oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The reliability and predictive validity of the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM)
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8285-0935
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
2018 (English)In: Psychological Assessment, ISSN 1040-3590, E-ISSN 1939-134XArticle in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

This study assessed the reliability and validity of the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM), a structured professional judgment measure for assessing stalking risks. The SAM was completed retrospectively from file review for 146 adult stalkers (90.4% male) referred to a community-based forensic mental health service. Interrater reliability (IRR) was initially poor, but developing a strict definition of stalking currency and rescoring the SAM led to improvement. Based on the updated scoring, IRR was moderate for judgments about whether stalking was ongoing at the time of assessment, and fair to moderate for summary risk judgments. Both case prioritization (area under the curve [AUC] = .69) and risk for continued stalking (AUC = .76) ratings discriminated between groups, with high-risk stalkers 5-9 times as likely as low-risk stalkers to reoffend by stalking their original victims. Lifetime SAM total scores (AUC = .70) also featured moderate to good discrimination. Follow-up analyses suggested that this was driven mainly by the recent presence of risk markers and the nature of any ongoing stalking situation rather than historical or individual factors. Findings support the use of the SAM to structure risk judgments made by those with experience in assessing stalking. Current results also imply that IRR might be improved by introducing (a) a fixed definition of stalking currency and (b) usage guidelines for specific contexts. (PsycINFO Database Record.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
American Psychological Association (APA), 2018.
National Category
Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-64324DOI: 10.1037/pas0000589PubMedID: 29952593OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-64324DiVA, id: diva2:1174797
Available from: 2018-01-16 Created: 2018-01-16 Last updated: 2018-08-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Strand, Susanne

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Strand, Susanne
By organisation
School of Law, Psychology and Social Work
In the same journal
Psychological Assessment
Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 80 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf