A rapid evidence assessment of the research underpinning the validity of Structured Professional Judgement tools that assess risk of stalking

The Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM; Kropp et al., 2008) and the Stalking Risk Profile (SRP; Mackenzie et al., 2009) were published in 2008 and 2009 respectively and designed to assess risk of stalking behaviour. Based on generally accepted criteria of what constitutes a Structured Professionals Judgement (SPJ) tool (i.e. a combination of static and dynamic risk factors which also includes case formulation and risk management considerations; Hart et al., 2016), in my opinion, the SAM and SRP are the only stalking risk assessments which can be considered SPJ tools. The current REA was conducted to explore the evidence base underpinning both assessments. Overall, there was limited evidence to draw any conclusions on the interrater reliability, internal reliability, internal consistency, discriminant validity or predictive validity due to the lack of peer reviewed research for either the SAM or SRP. Only two studies evaluated the SRP, whereas seven evaluated the SAM. The findings of this REA must be interpreted with caution given the limited amount of relevant research identified and included in the analysis, specifically the lack of evaluative studies involving the SRP. There are also concerns about the quality of the studies included, which generally include small samples, retrospective research designs, a lack of adequate comparison groups and difficulties identifying cases of stalking and recidivism. Further research is required to provide robust empirical support for claims regarding the validity and reliability of both assessment tools.