{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/122121"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/122121","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Trends in higher education professionals’ use and perceptions of structured professional judgment instruments for threat assessment purposes","abstract":"Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'U of I Access', the embargo will last until 2025-12-01","abstract_html":"Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'U of I Access', the embargo will last until 2025-12-01","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Snyder, Katherine"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Educ Policy, Orgzn & Leadrshp","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Ward Hood, Denice","Cromley, Jennifer","Huang, Wenhao David","Delaney, Jennifer"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2023,"date_issued":"2023-12","date_published":"2023-12","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:00Z","subjects":["Threat Assessment","Structured Professional Judgment Instrument","Behavioral Intervention","Higher Education","Threat Assessment Team"],"languages":["en","eng"],"rights":["Copyright 2023 Katherine Snyder"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/2142/122121","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Ward Hood, Denice","Cromley, Jennifer","Huang, Wenhao David","Delaney, Jennifer"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Snyder, Katherine"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2023-12","2023-11-26"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Educ Policy, Orgzn & Leadrshp"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Threat Assessment","Structured Professional Judgment Instrument","Behavioral Intervention","Higher Education","Threat Assessment Team"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en","eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2023 Katherine Snyder"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/2142/122121"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'U of I Access', the embargo will last until 2025-12-01","The student, Katherine Snyder, accepted the attached license on 2023-11-18 at 05:46.","The student, Katherine Snyder, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2023-11-18 at 05:51.","This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2023-11-26 at 13:49.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #19958 on 2024-03-01 at 13:30:32","Research indicates that most institutions of higher education in the United States have a threat assessment team (Randazzo & Cameron, 2012). The development and validation of threat assessment instruments has had a profound impact on the field of threat assessment, but despite widespread implementation of threat assessment in higher education, the use of such tools in higher education settings has remained under-researched (Pedersen et al., 2010, p. 74). Using Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation Theory (2003) and Davis’ (1989) Technology Acceptance Model as frameworks, this cross-sectional survey research had five main aims, to: (a) provide current rates of use of structured professional judgment (SPJ) instruments by higher education threat assessment professionals, (b) identify the most commonly use SPJ instruments in this setting, (c) explore the relationship between institutional characteristics and the use of an instrument, (d) assess higher education professionals’ perceptions of the instruments’ usefulness and ease of use and compare between instruments, and (e) use Davis’ Technology Acceptance model to investigate the relationship between perceived usefulness and ease of use and frequency of use. The final sample included 244 respondents who were members of threat assessment teams in higher education. Data analysis included descriptives, frequencies, Cramér’s V correlations, the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA of Ranks, and Ordinary Least Squares Regression using ranked variables. There were no statistically significant relationships between institutional characteristics and use of an instrument, or between instruments on perceived usefulness. There was a statistically significant difference between two instruments on perceived ease of use and a statistically significant relationship between perceived usefulness and frequency of use. This research has implications for tool developers, and trainers, higher education team members who use SPJ instruments, higher education decision makers with the power and resources to decide on an instrument, and policy and practice."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Trends in higher education professionals’ use and perceptions of structured professional judgment instruments for threat assessment purposes"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Ward Hood, Denice","Cromley, Jennifer","Huang, Wenhao David","Delaney, Jennifer"],"dc:creator":["Snyder, Katherine"],"dc:date":["2023-12","2023-11-26"],"dc:description":["Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'U of I Access', the embargo will last until 2025-12-01","The student, Katherine Snyder, accepted the attached license on 2023-11-18 at 05:46.","The student, Katherine Snyder, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2023-11-18 at 05:51.","This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2023-11-26 at 13:49.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #19958 on 2024-03-01 at 13:30:32","Research indicates that most institutions of higher education in the United States have a threat assessment team (Randazzo & Cameron, 2012). The development and validation of threat assessment instruments has had a profound impact on the field of threat assessment, but despite widespread implementation of threat assessment in higher education, the use of such tools in higher education settings has remained under-researched (Pedersen et al., 2010, p. 74). Using Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation Theory (2003) and Davis’ (1989) Technology Acceptance Model as frameworks, this cross-sectional survey research had five main aims, to: (a) provide current rates of use of structured professional judgment (SPJ) instruments by higher education threat assessment professionals, (b) identify the most commonly use SPJ instruments in this setting, (c) explore the relationship between institutional characteristics and the use of an instrument, (d) assess higher education professionals’ perceptions of the instruments’ usefulness and ease of use and compare between instruments, and (e) use Davis’ Technology Acceptance model to investigate the relationship between perceived usefulness and ease of use and frequency of use. The final sample included 244 respondents who were members of threat assessment teams in higher education. Data analysis included descriptives, frequencies, Cramér’s V correlations, the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA of Ranks, and Ordinary Least Squares Regression using ranked variables. There were no statistically significant relationships between institutional characteristics and use of an instrument, or between instruments on perceived usefulness. There was a statistically significant difference between two instruments on perceived ease of use and a statistically significant relationship between perceived usefulness and frequency of use. This research has implications for tool developers, and trainers, higher education team members who use SPJ instruments, higher education decision makers with the power and resources to decide on an instrument, and policy and practice."],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["https://hdl.handle.net/2142/122121"],"dc:language":["en","eng"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2023 Katherine Snyder"],"dc:subject":["Threat Assessment","Structured Professional Judgment Instrument","Behavioral Intervention","Higher Education","Threat Assessment Team"],"dc:title":["Trends in higher education professionals’ use and perceptions of structured professional judgment instruments for threat assessment purposes"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Educ Policy, Orgzn & Leadrshp"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:00Z"}