Testing the application of violent extremism risk assessment to individuals who have radicalised in Australia: The case of the VERA-2R

Shadowed outlines of people

Violent extremism risk assessment tools have become an important way of understanding and managing the threat posed by radicalised offenders in custodial and community settings. The aim of this study was to examine the applicability, interrater reliability and predictive validity of the Violent Extremism Risk Assessment—Version 2 Revised (VERA‑2R) against data on individuals who have radicalised in Australia. Two trained assessors—the authors— completed VERA-2R risk assessments for a sample of 50 extremist offenders. Results showed differences in risk profiles between individuals who were violent and non-violent. It was found that the VERA-2R had good interrater reliability but low predictive validity.


URLs correct as at December 2023

Becker MH 2019. When extremists become violent: examining the association between social control, social learning, and engagement in violent extremism. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 44(12): 1104–1124. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2019.1626093

Belton E & Cherney A 2023. Profiles of Individual Radicalisation in Australia (PIRA) Codebook (draft). University of Queensland

Belton E, Cherney A & Zahnow R 2023. Profiles of Individual Radicalisation in Australia (PIRA): Introducing an Australian Open-Source Extremist Database. Perspectives on Terrorism 17(1): 18–35

Borum R 2015. Assessing risk for terrorism involvement. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management 2(2): 63–87

Bright D, Whelan C & Harris-Hogan S 2020. On the durability of terrorist networks: Revealing the hidden connections between jihadist cells. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 43(7): 638–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2018.1494411

Cherney A & Belton E 2024. Testing the reliability and validity of the VERA-2R on individuals who have radicalised in Australia. Report to the Criminology Research Advisory Council. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.52922/crg77345

Corner E & Taylor H 2023a. Grievance-fuelled violence: Modelling the process of grievance development. Research Report no. 27. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.52922/rr78917

Corner E & Taylor H 2023b. Testing the reliability, validity and equity of terrorism risk assessment instruments. Centre for Social Research and Methods, Australian National University (FOI released document version). https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/foi/files/2023/fa-230400097-document-released-part-1.pdf

Cubitt T & Wolbers H 2023. Review of violent extremism risk assessment tools in Division 104 control orders and Division 105A post-sentence orders. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/special/special-14

de Bruin A, Duits N, Kempes M & Prinsen M 2022. Interrater and intrarater reliability of the Violent Extremism Risk Assessment tool. Netherlands: Custodial Institutions Agency, Ministry of Justice, Science and Education

Douglas KS & Reeves KA 2010. Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 (HCR-20) Violence Risk Assessment Scheme: Rationale, application, and empirical overview. In RK Otto & KS Douglas (eds), Handbook of violence risk assessment. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group: 147–185

Geraghty K & Woodhams J 2015. The predictive validity of risk assessment tools for female offenders: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.01.002

Gill P, Corner E, McKee A, Hitchen P & Betley P 2019. What do closed source data tell us about lone actor terrorist behavior? A research note. Terrorism and Political Violence. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2019.1668781

Groth-Marnat G & Wright JA 2016 Handbook of psychological assessment (6th ed). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons

Hart SD & Logan C 2011. Formulation of violence risk using evidence-based assessments: The structured professional judgment approach. In P Sturmey & M McMurran (eds), Forensic case formulation. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell: 83–106

Independent National Security Legislation Monitor 2023. Review into Division 105A (and related provisions) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). Commonwealth of Australia

Koo TK & Li MY 2016. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine 15(2): 155–163

LaFree G, Jensen MA, James PA & Safer-Lichtenstein A 2018. Correlates of violent political extremism in the United States. Criminology 56(2): 233–268

Logan C & Lloyd M 2019. Violent extremism: A comparison of approaches to assessing and managing risk. Legal and Criminological Psychology 24: 141–161

Mossman D 2013. Evaluating risk assessments using receiver operating characteristic analysis: Rationale, advantages, insights, and limitations. Behavioral Sciences & the Law 31(1): 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2050

Pressman E, Duits N, Rinne T & Flockton J 2018. Violent Extremism Risk Assessment—Version 2 Revised. Utrecht, Netherlands: Netherlands Institute of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology

Schuurman B & Carthy SL 2023. Understanding (non) involvement in terrorist violence: What sets extremists who use terrorist violence apart from those who do not? Criminology & Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12626

Singh JP 2013. Predictive validity performance indicators in violence risk assessment: A methodological primer. Behavioral Sciences & the Law 31(1): 8-22

Singh JP, Desmarais SL & Van Dorn RA 2013. Measurement of predictive validity in violence risk assessment studies: A second‐order systematic review. Behavioral Sciences & the Law 31(1): 55–73

Vincent GM, Guy LS, Fusco SL & Gershenson BG 2012. Field reliability of the SAVRY with juvenile probation officers: Implications for training. Law and Human Behavior 36(3): 225–236