk of sexual violence. We investigated the interrater reliability (IRR) of judgments made using the RSVP in a multidisciplinary forensic-clinical context. Raters were 28 forensic mental health and intellectual disability professionals with diverse training and experience. They used the RSVP to evaluate six case vignettes that varied with respect to offense characteristics, clinical complexity, and level of risk. The IRR of ratings for individual risk factors was generally fair. There was a good level of interrater reliability on Summary Judgments and Supervision Recommendations. Interrater reliability was highest when used by professionals who were highly trained in forensic risk assessment. On average, professionals with lower levels of specialist training agreed less with their colleagues and experts, and provided higher estimations of sexual violence risk. Lower levels of agreement were found in cases with moderate levels of complexity and risk. The RSVP can be used to make judgments of risk with adequate levels of interrater reliability. However, this is dependent on the training and expertise of professionals who use the tool. Methodological strengths and limitations are considered, followed by a discussion of implications for training, practice, and future research.