Hi Dear

Nice to meet you
I'm Sana Fatah,Can i get to know you?
lets keep in touch through
my personal here
i would like to have further discussion
Thanks
Yours Sincerely
Sana

Recent hacked posts

Over the past few weeks some advertising posts somehow made it on to this blog.  Someone must have hacked the account.  I believe I have deleted all these advertisements from the blog.  Thanks again.

Cohort differences on the CVLT-II and CVLT3: evidence of a negative Flynn effect on the attention/working memory and learning trials: The Clinical Neuropsychologist: Vol 0, No 0

This will be added to the Flynn effect reference project document when it is next updated.

Cohort differences on the CVLT-II and CVLT3: evidence of a negative Flynn effect on the attention/working memory and learning trials: The Clinical Neuropsychologist: Vol 0, No 0
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2019.1699605

wj3chc.atkinsmr7679@blogger.com

******************************************

Kevin S. McGrew, PhD

Educational & School Psychologist

Director

Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)

https://www.themindhub.com

******************************************

Evaluating Intellectual Disability after the Moore v. Texas Redux | Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

http://jaapl.org/content/47/4/486

Abstract

This article reviews the history of the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings on intellectual disability in capital cases, highlighting the difficulty states have had in devising a workable definition that meets constitutional standards. The Court's decisions in Penry v. Lynaugh (1989), Atkins v. Virginia (2002), and Hall v. Florida (2014) are briefly summarized. Next, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' ruling in Ex parte Briseno (2004) is discussed as a prelude to the Supreme Court's decision in Moore v. Texas I (2017). On remand, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals interpreted the Supreme Court's Moore I ruling in a manner that resulted in finding Mr. Moore intellectually able, and therefore eligible for the death penalty, in Ex parte Moore II (2018). Finally, the importance of the Supreme Court's most recent ruling on intellectual disability in capital cases, Moore v. Texas II (2019), is explored in depth. The article concludes with recommendations for best practices among forensic evaluators who assess capital defendants for intellectual disability.

Sent from my iPhone

Variations in reliability and validity do not influence judge, attorney, and mock juror decisions about psychological expert evidence. - PsycNET

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-55518-001

Citation

Chorn, J. A., & Kovera, M. B. (2019). Variations in reliability and validity do not influence judge, attorney, and mock juror decisions about psychological expert evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 43(6), 542–557. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000345

---

Abstract

Objective: We tested whether the reliability and validity of psychological testing underlying an expert's opinion influenced judgments made by judges, attorneys, and mock jurors. Hypotheses: We predicted that the participants would judge the expert's evidence more positively when it had high validity and high reliability. Method: In Experiment 1, judges (N = 111) and attorneys (N = 95) read a summary of case facts and proffer of expert testimony on the intelligence of a litigant. The psychological testing varied in scientific quality; either there was (a) blind administration (i.e., the psychologist did not have an expectation for the test result) of a highly reliable test, (b) nonblind administration (i.e., the psychologist did have an expectation for the test result) of a highly reliable test, or (c) blind administration of a test with low reliability. In a trial simulation (Experiment 2), we varied the scientific quality of the intelligence test and whether the cross-examination addressed the scientific quality of the test. Results: The variations in scientific quality did not influence judges' admissibility decisions nor their ratings of scientific quality nor did it influence attorneys' decisions about whether to move to exclude the evidence. Attorneys' ratings of scientific quality were sensitive to variations in reliability but not the testing conditions. Scientifically informed cross-examinations did not help mock jurors (N = 192) evaluate the validity or the reliability of a psychological test. Conclusion: Cross-examination was an ineffective method for educating jurors about problems associated with nonblind testing and reliability, which highlights the importance of training judges to evaluate the quality of expert evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)

--
***********************************************
Kevin S. McGrew,  PhD
Educational Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
www.themindhub.com
************************************************

Meta-analysis of relation between WCST and IQ

https://res.mdpi.com/d_attachment/brainsci/brainsci-09-00349/article_deploy/brainsci-09-00349.pdf

--
***********************************************
Kevin S. McGrew,  PhD
Educational Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
www.themindhub.com
************************************************

Ethnic adjustment abuses in forensic assessment of intellectual abilities. - PsycNET

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-61762-001

Within the past few years, courts have been more open to accepting evidence of psychological research. For instance, in 2002, the United States Supreme Court, citing an American Psychological Association (APA) Amicus brief, declared that the execution of mentally retarded individuals was unconstitutional because it violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Between 2005 and 2012, the Supreme Court accepted APA briefs describing the limitations in neural development of adolescents and its relevance to sentencing. In 2013, the Court ruled that in assessing an individual's intelligence there must be a consideration of the standard error of measurement. All of this suggested a progressive movement in judicial recognition of psychological research. However, during the same time, many courts were allowing and accepting testimony in capital sentencing cases of so-called ethnic adjustment. Some psychologists were testifying that defendants who were from ethnic minority groups had IQ scores that were suppressed and that therefore their scores had to be "adjusted" upward to compensate for the suppression. However, these adjustments were based purely on clinical judgment and did not reflect any empirical studies. As a result, several of these individuals who had their IQ scores adjusted have been executed. This article will describe the case law surrounding this concept, ethical issues that it raises, and how a practitioner can provide useful consultation to attorneys who represent defendants in such cases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)

Enduring the tests of age and time: Wechsler constructs across versions and revisions - ScienceDirect

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289619301850

Atkins Court Decisions: Ford v OH (2019) and Jenkins v AL (2019)

Two more Atkins related court decisions.

Ford v OH (2019)

Jenkins v AL (2019)

After Being Reversed Twice, Texas Appeals Court Takes Intellectually Disabled Prisoner Off Death Row

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/after-being-reversed-twice-texas-appeals-court-takes-intellectually-disabled-prisoner-off-death-row

Atkins Court Decisions: A bunch to update from FL and OK

I have been WAYYYYYYYY behind in posting recent Atkins court decisions and related documents.  Here I post info regarding a number of cases, without comment.  Click on each to access PDF files.

Bowles (2019, FL)

Harris (2019, OK)

Sharpe (2019, OK)

Smith (2019, OK)

Walls (2019, FL; one, two).  More info here.

Atkins Court Decision: TX CCA Commutes Bobby Moore’s Death Sentence in Intellectual Disability Case

After iterating through the courts for years, the Atkins case of Bobby Moore, which had the Texas Briseno factors as a core issue, has been settled.

Click here for news story.  Here is another news story link.

Forensic Clinicians' Understanding of Bias (MacLean et al., 2019)

Article link.

Abstract

Bias, or systematic influences that create errors in judgment, can affect psychological evaluations in ways that lead to erroneous diagnoses and opinions. Although these errors can have especially serious consequences in the criminal justice system, little research has addressed forensic psychologists' awareness of well-known cognitive biases and debiasing strategies. We conducted a national survey with a sample of 120 randomly selected licensed psychologists with forensic interests to examine (a) their familiarity with and understanding of cognitive biases, (b) their self-reported strategies to mitigate bias, and (c) the relation of a and b to psychologists' cognitive reflection abilities. Most psychologists reported familiarity with well-known biases and distinguished these from sham biases and reported using research-identified strategies but not fictional or sham strategies. However, some psychologists reported little familiarity with actual biases, endorsed sham biases as real, failed to recognize effective bias mitigation strategies, and endorsed ineffective bias mitigation strategies. Furthermore, nearly everyone endorsed introspection (a strategy known to be ineffective) as an effective bias mitigation strategy. Cognitive reflection abilities were systematically related to error, such that stronger cognitive reflection was associated with less endorsement of sham biases.

Keywords: bias, forensic evaluation, survey, cognitive reflection

Digit Span Subscale Scores May Be Insufficiently Reliable for Clinical Interpretation: Distinguishing Between Stratified Coefficient Alpha and Omega Hierarchical - Gilles E. Gignac, Matthew R. Reynolds, Kristof Kovacs, 2019

Digit Span Subscale Scores May Be Insufficiently Reliable for Clinical Interpretation: Distinguishing Between Stratified Coefficient Alpha and Omega Hierarchical - Gilles E. Gignac, Matthew R. Reynolds, Kristof Kovacs, 2019
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1073191117748396

Sent from Flipboard

******************************************************

Kevin McGrew, PhD

Educational Psychologist

Director, Institute for Applied Psychometrics

IAP

www.themindhub.com

******************************************************

The Flynn effect for fluid IQ may not generalize to all ages or ability levels: A population-based study of 10,000 US adolescents - ScienceDirect

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289619301679

A-79 Flynn Effect Correction: Accuracy Base Rate for IQ/Ability Level | Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology | Oxford Academic

https://academic.oup.com/acn/article-abstract/34/6/939/5555276?redirectedFrom=fulltext

A-79 Flynn Effect Correction: Accuracy Base Rate for IQ/Ability Level | Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology | Oxford Academic

https://academic.oup.com/acn/article-abstract/34/6/939/5555276


Sent from my iPhone

Reasonable Accommodations for Meeting the Unique Needs of Defendants with Intellectual Disability | Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

http://jaapl.org/content/47/3/310


******************************************************
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
Director, Institute for Applied Psychometrics
IAP
www.themindhub.com
******************************************************

Adjudicative Competence and the Criminalization of Intellectual Disability | Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

http://jaapl.org/content/47/3/321


******************************************************
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
Director, Institute for Applied Psychometrics
IAP
www.themindhub.com
******************************************************

Atkins Court Decisions--Pizzuto v Idaho (2019) and Johnson v Texas (2019)

Here are two new Atkins court decisions, provided without comment.

Pizzuto v Idaho (2019).  Prior decisions related to this case can be found here.

Johnson v Texas (2019). 

AAIDD Opposes a Proposed Revision to the DSM-5’s Entry for Intellectual Disability

http://aaidd.org/news-policy/news/releases/2019/07/29/aaidd-opposes-a-proposed-revision-to-the-dsm-5-s-entry-for-intellectual-disability

Declines in vocabulary among American adults within levels of educational attainment, 1974–2016 - ScienceDirect

File under Flynn effect related research

Abstract

We examined trends over time in vocabulary, a key component of verbal intelligence, in the nationally representative General Social Survey of U.S. adults (n = 29,912). Participants answered multiple-choice questions about the definitions of 10 specific words. When controlled for educational attainment, the vocabulary of the average U.S. adult declined between the mid-1970s and the 2010s. Vocabulary declined across all levels of educational attainment (less than high school, high school or 2-year college graduate, bachelor's or graduate degree), with the largest declines among those with a bachelor's or graduate degree. Hierarchical linear modeling analyses separating the effects of age, time period, and cohort suggest that the decline is primarily a time period effect. Increasing educational attainment has apparently not improved verbal ability among Americans. Instead, as educational attainment has increased, those at each educational level are less verbally skilled even though the vocabulary skills of the whole population are unchanged.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618302198

Webster v IN (2019) decision reported in Washington Times

Webster v IN (2019), which can be found here, was recently covered in the Washington Times.

The Flynn Effect in Families: Studies of Register Data on Norwegian Military Conscripts and Their Families

The Flynn Effect in Families: Studies of Register Data on Norwegian Military Conscripts and Their Families
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-3200/2/3/106/htm

Sent from Flipboard

2 Recent law reveiw articles: Lamparello (2019), Johnson et al. (2019)

Click link to access PDF.

• Johnson, S. L., Blume, J. H. & Hritz, A. C. (2019).  Convictions of innocent people with intellectual disability.

• Lamparello, A. (2019).  IQ, culpability, and the criminal law's "gray area:"  Why the rationale for reducing culpability of juveniles and intellectually disabled adults should apply to low-IQ adults.

Three recent Atkins decisions: Altamirano (2019; Az), Raulerson (2019, Ga), Webster (2019, IN)

Here are three recent Atkins decisions. Click to access PDF.

• Altamirano (2019; Az)
• Raulerson (2019, Ga)
• Webster (2019, IN)

Judge Finds Federal Death-Row Prisoner Bruce Webster Intellectually Disabled, Vacates Death Sentence

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/judge-finds-federal-death-row-prisoner-bruce-webster-intellectually-disabled-vacates-death-sentence

APA 2019 workshop on "New Developments in the Death Penalty and People with Intellectual Disability:

Click on image to enlarge

Communication and cross-examination in court for children and adults with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review - Joanne Morrison, Rachel Forrester-Jones, Jill Bradshaw, Glynis Murphy, 2019

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1365712719851134

Abstract

Courts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland have identified children and adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) as vulnerable witnesses. The call from the English Court of Appeal is for advocates to adjust questioning during cross-examination according to individual needs. This review systematically examined previous empirical studies with the aim of delineating the particular communication needs of children and adults with ID during cross-examination. Studies utilising experimental methodology similar to examination/cross-examination processes, or which assessed the communication of actual cross-examinations in court were included. A range of communication challenges were highlighted, including: suggestibility to leading questions and negative feedback; acquiescence; accuracy; memory and understanding of court language. In addition, a number of influencing factors were identified, including: age; IQ level; question styles used. This review highlights the need for further research using cross-examination methodology and live practice, that take into consideration the impact on communication of the unique environment and situation of the cross-examination process.

Keywords Communication, cross-examination, court, intellectual disability, learning difficulties, learning disability, vulnerable defendant, vulnerable witness

Atkins court decisions: Busby v Davis (TX) and Smith v Alabama

FYI--two recent Atkins related decisions

Busby v Davis (TX: 2019)

Smith v Alabama (2019)