The assessment of dangerousness and predictions of violence: recent research and future prospects

Recent research on clinical and actuarial assessments of dangerousness leaves many important questions unanswered regarding the relative validity and utility of such assessments. Moreover, the focus that has existed on determining the false-positive and false-negative rates of predictions of violence may be fundamentally misplaced. Clinical evaluations of dangerousness should be viewed as assessments of risk rather than as predictions of violence; and future research should focus on understanding and evaluating how clinical assessments of dangerousness-regarding truly representative types of possibly dangerous patients--are (or should be) made. In the meantime, the research to date on clinical assessments of dangerousness cannot properly be taken to conflict with the Supreme Court's recent affirmations of the admissibility of such assessments in courtroom proceedings.