Citation

Webster CD, Bloom H, Eisen RS. J. Threat Assess. 2003; 2(4): 1-15.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1300/J177v02n04_01

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Workplace violence is becoming a topic of rising importance. Yet, to date, it has been little researched. While it is true that homicides in the workplace are rare, levels of aggressivity, harassment, intimidation, physical and sexual assaultiveness, and incivility easily surpass levels sufficient to dismiss arguments that the topic is unamenable to serious study because of "low base rates." As eventually happened with the broader "dangerousness" literature of a quarter century ago, the assessment task becomes increasingly researchable once definitions of violence are laid down and once risk factors are posited and made explicit. This paper agrees with Hall's (2001) view that many basic practice principles are transferable to workplace violence evaluations from both forensic and general psychiatry. It is argued that consultants need to be expert both at assessing organizational circumstances and individual persons. Specific risk factor schemes are suggested, albeit tentatively (WRA-20, ERA-20, and Hall's WVRAC). Yet it is made clear that assessors have to go beyond the mere compilation of item scores and be able to offer both the organization and the assessee, himself or herself, explanations which account for bizarre, unacceptable, and violent conduct. They also have to be able to suggest methods of attenuating violence potential.