Threat Assessment and Threat Management

Self Cite

This study is a qualitative and quantitative analysis of written and spoken manifestos authored by lone offenders that planned to or committed a targeted attack (n = 30). The acts of violence were primarily motivated by an ideology or a personal grievance, and occurred between 1974-2021. The main objective of this retrospective study was to examine if a behavior-based threat assessment instrument, the Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol (TRAP-18), could be applied to a thin slice of data using only language evidence compiled by the perpetrator before the event occurred. Findings indicate that 17 out of 18 TRAP-18 indicators (94%) were able to be coded in the manifestos. Proximal warning behaviors ranged from 2 to 7, with an average of 4.5. The average number of distal characteristics was 3.8 across the sample. The most frequent proximal warning behaviors were leakage, identification, fixation, and last resort. The most frequent distal characteristics were changes in thinking and emotion, framed by an ideology, and personal grievance and moral outrage. Further analyses of the manifestos comparing written versus spoken communications, ideologically based versus grievance-fueled attacks, and seven categories of primary motivations, supported the generalizability of the TRAP-18 when applied to only language data. A definition for targeted violence manifestos is proposed and examined within a genre framework. Application to threat assessment and management is discussed. Public Significance StatementThis study analyzed the language of targeted violence manifestos to see if TRAP-18 indicators could be identified in a thin slice of data. Ninety-four percent of the indicators were present, including both proximal warning behaviors, which averaged 4.5 per manifesto, and distal characteristics. A definition for targeted violence manifestos is proposed and examined within a genre framework. Application to threat assessment and management is discussed.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The noun threat has two distinctive meanings in the English language (Meloy, Hoffmann, Deisinger, & Hart, 2021):…”

Section: Forensic Linguistic Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

TRAP-18 indicators validated through the forensic linguistic analysis of targeted violence manifestos.

Kupper¹,

Meloy²

2021

Self Cite

“…TA relies on various sources of information to inform decisions about an individual’s level of risk and intervention strategies to mitigate that risk. TA and resulting mitigation strategies are only as dependable and accurate as the quantity and quality of information gathered during the assessment process (Meloy et al, 2014).…”

Section: Development Of the Ncbio-25mentioning

confidence: 99%

The North Carolina BeTA Investigation Overview (NCBIO-25): A structured professional judgment tool (SPJ) for behavioral threat assessment in law enforcement settings.

Jones¹,

Gray²,

Williams³

2021

The movement to implement threat assessment (TA) units first requires the implementation of evidence-based assessment. This study examined the initial psychometric data for the North Carolina BeTA Investigation Overview (NCBIO-25), a multidisciplinary teamadministered structured professional judgment measure for Behavioral Threat Assessment in a law enforcement setting. The measure was used with a sample of 64 persons of concern for whom a TA was requested and performed. The results indicated that high interrater reliability could be achieved in raters trained in TA. In addition, initial factorial validity indicated a five-factor model with correlated latent variables appeared to be the best representation of the observed data. These results suggest that the NCBIO-25 is a promising new tool to aid law enforcement TA teams in conducting TA investigations and developing plans for risk management. Public Significance StatementOperational decision-making in the threat assessment process is enhanced by the use of reliable and valid measures. This study provides initial psychometric information on a structured professional judgment tool that can aid case decision-making in law enforcement settings that work threat cases across multiple settings and with multiple potential targets of interest. The findings of this study will directly benefit threat assessment units within law enforcement settings in public sector settings who wish to have a free for use, empirically based, systematic structure for capturing behavioral evidence to conduct a threat assessment.

“…Threat assessment, which usually occurs in an operational context, can be conducted by a range of trained professionals (law enforcement personnel, security personnel, human resource personnel, mental health practitioners, etc.) and is different from the practice of violence risk assessment (VRA), which is usually focused on answering questions in a judicial context and conducted by highly trained mental health professionals (Meloy et al, 2014). Once these individuals are detected, threat assessment may rely on tested risk assessment tools to structure data collection and evaluation of specific exacerbating, mitigating, and contextual factors contributing to their risk (Fazel et al, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cawood Assessment Grid for organizational (workplace) violence: Initial testing for interrater reliability and predictive validity.

Cawood¹,

Scalora²,

Viñas-Racionero³

2020

Violence risk assessment tools aid threat and violence risk assessments and management interventions conducted in a variety of environments, including workplaces. However, only a limited number of studies have tested the interrater reliability and predictive validity of violence risk assessment tools for potential physical violence cases involving adult instigators in workplaces. This postdictive study provides the results of the initial empirical testing of the interrater reliability and predictive validity of the Cawood Assessment Grid (CAG), a widely used assessment tool for determining the risk of physical violence in common workplace (organizational) settings. Three coders using the CAG assessed 40 case summaries. Statistical analyses of the Summary Risk Ratings (SRRs) suggested raters had good interrater reliability (ICC 3−1 = .67) and the SRRs were strongly associated with occurrence of physical violence (AUC = .81). These results support the continued use of the CAG during assessments of risk for physical violence in workplace settings and add to the empirical literature supporting the use of violence risk assessment tools to enhance our ability to identify cases that have a higher probability of ending in physical violence. Public Significance StatementThis study found the Cawood Assessment Grid significantly differentiated between common workplace violence cases that did or did not have physically violent outcomes, while demonstrating adequate reliability for users. These results support the increased use of appropriately tested tools to assess the risk of violence in workplaces, which will enhance the safety of potential victims.