Using Self-Report in Psychological Assessments of Sexually Violent Predator Evaluations

Abstract

This chapter examines whether self-report information gleaned from interviews of sexually violent predators contributes in any meaningful and valid way to decisions derived from psychological assessments. The authors note that merely adding information does not add incrementally to the validity of a decision. Indeed, adding information with unknown and highly suspect psychometric characteristics can make things worse by undermining the validity of the decision. Furthermore, it is precisely the clinician who believes that he or she can overcome the limitations of any piece of evidence who is most at risk for making serious decision errors. The chapter argues that using self-report to draw conclusions is terribly dangerous when one considers both the psychometrics of decision-making and the judgment biases to which human beings so easily fall prey, even mental health clinicians. Finally, the analysis suggests that clinicians should give relatively little weight to information obtained by way of self-report because of the ready availability of higher-quality information within the context of conducting sexually violent predator evaluations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)