Finding Workers, Offenders, or Students Most at-Risk for Violence: Actuarial Tests save Lives and Resources

Abstract

147 adults (107 men, 40 women) and 89 adolescents (61 boys, 28 girls), selected randomly from referrals and volunteers, were given the Ammons Quick Test (QT), the Beck Suicide Scale (BSS), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Second (MMPI-2) or Adolescent Versions (MMPI-A), the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices, and the Standard Predictor (SP) of Violence Potential Adult or Adolescent Versions. The goals were to: (a) demonstrate computer and paper-and-pencil tests correlated; (b) validate tests to identify at-risk for violence; (c) show that identifying at-risk saves lives and resources; and (d) find which industries benefited from testing at-risk. Paper-and-pencil vs. computer test correlations (.83-.99), sensitivity (.97-.98), and specificity (.50-.97) were computed. Testing at-risk saves lives and resources. Critical industries for testing at-risk individuals may include airlines, energy generating industries, insurance, military, nonprofit-religious, prisoners, trucking or port workers, and veterans.

Implications of Machine-Learning, Internet-Tests to Save Lives and Money: "7-Point Violence Profile:" Review of 212 Studies, 320,051 Persons, Over 95 Years, With a Cross-Validation Among 136 Homicidal, Overdosing- Substance-Abusing, Sex-Offending,

“…See Figure 1 for a comparison of the current ways contrasted with MLIT. There are paper-and-pencil tests, interviews and judgment, medical exams, and the modern MLIT: (a) the paper-and-pencil, violence risk tests, have a mean sensitivity and specificity of .73 [as contrasted with a miss rate of 27%] (Quinsey, Harris, Rice, and Courmier, 1998, 2015Hanson and Thornton, 2000;Monahan et al, 2000); the background-credit checks hit rate is .25 [as compared with a miss rate of 75%] (Quinsey, Harris, Rice, and Cormier, 1998;2015); (b) the interviews and judgment, have an average hit rate of .46 (as opposed to a miss rate of .54) [Sepejak, Menzies, Webster, and Jensen, 1983;Lidz, 1993;Monahan, 1996;Rice, Harris, and Quinsey, 1996]; (c) in 2,200 medical and psychiatric exams, there is a mean .49 hit rate [versus a miss rate of 51%, which exceeds chance] (Hsieh, Gutman, and Haliscak, 2000;Loke, Liaw, Tiong, Ling, and Chang, 2002;Madan and Harley, 2003;Bueno-de-Mesquita, Nuyten, Wesseling, van Tinteren, Linn, and van de Vijver, 2009;Zagar, Kovach, Basile, Hughes, Grove, et al, 2013); and (d) the Standard Predictor of Violence Potential, along with the MMPI-2/A, have a combined specificity and sensitivity for deception, mental illness, substance abuse and violence of 0.97 (Zagar and Grove, 2010;Zagar, Kovach, Basile, Hughes, Grove, et al, 2013) for homicidal, overdosing-substance-abusing, sex-offending and suicide-completers.…”

“…Zagar and Grove (2010) with N=2,722 showed that homicide, sex offending, and assault was predicted accurately and precisely (AUC for 1,595 adults = .99, AUC for 1,127 youth =.91 and AUC = .96 for 2,722 combined). Zagar, Kovach, Basile, Hughes, Grove et al, 2013, andZagar, et al, 2016 showed that MLIT, actuarial assessment is more objective, reliable, sensitive, specific and valid, than current approaches with .97 vs .39, for homicide, sex-offending and suicide. In a 50 year meta-analysis of suicide research, Franklin, Fox, Bentley, Kleiman, Huang, et al, (2017) discovered that MLIT was superior to find risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behavior.…”

“…The records were checked and accepted as accurate, with regard to convictions and illnesses. Records were examined for previous court contacts for neglect, substance-dependency, physical and sexual abuse, delinquent and criminal oneness such as truancy, disorderly conduct, solicitation, phone harassment, forgery, mob action, violating a court order, drug possession or sales, property damage, auto theft, theft, burglary, robbery, unlawful weapon possession [firearm(s)], arson, assault or battery, aggravated criminal sexual assault, and homicide (same procedure as used in Zagar, Kovach, Basile, Hughes, Grove, et al, 2013). Of the 146 participants, approximately 20 traveled in for the examinations from adjoining states of Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and New Jersey, referred from airlines, courts, energy production industries, insurance firms, trucking companies, and lawyers.…”

Applying best treatments by using a regression equation to target violence-prone youth: a review1,2

“…This method will be discussed. The second method, the case study approach with statistical (actuarial) testing, has been discussed in Zagar, Kovach, Basile, Hughes, Grove, Busch, et al , 2013, (in review) and will not be further mentioned here. The regression equation to identify risk-prone teens has a proven track record of predicting which youths may become violent, compared with those less likely to commit offenses against persons.…”

Finding High Risk Persons with Internet Tests to Manage Risk—A Literature Review with Policy Implications to Avoid Violent Tragedies, Save Lives and Money

“…Over 35 years, annual workplace homicides dropped from 1,000 to 400; 25% of yearly workplace homicides were due to robberies. If one included just off-the-work-site murders, these annual work place homicide rates doubled to 800 (Zagar, Kovach, Basile, et al, 2013). With more jobs, homicides decrease.…”