東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

A retrospective examination of the H...

Frenzel, Richard Bryan, II.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

A retrospective examination of the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 version 2 (HCR-20 V2) to assess for gender differences on final risk judgments.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	A retrospective examination of the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 version 2 (HCR-20 V2) to assess for gender differences on final risk judgments./
作者:	Frenzel, Richard Bryan, II.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2017,
面頁冊數:	121 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-03(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International79-03B(E).
標題:	Clinical psychology. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10742464
ISBN:	9780355499759

A retrospective examination of the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 version 2 (HCR-20 V2) to assess for gender differences on final risk judgments.
Frenzel, Richard Bryan, II.

A retrospective examination of the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 version 2 (HCR-20 V2) to assess for gender differences on final risk judgments. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017 - 121 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-03(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Psy.D.)--The Wright Institute, 2017.

This research study explored the potential differences of gender on Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 Version 2 (HCR-20 V2) final risk judgments by licensed psychologists conducting risk assessment evaluations in a North Carolina state psychiatric hospital. Final risk judgments on the HCR-20 V2 are determined through the utilization of the structured professional judgment (SPJ) model of violence risk assessment. Findings contribute to the psychologist's determination of overall risk as indicated by ratings of "Low," "Moderate," or "High" on measures of "Serious Violence" and "Other Aggressive Acts" on the HCR-20 V2. Archival data, consisting of 608 HCR- 20 V2 protocols, was analyzed for the purposes of this study. Independent samples t-tests and two-tailed Pearson bivariate correlations were used to assess the data and determine whether gender differences were present. No significant relationship was found between female licensed psychologists following a comparison of male and female patient risk assessment evaluations. These findings indicate the results of the study show there is no credible evidence to support that gender differences guide female licensed psychologists to rate male patients any differently on final risk judgments than female patients. In contrast to the prediction of the hypotheses, where negative associations were thought to be found, positive associations on total HCR-20 V2 Historical scale item scores were found for male licensed psychologists assessing female patients when patients were scored High on final risk judgments for Serious Violence. These results suggest that gender differences do not alter male licensed psychologist's findings on final risk judgments when assessing female patients. Furthermore, as the hypotheses predicted, total HCR-20 V2 scores were not significantly different in male and female patients when male licensed psychologist's risk assessment evaluations were examined. These results highlight an absence of evidence in this study that would show male licensed psychologists rate male patients differently than their female counterparts. Lastly, as the hypotheses predicted, positive associations on total HCR-20 V2 Historical scale item scores were found for female licensed psychologists assessing male patients when patients scored High on final risk judgments for Serious Violence. These findings parallel the results of male licensed psychologists assessing female patients where a positive association was also found. Altogether, these results suggest that gender differences do not alter the licensed psychologist's HCR-20 V2 conclusions on final risk judgments for Serious Violence. These results further suggest that gender differences are not significantly different regarding licensed psychologist's HCR-20 V2 final risk judgments when patients in a state psychiatric hospital are assessed for violence risk. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously as there were too few valid female patient HCR-20 V2 protocols included in the study to provide enough statistical certainty to be confident about the results.

ISBN: 9780355499759Subjects--Topical Terms:

524863
Clinical psychology.

A retrospective examination of the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 version 2 (HCR-20 V2) to assess for gender differences on final risk judgments.
LDR:04127nmm a2200301 4500 001 2203556
005 20190531105740.5
008 201008s2017 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780355499759
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10742464
035 $a AAI10742464
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Frenzel, Richard Bryan, II. $3 3430356
245 1 2 $a A retrospective examination of the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 version 2 (HCR-20 V2) to assess for gender differences on final risk judgments.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2017
300 $a 121 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-03(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: Douglas Craig.
502 $a Thesis (Psy.D.)--The Wright Institute, 2017.
520 $a This research study explored the potential differences of gender on Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 Version 2 (HCR-20 V2) final risk judgments by licensed psychologists conducting risk assessment evaluations in a North Carolina state psychiatric hospital. Final risk judgments on the HCR-20 V2 are determined through the utilization of the structured professional judgment (SPJ) model of violence risk assessment. Findings contribute to the psychologist's determination of overall risk as indicated by ratings of "Low," "Moderate," or "High" on measures of "Serious Violence" and "Other Aggressive Acts" on the HCR-20 V2. Archival data, consisting of 608 HCR- 20 V2 protocols, was analyzed for the purposes of this study. Independent samples t-tests and two-tailed Pearson bivariate correlations were used to assess the data and determine whether gender differences were present. No significant relationship was found between female licensed psychologists following a comparison of male and female patient risk assessment evaluations. These findings indicate the results of the study show there is no credible evidence to support that gender differences guide female licensed psychologists to rate male patients any differently on final risk judgments than female patients. In contrast to the prediction of the hypotheses, where negative associations were thought to be found, positive associations on total HCR-20 V2 Historical scale item scores were found for male licensed psychologists assessing female patients when patients were scored High on final risk judgments for Serious Violence. These results suggest that gender differences do not alter male licensed psychologist's findings on final risk judgments when assessing female patients. Furthermore, as the hypotheses predicted, total HCR-20 V2 scores were not significantly different in male and female patients when male licensed psychologist's risk assessment evaluations were examined. These results highlight an absence of evidence in this study that would show male licensed psychologists rate male patients differently than their female counterparts. Lastly, as the hypotheses predicted, positive associations on total HCR-20 V2 Historical scale item scores were found for female licensed psychologists assessing male patients when patients scored High on final risk judgments for Serious Violence. These findings parallel the results of male licensed psychologists assessing female patients where a positive association was also found. Altogether, these results suggest that gender differences do not alter the licensed psychologist's HCR-20 V2 conclusions on final risk judgments for Serious Violence. These results further suggest that gender differences are not significantly different regarding licensed psychologist's HCR-20 V2 final risk judgments when patients in a state psychiatric hospital are assessed for violence risk. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously as there were too few valid female patient HCR-20 V2 protocols included in the study to provide enough statistical certainty to be confident about the results.
590 $a School code: 0253.
650 4 $a Clinical psychology. $3 524863
650 4 $a Quantitative psychology. $3 2144748
650 4 $a Gender studies. $3 2122708
690 $a 0622
690 $a 0632
690 $a 0733
710 2 $a The Wright Institute. $3 1019343
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 79-03B(E).
790 $a 0253
791 $a Psy.D.
792 $a 2017
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10742464