Abstract
Accuracy of dangerousness predictions are typically assessed by subsequent violence related arrests and/or hospitalizations, yet evidence suggests the sole use of these measures excludes all but a small fraction of actual subject violence. As a result, forensic professionals are perceived as poor predictors of violence, perhaps wrongly. Expansion of criterion measures of violence is suggested, and methods for detecting subject distortion of past violence are proffered. Utilization of fake-good/fake-bad assessment methods for uncovering dishonest interview behavior, and concealment of past violence in particular, seems warranted.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
