ArticlePsychiatry research2025
Self- and other-harm in mass shooters: A dual-harm analysis.
Article in Psychiatry research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pre-attack crisis indicators in mass shooters: Differences across no-, single-, and dual-harm groups.Journal of affective disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionResearch suggests that individuals engaging in both self- and other-harm (viz., dual-harm) face increased risks of negative outcomes compared to those with single-harm (either self- or other-harm) or no-harm histories. This study examines mass shooters through this lens and compares them across multiple risk factors.
methodsThis study analyzed 197 U.S. mass shooters in public incidents with four or more fatalities (August 1966 to January 2023), using The Violence Project Database. Nearly all were men (97.5 %), with a mean age of 34 (M = 33.97, SD = 12.65, range = 11-72). Participants were categorized into no-harm, single-harm, or dual-harm groups based on histories of thoughts of self-harm, aggression, and violent crime.
resultsOne-fifth (n = 40) exhibited dual-harm, with this group showing the highest prevalence of most risk factors. They had significantly more adverse childhood experiences (no-harm = 0.56, single-harm = 1.02, dual-harm = 1.88, p < .001, ε² = .091). Compared to the no-harm group (31.5 %), dual-harm individuals had significantly higher rates of sexual abuse, single-parent upbringing, psychiatric hospitalization, psychiatric medication, prior counseling, mood disorders, drug use, bullying, animal abuse, criminal records, abusive behavior, interest in past mass violence, fame-seeking, video game engagement, and leakage. Compared with the single-harm group, the dual-harm group (48.2 %) had significantly higher rates of sexual abuse and leakage.
conclusionsExamining mass violence from the trichotomy of harm levels highlights a high-risk subset with complex needs, while also identifying a lower-risk no-harm group, underscoring the heterogeneity of their life experiences and behaviors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.