Construct Validity, Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Dynamic Risk Assessment and Management System (DRAMS) in Offenders with Intellectual Disability

• NCJ Number: 224291
• Journal: Legal and Criminological Psychology Volume: 13 Part 2 Issue: Part 2 Dated: September 2008 Pages: 309-321
• Author(s): Lesley R. Steptoe; William R. Lindsay; Leslie Murphy; Steven J. Young
• Date Published: September 2008
• Length: 13 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United Kingdom

Annotation

This study assessed the construct validity, reliability, and predictive utility of the Dynamic Risk Assessment and Management System (DRAMS).

Abstract

Results found that the reformulated DRAMS had good construct and concurrent validity. It appears to be a reliable assessment tool and informs on risk levels relating to stable and acute proximal factors. DRAMS also appears as an important addition to the utility of risk assessments for forensic patients in a secure setting. A reformulation of the individual section variables according to convergent and discriminant correlational analysis revealed Cronbach's alpha levels of >.8 for all sections apart from mood (alpha .750) and items retained to facilitate clinical information (alpha .017). The sections of mood, antisocial behavior, and intolerance/agreeableness predicted incidents with a medium effect size as did total DRAMS scores. There were highly significant differences between assessments taken 1 or 2 days prior to an incident and control assessments conducted at least 7 days from an incident. It is noted that there have been a number of developments in the assessment of dynamic risk in the criminological literature. The DRAMS has been developed to facilitate the measurement of dynamic factors of risk for offenders with intellectual disability. The current study was designed to assess the construct validity, reliability, and predictive utility of the DRAMS in forensic patients in a high secure setting. Predictions were made against independently collected incident data. Data were derived from a group of 23 males from Scotland and Northern Ireland with a diagnosis of intellectual disability who lived in a highly secured hospital setting. Concurrent validity was assessed against the Ward Anger Rating Scale (WARS). Two hundred pairs of WARS and DRAMS assessments revealed orderly sectional correlations. Tables, references