#Intellectual #disability (#ID) and adjudicative #competence evaluations: A detailed review of an often-overlooked population.

Intellectual disability and adjudicative competence evaluations: A detailed review of an often-overlooked population. 

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-49587-001

Wood, M. E., Potts, H., & Wang, S. (2024). Intellectual disability and adjudicative competence evaluations: A detailed review of an often-overlooked population. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000446

---

Abstract
Research has indicated that individuals with intellectual disability represent a relatively small but meaningful subset of defendants referred for adjudicative competence evaluations. While scholars have consistently argued that this population is unique and requires special consideration in terms of the competency assessment and treatment process, little is known about this population overall and/or the relative effectiveness of the uniquely tailored interventions recommended in the literature. The current study, an archival analysis of 117 court-ordered adjudicative competence evaluations, aimed to address this gap by focusing exclusively on a known group of defendants with intellectual disability. The results revealed a significantly lower base rate of opined competence (18.8%) relative to the larger population of defendants referred for competency evaluations (i.e., historically between 70% and 80%). Nearly one-quarter of the sample was opined unrestorable, which was associated with significantly lower measured intelligence (d = 0.61 and 0.91) and adaptive behavior scores (d = 1.04) than their counterparts. These results add to a very limited body of research on this subset of defendants. Implications are discussed in terms of systemic considerations, with a particular emphasis on the need for appropriate services for this subset of defendants, as well as a commitment to research on the efficacy of these interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Wait, Where’s the Flynn Effect on the WAIS-V?

 

Emily L. Winter, 

Sierra M. Trudel, 

Alan S. Kaufman

J. Intell. 2024, 12(11), 118; https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence12110118

Click on the link to down open access copy of the PDF article.

The recent release of the WAIS-5, a decade and a half after its predecessor, the WAIS-IV, raises immediate questions about the Flynn effect (FE). Does the traditional FE of points per decade in the U.S. for children and adults, identified for the Full Scale IQs of all Wechsler scales and for other global IQ scores as well, persist into the 2020s? The WAIS-5 Technical and Interpretive Manual provides two counterbalanced validity studies that address the Flynn effect directly—N = 186 adolescents and adults (16–90 years, mean age = 47.8) tested on the WAIS-IV and WAIS-5; and N = 98 16-year-olds tested on the WISC-V and WAIS-5. The FE is incorporated into the diagnostic criteria for intellectual disabilities by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), by DSM-5-TR, and in capital punishment cases. The unexpected result of the two counterbalanced studies was a reduction in the Flynn effect from the expected value of 3 IQ points to 1.2 points. These findings raise interesting questions regarding whether the three point adjustment to FSIQs should be continued for intellectual disability diagnosis and whether the federal courts should rethink its guidelines for capital punishment cases and other instances of high stakes decision-making. Limitations include a lack of generalization to children, the impact of the practice effects, and a small sample size.

Keywords: 

Flynn effect; IQ tests; cognitive assessment; Wechsler scales; WAIS-5; WAIS-IV; intelligence testing; capital punishment cases; intellectual disabilities