Assessing Dynamic Violence Risk: Common Language Risk Levels and Recidivism Rates for the Violence Risk Scale

Public Significance Statement This study illustrates a formalized method of integrating risk and change information into violence risk appraisals using the Violence Risk Scale (VRS) to capture the dynamic nature of violence risk. This study also illustrates the first formalized application of the five-level common risk language framework to violent recidivism, via the VRS, and contributes to the advancement of nonarbitrary ways of communicating risk for future violence to strengthen the accuracy and fairness of decision-making in psycholegal contexts. The present study features the development of new risk categories and recidivism estimates for the Violence Risk Scale (VRS), a violence risk assessment and treatment planning tool. We employed a combined North American multisite sample (k = 6, N = 1,338) of adult mostly male offenders, many with violent criminal histories, from correctional or forensic mental health settings that had complete VRS scores from archival or field ratings and outcome data from police records (N = 1,100). There were two key objectives: (a) to identify the rates of violent recidivism associated with VRS scores and (b) to generate updated evidence-based VRS violence risk categories with external validation. To achieve the first objective, logistic regression was applied using VRS pretreatment and change scores on treated samples with a minimum 5-year follow-up (k = 5, N = 472) to model 2-, 3-, and 5-year violent and general recidivism estimates, with the resulting logistic regression algorithms retained to generate a VRS recidivism rates calculator. To achieve the second objective, the Council of State Governments' guidelines were applied to generate five risk levels using the common language framework using percentiles, risk ratios (from Cox regression), and absolute violent and general recidivism estimates (from logistic regression). Construct validity of the five risk levels was examined through group comparisons on measures of risk, need, protection, and psychopathy obtained from the constituent samples. VRS applications to enhance risk communication, treatment planning, and violence prevention in light of the updated recidivism estimates and risk categories are discussed.