Even though actuarial risk information is not routinely used in forensic decisionmaking, research evidence shows that actuarial assessments provide the most accurate predictions of violent recidivism and can improve forensic decisionmaking. It is argued that good forensic decisions place higher risk cases under greater supervision than lower risk cases. This study of hypothetical decisions by 60 experienced forensic clinicians manipulated violence risk within subjects and varied case history information and risk assessment statement between subjects to examine to what extent forensic clinicians’ perceptions of risk and decisions are sensitive to statements about likelihood of violence and to risk-relevant case information, and if sensitivity varies with the availability of actuarial likelihood statements. The study utilized two case histories consisting of relatively high- and low-risk individuals, presented in counterbalanced order. The study demonstrated that under some circumstances, forensic clinicians could use information related to violence risk. However, a summary likelihood statement improved communication of risk. The best decisions (the greatest distinction in security placement between objectively higher and lower risk patients) occurred when a probabilistic risk assessment summary statement was provided. In the absence of such statements and information, participants tended to be conservative or even declined to make a decision. These findings strongly recommend strategies for improving violence risk communication. Appendix and references