A cross-validation of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide—Revised (VRAG–R) within a correctional sample.

Abstract

The Violence Risk Appraisal Guide-Revised (VRAG-R) was developed to replace the original VRAG based on an updated and larger sample with an extended follow-up period. Using a sample of 120 adult male correctional offenders, the current study examined the interrater reliability and predictive and comparative validity of the VRAG-R to the VRAG, the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, the Statistical Information on Recidivism-Revised, and the Two-Tiered Violence Risk Estimate over a follow-up period of up to 22 years postrelease. The VRAG-R achieved moderate levels of predictive validity for both general and violent recidivism that was sustained over time as evidenced by time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Further, moderate predictive validity was evident when the Antisociality item was both removed and then subsequently replaced with a substitute measure of antisociality. Results of the individual item analyses for the VRAG and VRAG-R revealed that only a small number of items are significant predictors of violent recidivism. The results of this study have implications for the application of the VRAG-R to the assessment of violent recidivism among correctional offenders. (PsycINFO Database Record

Static and Dynamic Assessment of Violence Risk Among Discharged Forensic Patients

“…Total scores on the VRAG-R are interpreted by comparing them to corresponding recidivism norms and risk categories. The previous version, the VRAG, has considerable support for its predictive validity (Campbell et al, 2009; Yang et al, 2010); the VRAG-R has not yet been widely studied, but a recent cross-validation study provided some support for its predictive validity for violent recidivism (Glover, Churcher, Gray, Mills, & Nicholson, 2017). As the VRAG-R was scored by only one rater, inter-rater reliability was not available.…”

Cross-Validation of the Revised Version of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG-R) in a Sample of Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offenses

“…Currently, two cross-validation studies (Glover, Churcher, Gray, Mills, & Nicholson, 2017; Olver & Sewall, 2018) have examined the predictive validity of the VRAG-R in different correctional samples. Glover et al (2017) investigated the predictive validity of the VRAG-R in a correctional sample of 120 adult male individuals with a relatively small proportion of individuals who have committed sexual offenses; among the most serious index offenses almost half of the sample had an index offense of robbery (49.2%), whereas the remainder of the sample had an index offense of murder/manslaughter (22.5%), assault (15.0%), property (3.3%), sexual assault (0.8%), or other crimes (e.g., drug crimes; 8.9%). The authors reported for an average follow-up time of more than 17 years moderate effect sizes for the prediction of general and violent recidivism (AUC = .66 and .65, p < .001, respectively).…”

“…Furthermore, we focused our analyses on different recidivism types which are described in the following “Method” section to investigate the specificity of VRAG-R. First, we analyzed the predictive validity of the VRAG-R hypothesizing it would yield effect sizes comparable with those reported by Rice et al (2013). Next, we examined the predictive accuracy of each single VRAG-R item (Glover et al, 2017). Then, we were interested whether the VRAG-R would demonstrate incremental predictive validity beyond the SORAG and the Static-99.…”

The predictive and incremental validity of ADHD beyond the VRAG-R in a high-risk sample of young offenders

“…The VRAG-R is easy to score and should work equally well concerning the assessment of recidivism risk for violent offending in any kind of adult male offender who has committed a "serious antisocial act" [21]. First cross-validation studies have shown that the VRAG-R can predict violent recidivism in different adult offender samples with moderate to large effect sizes, including violent and sexual offenders as well as offenders not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder [12,15,29,53]. However, the VRAG-R, just like most other risk-assessment instruments, was primarily developed for adults and it is not yet clear, whether it can be validly used in young offenders as well.…”