As reported at In The News Blog: "The Court unanimously held that a defendant may be spared the death penalty because he is mentally deficient in one area, even if his overall IQ score falls in the normal range. The decision overturned an appeals court finding that “full-scale IQ” was the best measure of intelligence." Click on the In the News Blog for a lengthier summary.
I've posted copies of the original 2005 decision (click here) and the final California Supreme Court decision (click here) for readers to digest.
I'm going to read the decision carefully as it raises many important intelligence testing and measurement issues. I'm not sure if I will eventually make a single post re: my observations, comments, conclusions, quesitons, etc., or if I will present snippets from the two decisions and make comments in separate posts.
My knee jerk reaction, after seeing four different Wechsler test administrations (and a fifth abbreviated Wechsler---WASI), all that produced very consistent findings, is why someone didnt' recommend the administration of other measures of cognitive abilities (not measured by the Wechslers) to gather information re: important cognitive abilities related to intellectual functioning.
I would love to hear from other psychologists, intelligence scholars, and experts in mental retardation re: their opinion of the courts ruling and the evidence presented, logic of the court, etc. This is a case that can be very instructive. I just need to find time to do it justice. Guest blog posts would be much appreciated.
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, school psychology, forensic psychology, criminal justice, criminal psychology, mental disability, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, MR, mental retardation, developmental disabilities, Atkins case, California Supreme Court, Vidal, Wechsler IQ tests, general intelligence, part scores
