BACKGROUND: Adolescents are most at risk of engaging in violent interaction. Targeting violence risk and protective factors is essential for correctly understanding and assessing their role in potential violence. We aimed to use the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) tool within the sample of adolescents to capture violence risk and protective factors and personality variables related to risk and protective factors. We further aimed to identify which violence risk and protective factors were positively or negatively related to violence within personal history and if any personality traits are typical for violent and non-violent adolescents. Identifying broader or underlying constructs within the SAVRY tool factor analysis can enable appropriate therapeutic targeting. METHODS: We used the Czech standardized version of the SAVRY tool. The study sample comprised 175 men and 226 women aged 12-18 years divided into two categories according to the presence or absence of violence in their personal history. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare numerical variables between the two groups. SAVRY factor analysis with varimax rotation was used to determine the item factors. We administered the High School Personality Questionnaire (HSPQ) to capture adolescents' personality characteristics. RESULTS: In our sample, there were 151 participants with violence in their personal histories and 250 non-violent participants. Non-violent adolescents had higher values for all six SAVRY protective factors. The strongest protective factor was P3, Strong attachment and bonds across gender or a history of violence. Using factor analysis, we identified three SAVRY internal factors: social conduct, assimilation, and maladaptation. The SAVRY protective factors were significantly positively related to several factors in the HSPQ questionnaire. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the significance of protective factors and their relationship with violence prevalence. HSPQ diagnostics could be helpful in clinically targeting personality-based violence risks and protective factors. The therapeutic focus should be on tension, peer rejection, and anxiety. It is also essential to foster positive attitudes toward authority, prosocial behavior, and attitudes toward school. These strategies can help strengthen protective factors of the SAVRY.

Department of Economic Statistics University of Economics and Business Prague Czechia

Department of Law and Criminology Royal Holloway University of London Egham United Kingdom

Department of Psychiatry 1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague General University Hospital Prague Prague Czechia

Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology 3rd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czechia

Department of Psychiatry Bohnice Psychiatric Hospital Prague Czechia

Department of Psychology Faculty of Arts Charles University Prague Czechia

Police Presidium of the Czech Republic Prague Czechia

West London Mental Health NHS Trust Broadmoor Hospital London United Kingdom

See more in PubMed

de Vries Robbé M, de Vogel V. A European perspective on risk assessment tools. In: Goethals K. editor. Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in Europe. Cham: Springer International Publishing; (2018). p. 249–66.

Douglas K, Guy L, Reeves K, Weir J. HCR-20 Violence Risk Assessment Scheme: Overview and Annotated Bibliography. (2005). Available online at: https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1362&context=psych_cmhsr (accessed October 13, 2019).

Fazel S, Singh J, Doll H, Grann M. Use of risk assessment instruments to predict violence and antisocial behaviour in 73 samples involving 24 827 people: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. (2012) 345:e4692. 10.1136/bmj.e4692 PubMed DOI PMC

Ramesh T, Igoumenou A, Vazquez Montes M, Fazel S. Use of risk assessment instruments to predict violence in forensic psychiatric hospitals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Psychiatry. (2018) 52:47–53. 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.02.007 PubMed DOI PMC

de Vries Robbé M, de Vogel V, de Spa E. Protective factors for violence risk in forensic psychiatric patients: a retrospective validation study of the SAPROF. Int J Forensic Ment Health. (2011) 10:178–86. 10.1186/s12991-018-0175-5 PubMed DOI PMC

de Vries Robbé M, de Vogel V, Koster K, Bogaerts S. Assessing protective factors for sexually violent offending with the SAPROF. Sex Abuse. (2015) 27:51–70. PubMed

Páv M, Vňuková M, Ptáček R. SAPROF: Strukturované Posouzení Protektivních Faktorù Při Posuzování Rizika Násilného Chování. Praha: Ministerstvo zdravotnictví ČR; (2020). p. 84.

Borum R, Lodewijks H, Bartel P, Forth A. The structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY). In: Otto RK, Douglas KS. editors. Handbook of Violence Risk Assessment. Milton Park: Routledge; (2020). p. 63–79.

Broulíková H, Winkler P, Páv M, Kondrátová L. Costs of mental health services in czechia: facilitating an evidence-based reform of psychiatric care. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. (2020) 18:287–98. 10.1007/s40258-019-00501-7 PubMed DOI

Cohen M, Piquero A, Jennings W. Studying the costs of crime across offender trajectories. Criminol Public Policy. (2010) 9:279–305.

Páv M, Vňuková M, Sebalo I. Factors affecting length of inpatient forensic stay: retrospective study from Czechia. Front Psychiatry. (2022) 13:825615. 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.825615 PubMed DOI PMC

Steinberg L, Morris A. Adolescent development. J Cogn Educ Psychol. (2001) 2:55–87.

Eccles J, Midgley C, Wigfield A, Buchanan C. Development during adolescence: the impact of stage–environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families (1993). In: Notterman JM. editor. The Evolution of Psychology: Fifty Years of the American Psychologist. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; (1997). p. 475–501. 10.1037//0003-066x.48.2.90 PubMed DOI

Haynie D, Silver E, Teasdale B. Neighborhood characteristics, peer networks, and adolescent violence. J Quant Criminol. (2006) 22:147–69.

Crick N, Dodge K. Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression. Child Dev. (1996) 67:993–1002. PubMed

Juríčková V, Linhartová P, Adámek P, Nichtová A, Figueroa J, Páv M, et al. Behavioral inhibition in neutral and emotional contexts in acutely violent patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Curr Psychol. (2022) 2022:1–9.

Nichtová A, Volavka J, Vevera J, Pøíhodová K, Juríèková V, Klemsová A, et al. Deconstructing violence in acutely exacerbating psychotic patients. CNS Spectr. (2021) 26:643–7. 10.1017/S1092852920001601 PubMed DOI

Fraser M. Aggressive behavior in childhood and early adolescence: an ecological-developmental perspective on youth violence. Soc Work. (1996) 41:347–61. PubMed

Holt S, Buckley H, Whelan S. The impact of exposure to domestic violence on children and young people: a review of the literature. Child Abuse Negl. (2008) 32:797–810. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.02.004 PubMed DOI

Perry B. The neurodevelopmental impact of violence in childhood. In: Schetky D, Benedek EP. editors. Textbook of Child and Adolescent Forensic Psychiatry. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, Inc; (2001). p. 221–38.

Bacchini D, Affuso G, Aquilar S. Multiple forms and settings of exposure to violence and values: unique and interactive relationships with antisocial behavior in adolescence. J Interpers Violence. (2015) 30:3065–88. 10.1177/0886260514554421 PubMed DOI

Bevan E, Higgins D. Is domestic violence learned? The contribution of five forms of child maltreatment to men’s violence and adjustment. J Fam Viol. (2002) 17:223–45.

Hoeve M, Dubas J, Eichelsheim V, van der Laan P, Smeenk W, Gerris J. The relationship between parenting and delinquency: a meta-analysis. J Abnorm Child Psychol. (2009) 37:749–75. PubMed PMC

Skřivánková P. Selected Psychological Characteristics in Violence Risk Assessment in Youth in the Czech Republic. Prague: Charles University; (2022).

Burt S, Pearson A, Carroll S, Klump K, Neiderhiser J. Child antisocial behavior is more environmental in origin in disadvantaged neighborhoods: evidence across residents’ perceptions and geographic scales in two samples. J Abnorm Child Psychol. (2019) 48:265–76. 10.1007/s10802-019-00587-6 PubMed DOI PMC

Sellbom M, Wygant DB, Drislane LE. Elucidating the construct validity of the psychopathic personality inventory triarchic scales. J Pers Assess. (2015) 97:374–81. 10.1080/00223891.2014.962654 PubMed DOI

Geffner R, Conradi L, Geis K, Brenda Aranda M. Conducting child custody evaluations in the context of family violence allegations: practical techniques and suggestions for ethical practice. J Child Custody Res Issues Pract. (2009) 6:189–218.

Johnson J, Cohen P, Smailes E, Kasen S, Oldham J, Skodol A, et al. Adolescent personality disorders associated with violence and criminal behavior during adolescence and early adulthood. Am J Psychiatry. (2000) 157:1406–12. PubMed

Sutherland I, Shepherd J. A personality-based model of adolescent violence. Br J Criminol. (2002) 42:433–41. 10.1080/15374410801955888 PubMed DOI

Mestre J, Núñez-Lozano J, Gómez-Molinero R, Zayas A, Guil R. Emotion regulation ability and resilience in a sample of adolescents from a suburban area. Front Psychol. (2017) 8:1980. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01980 PubMed DOI PMC

Naragon-Gainey K, McMahon T, Chacko T. The structure of common emotion regulation strategies: a meta-analytic examination. Psychol Bull. (2017) 143:384–427. 10.1037/bul0000093 PubMed DOI

Nestor P. Mental disorder and violence: personality dimensions and clinical features. Am J Psychiatry. (2002) 159:1973–8. PubMed

Juarros-Basterretxea J, Herrero J, Escoda-Menéndez P, Rodríguez-Díaz F. Cluster B personality traits and psychological intimate partner violence: considering the mediational role of alcohol. (2020) 37:N1566–87. Available online at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260520922351 (accessed October 10, 2022). 10.1177/0886260520922351 PubMed DOI

Carlota A. Filipino female juvenile delinquents: an exploratory study of their level of intelligence, personality, and attitudes towards the self and selected social figures. Philipp J Psychol. (1982) 15–16:3–27.

Jacob L, Haro J, Koyanagi A. Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration in the English general population. Psychol Med. (2019) 49:1316–23. 10.1017/S0033291718001939 PubMed DOI

Lösel F, Farrington D. Direct protective and buffering protective factors in the development of youth violence. Am J Prev Med. (2012) 43:S8–23. PubMed

de Vries Robbé M, Geers M, Stapel M, Hilterman E, de Vogel V. SAPROF Youth Version: Guidelines for the Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk in Juveniles. Utrecht: Van der Hoeven Kliniek; (2015).

Kleeven A, de Vries Robbé M, Mulder E, Popma A. Risk assessment in juvenile and young adult offenders: predictive validity of the SAVRY and SAPROF-YV. Assessment. (2022) 29:181–97. 10.1177/1073191120959740 PubMed DOI PMC

Burghart M, de Ruiter C, Hynes SE, Krishnan N, Levtova Y, Uyar A. The structured assessment of protective factors for violence risk (SAPROF): a meta-analysis of its predictive and incremental validity. Psychol Assess. (2022). 10.1037/pas0001184 PubMed DOI

Páv M, Skřivánková P, Vňuková M, Ptáček RV. Hodnocení rizika násilného jednání. Ceska Slov Psychiatr. (2020) 116:66–73.

Catchpole R, Gretton H. The predictive validity of risk assessment with violent young offenders: a 1-year examination of criminal outcome. Crim Justice Behav. (2016) 30:688–708.

Hilterman E, Nicholls T, van Nieuwenhuizen C. Predictive validity of risk assessments in juvenile offenders: comparing the SAVRY, PCL:YV, and YLS/CMI with unstructured clinical assessments. Assessment. (2014) 21:324–39. 10.1177/1073191113498113 PubMed DOI

Vincent G, Guy L, Gershenson B, Mccabe P. Does risk assessment make a difference? Results of implementing the SAVRY in juvenile probation. Behav Sci Law. (2012) 30:384–405. 10.1002/bsl.2014 PubMed DOI

Koh L, Day A, Klettke B, Daffern M, Chu C. Youth violence assessment instruments: are they sensitive to change and are changes related to recidivism? Psychol Crime Law. (2021) 28:416–33. 10.1034/j.1600-0447.106.s412.10.x PubMed DOI

Soderstrom M, Childs K, Frick P. The role of protective factors in the predictive accuracy of the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY). Youth Violence Juv Justice. (2019) 18:78–95.

Fabrigar L, MacCallum R, Wegener D, Strahan E. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods. (1999) 4:272–99.

Sijtsema J, Kretschmer T, van Os T. The structured assessment of violence risk in youth in a large community sample of young adult males and females: the TRAILS study. Psychol Assess. (2015) 27:669–77. 10.1037/a0038520 PubMed DOI

Hilterman E, Bongers I, Nicholls T, van Nieuwenhuizen C. Identifying gender specific risk/need areas for male and female juvenile offenders: factor analyses with the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY). Law Hum Behav. (2016) 40:82–96. 10.1037/lhb0000158 PubMed DOI

Skřivánková P. Strukturované Hodnocení Rizika Násilí u Dospívajících. Praha: Hogrefe – Testcentrum; (2020).

Cattell R, Cattell M. High School Personality Questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for personality and ability testing; (1968).

Srivastava G. Development of norms for Hindi adaptation of junior-senior HSPQ (1968 version). Asian J Psychol Educ. (1982) 9:43–7.

Cattell R, Gibbons B. Personality factor structure of the combined guilford and cattell personality questionnaires. J Pers Soc Psychol. (1968) 9:107–20. 10.1037/h0025724 PubMed DOI

Cattell R. HSPQ Cuestionario de Personalidad Para Adolescentes (12-18 años). Madrid: TEA Ediciones; (1983).

Dolejš M. Updating of the Population Standards for High School Personality Questionnaire (HSPQ). Olomouc: STARFOS; (2014).

Sherman JL, Krug SE, Birenbaum M. Checking the reliability and validity of HSPQ profiles. J Pers Assess. (1979) 43:644–7. 10.1207/s15327752jpa4306_15 PubMed DOI

Cattell R, Coan R, Beloff H. A re-examination of personality structure in late childhood, and development of the high school personality questionnaire. J Exp Educ. (2015) 27:73–88.

Balcar K. Osobnostní Dotazník Pro Mládež HSPQ (II. Přepracované Vydání). Bratislava: Psychodiagnostické a didaktické testy; (1986).

Lodewijks H, Doreleijers T, de Ruiter C, Borum R. Predictive validity of the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY) during residential treatment. Int J Law Psychiatry. (2008) 31:263–71. 10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.04.009 PubMed DOI

Zhou J, Witt K, Cao X, Chen C, Wang X. Predicting reoffending using the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY): a 5-year follow-up study of male juvenile offenders in Hunan Province, China. PLoS One. (2017) 12:e0169251. 10.1371/journal.pone.0169251 PubMed DOI PMC

Herrenkohl T, Kosterman R, Mason W, Hawkins J. Youth violence trajectories and proximal characteristics of intimate partner violence. Violence Vict. (2007) 22:259–74. 10.1891/088667007780842793 PubMed DOI

de Vogel V, de Vries Robbé M, de Ruiter C, Bouman Y. Assessing protective factors in forensic psychiatric practice: introducing the SAPROF. Int J Forensic Ment Health. (2011) 10:171–7.

Childs K, Frick P, Gottlieb K. Sex differences in the measurement invariance and factors that influence structured judgments of risk using the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY). Youth Violence Juv Justice. (2014) 14:76–92.

Langhinrichsen-Rohling J, Neidig P. Violent backgrounds of economically disadvantaged youth: risk factors for perpetrating violence? J Fam Violence. (1995) 10:379–97.

Laye-Gindhu A, Schonert-Reichl K. Nonsuicidal self-harm among community adolescents: understanding the “whats” and “whys” of self-harm. J Youth Adolesc. (2005) 34:447–57.

Caprara G, Kanacri B, Gerbino M, Zuffianň A, Alessandri G, Vecchio G, et al. Positive effects of promoting prosocial behavior in early adolescence. Int J Behav Dev. (2014) 38:386–96.

Waasdorp T, Bradshaw C, Leaf P. The impact of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on bullying and peer rejection: a randomized controlled effectiveness trial. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. (2012) 166:149–56. 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.755 PubMed DOI

Forman SG, Forman BD. Family environment and its relation to adolescent personality factors. J Pers Assess. (1981) 45:163–7. 10.1207/s15327752jpa4502_11 PubMed DOI

Zara G, Farrington D. Childhood and adolescent predictors of late onset criminal careers. J Youth Adolesc. (2009) 38:287–300. 10.1007/s10964-008-9350-3 PubMed DOI

Kraemer G. Social attachment, brain function, aggression and violence. In: Raine A, Brennan PA, Farrington DP, Mednick SA. editors. Biosocial Bases of Violence. Boston, MA: Springer; (1997). p. 207–29.

Jan Č. Rozvíjení Osobnosti a Zpùsob Výchovy. ISV. (1996).

Werner E, Ruth S. Journeys From Childhood to Midlife: Praha, Risk, Resilience, and Recovery. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; (2001).

Páv M, Sebalo I, Vňuková M, Pabiánová Š, Málová V, Hollý M, et al. Predicting discharge from long-term forensic treatment: patients characteristics, protective factors, needs and treatment-related factors study in the Czechia. J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol. (2022) 33:89–111. 10.1080/14789949.2022.2027995 DOI

Lambert M, Barley D. Research summary on the therapeutic relationship and psychotherapy outcome. Psychotherapy. (2001) 38:357–61.

Garnefski N, Kraaij V, Spinhoven P. Negative life events, cognitive emotion regulation and emotional problems. Pers Individ Diff. (2001) 30:1311–27.

Chu C, Goh M, Chong D. The predictive validity of savry ratings for assessing youth offenders in Singapore: a comparison with YLS/CMI ratings. Crim Justice Behav. (2016) 43:793–810. 10.1177/0093854815616842 PubMed DOI PMC