Showing posts with label forensic psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label forensic psychology. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Posted with BlogsyTuesday, October 2, 2012
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Research Brief: Does neurological-image evidence influence jurors in criminal jury trials ?
Double click OM image to enlarge
- iPost using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
- iPost using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Monday, May 31, 2010
Research Brief 5-31-2010: Forensic psychology education and training
The field of forensic psychology has experienced remarkable growth over the past three decades. Perhaps the best evidence of this growth is the number of forensic psychology training programs currently enrolling students. Those interested in forensic psychology can choose from several types of programs aimed at different educational outcomes. In addition, opportunities for postdoctoral fellowships, continuing education, and respecialization have become increasingly more available. Despite the increased availability of forensic psychology training programs, there is little consensus regarding the core substantive components of these programs. This article will summarize the existing educational and training models in forensic psychology programs and then identify a core set of competencies that should be considered for inclusion in doctoral-level forensic psychology training curricula to adequately prepare students for the increasingly varied roles assumed by forensic psychologists.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, psychometrics, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, adaptive behavior, adaptive functioning, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, Atkins MR/ID listserv, ICDP blog
Thursday, January 7, 2010
JAAPL special issue on evidence, Daubert standard and forensic psychiatry and the law
The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online has published a special issue covering evidence-based practice and the Daubert standard with the field of forensic psychiatry and law. The on-line table of contents is reproduced below. Thanks to Kevin Foley for bringing this to my attention.
Contents: December 2009, Volume 37, Issue 4
INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL ISSUE:
EDITORIALS:
REGULAR ARTICLE:
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY:
LEGAL DIGEST:
BOOK REVIEWS:
Contents: December 2009, Volume 37, Issue 4
INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL ISSUE:
Graham D. Glancy and Michael Saini
The Confluence of Evidence-Based Practice and Daubert Within the Fields of Forensic Psychiatry and the Law
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 438-441. [Full Text] [PDF]
EDITORIALS:
Michael Welner
The Justice and Therapeutic Promise of Science-Based Research on Criminal Evil
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 442-449. [Full Text] [PDF]
REGULAR ARTICLE:
Richard Rogers and Jill Johansson-Love
Evaluating Competency to Stand Trial with Evidence-Based Practice
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 450-460. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Frank Sirotich
The Criminal Justice Outcomes of Jail Diversion Programs for Persons With Mental Illness: A Review of the Evidence
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 461-472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Michael Saini
A Meta-analysis of the Psychological Treatment of Anger: Developing Guidelines for Evidence-Based Practice
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 473-488. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
J. Arturo Silva
Forensic Psychiatry, Neuroscience, and the Law
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 489-502. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Richard D. Schneider
Commentary: Evidence-Based Practice and Forensic Psychiatry
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 503-508. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Amy Phenix and Shoba Sreenivasan
A Practical Guide for the Evaluation of Sexual Recidivism Risk in Mentally Retarded Sex Offenders
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 509-524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Stanley L. Brodsky, Tess M. S. Neal, Robert J. Cramer, and Mitchell H. Ziemke
Credibility in the Courtroom: How Likeable Should an Expert Witness Be?
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 525-532. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY:
Neil Krishan Aggarwal
Allowing Independent Forensic Evaluations for Guantánamo Detainees
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 533-537. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Marilyn Price and Donna M. Norris
White-Collar Crime: Corporate and Securities and Commodities Fraud
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 538-544. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Sohrab Zahedi, Robert Burchuk, David C. Stone, and Alex Kopelowicz
Gun Laws and the Involuntarily Committed: A California Road Map
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 545-548. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Anasuya Salem and Cecilia Leonard
Psychiatric and Clinical Sequelaeof Delirium and Competenceto Stand Trial
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 549-551. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Joseph D. Bloom
Forensic Psychiatry and the Forensic Sciences: In Memory of Peter J. Batten, MD
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 552-555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
LEGAL DIGEST:
J. Jason Buckland and Richard L. Frierson
Constitutionality of the Federal Sex-Offender Commitment Law
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 556-558. [Full Text] [PDF]
Joel Watts and Joy Stankowski
The Therapist-Patient Privilege Challenged
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 558-561. [Full Text] [PDF]
Praveen Kambam and Sherif Soliman
IQ in Miranda Waivers and Death Penalty
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 561-563. [Full Text] [PDF]
Sara G. West and Stephen Noffsinger
Absolute Right to Privacy for Prison Inmates
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 563-565. [Full Text] [PDF]
Edward Poa and Phillip Resnick
Arwen Podesta and D. Clay Kelly
Forced Medication for Death Penalty Appeals
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 567-570. [Full Text] [PDF]
Mehdi Qalbani and D. Clay Kelly
Franklin J. Bordenave, II and D. Clay Kelly
D. Clay Kelly
Claim of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 573-574. [Full Text] [PDF]
BOOK REVIEWS:
Denise C. Kellaher
Drug Court: Constructing the Moral Identity of Drug Offenders
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 575. [Full Text] [PDF]
Elizabeth Hogan
Correctional Psychiatry: Practice Guidelines and Strategies
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2009 37: 576. [Full Text] [PDF]
M. Jerome Fialkov
Edward Poa
Technorati Tags: psychology, psychiatry, forensic psychiatry, forensic psychology, neuroscience, neuropsychology, psychiatry and law, psychology and law, competence for trial, mental retardation, MR, ID, intellectual disability, Miranda rights, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, ICDP blog
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
New expert added to ICDP professional expert blogroll: Dr. Timothy Derning
Clinical and Forensic Psychology
Timothy J. Derning, Ph.D., M.S.Ed. is an forensic psychologist specializing in neurocognitive and neurobehavioral disabilities, including Intellectual Disability/Mental Retardation (ID/MR), developmental disabilities, high functioning Autism/Asperger’s disorder, Nonverbal Learning Disorder (NLD), Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, etc.
Over the course of the past 20 years he has testified in numerous capital and non-capital cases involving intellectual disabilities in juveniles and adults. He has given expert testimony in pre- and post-conviction cases regarding deficits related to mental retardation, adaptive abilities, developmental delay, social naïveté’, the impact of low intelligence, suggestibility, coercive influence, malingering, communication impairment, psychological trauma, psychopathology and mental illness as these pertain to forensic questions of trial competency, ability to understand and waive rights, confession validity, diminished capacity, competency for execution, dangerousness, etc. Dr. Derning has also prepared opinions in retrospective evaluations of mental retardation in ‘Atkins’ capital cases.
Dr. Derning has been retained and qualified as an expert in Federal courts, and in Superior Courts in California, as well as in jurisdictions of New York, Georgia, Arkansas, Texas, Florida, Hawaii, Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and elsewhere. He served as the mental retardation expert in the case against Jesse Misskelley (‘The Memphis Three’), the mental retardation re-trial of Johnny Paul Penry in 2002, and mental retardation case Craig Godineaux (co-defendant, ‘Wendy’s Massacre’ Queens, NY). Dr. Derning was retained by Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro in two class-separate action suits brought against the California Dept. of Corrections and the California Board of Prison Terms regarding the identification and ADA accommodation of individuals with developmental disabilities (Clark v. California (1998); Armstrong v. Wilson (1999)).
He currently serves as a member of the American Association of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) Death Penalty Task Force. He also serves as a member of Arc California’s Task Force for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, and formerly served as a member of Arc’s California Task Force for Persons with Developmental Disabilities in the Criminal Justice System.
Over the past 20 years Dr. Derning has written and lectured on mental retardation and intellectual disabilities in the criminal justice system. He has conducted professional trainings and workshops for lawyers, mental health professionals, forensic psychologists, investigators, law enforcement, and the lay public at local, state, and national conferences. Working with Temple University's Institute on Disabilities he co-authored a training curriculum for mental health professionals regarding the assessment of defendants with mental retardation.
Dr. Derning serves as an independent psychological expert who subscribes to the ethical code of forensic psychology, which demands a balanced evaluation that is guided by the evaluation data and professional psychological research, favoring neither defense nor prosecution. He is not an advocate for individuals with intellectual disabilities, nor does advocate for or against the death penalty.
Contact information
710 W. Napa St.
Suite #2
Sonoma, CA 95476
Phone: 925-933-8661
Fax: 707-935-6224
timderning@aol.com
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, mental retardation, intellectual disability, neurocognitive, FAS, developmental disabilites, MR, ID, death penalty, capital punishment, Atkins cases, Atkins experts, expert witnesses
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Cultural competencies and forensic evaluations: Perlin & McClain (2009)
Perlin, M. & McClain, V. (2009). Where souls are forgotten: Cultural competencies, forensic evaluations, and internal human rights. Psychology Public Policy and Law, 15(4), 257-277. (click here to view)
Abstract
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, neuropsychology, school psychology, educational psychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, ABA, cutural sensitivity, cultural competencies, psychology and law
Abstract
Cultural competency is critical in criminal forensic evaluations. Cultural competency eschews reliance on stereotypes, precluding the mistake of assuming that cultural dictates apply with equal force to all who share a cultural background, thus allowing the forensic examiner to provide a comprehensive picture of the defendant to the fact-finder. While raised frequently in death penalty cases, the idea of cultural competency is equally important to the entire criminal process. To better understand the significance of this inquiry, we address how cultural sensitivity in test selection and interview techniques may enhance result validity. In a parallel fashion, ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has drawn importance to cultural competency. Although international human rights and cultural sensitivity have been considered with regard to race, gender, and religion, applications to criminal matters are still in their infancy. This article considers strategies to enhance the effectiveness of testimony and mitigation efforts.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, neuropsychology, school psychology, educational psychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, ABA, cutural sensitivity, cultural competencies, psychology and law
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Cultural sensivity in test selection in death penalty cases (Perlin & McCain, in press)
Perlin, Michael L. and McClain, Valerie Rae, 'Where Souls are Forgotten': Cultural Competencies, Forensic Evaluations and International Human Rights (July 30, 2009). Psychology, Public Policy and Law, Vol. 15, 2009; NYLS Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09/10 #6. Available at SSRN(click here):
Abstract
Cultural competency is critical in criminal forensic evaluations. Cultural competency eschews reliance on stereotype, precluding the mistake of assuming that cultural dictates apply with equal force to all who share a cultural background, thus allowing the forensic examiner to provide a comprehensive picture of the defendant to the factfinder. While raised frequently in death penalty cases, it is equally important to the entire criminal process. Cultural sensitivity in test selection and interview techniques that enhance validity of results are addressed. In a parallel fashion, ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has drawn importance to cultural competency. Although international human rights and cultural sensitivity have been considered with regard to race, gender and religion, applications to criminal matters are still in their infancy. This paper considers strategies to enhance the effectiveness of testimony and mitigation efforts.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, cultural competence, neuropsychology, crimnal psychology, criminal justic, educational psychology, school psychology, clinical psychology, disability rights, death penalty, capital punishment, Atkins cases
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Research on malingering: IAP database search 9-23-09
I simply have not had the time to read the articles in my in-box related to malingering issues during psychological assessment, issues that are often critical in Atkins MR death penalty cases. So...I decided to run a search of the IAP Reference Database for any empirical research related to malingering. Click here for the result.
Damn....there is a ton. Not enough time in the day, week, or year to digest it all. But, for folks looking for references, I hope this reference list helps.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, psychological testing, Atkins cases, MR, mental retardation, development disabilities, AAIDD, AAMR, malingering, IQ tests, IQ scores, intelligence, death penalty, capital punishment
Damn....there is a ton. Not enough time in the day, week, or year to digest it all. But, for folks looking for references, I hope this reference list helps.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, psychological testing, Atkins cases, MR, mental retardation, development disabilities, AAIDD, AAMR, malingering, IQ tests, IQ scores, intelligence, death penalty, capital punishment
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Question: Looking for research on Atkins MR cases and stress/malingering impact on IQ scores
I've yet to get to the stack of articles I've put aside on malingering and IQ testing in Atkin's cases, so I am not able to answer the following question that someone posed to me today. So...I'm asking readers if they have any information re: research that addresses the following question of a colleague. Please post your response in the "comment" section. Or, if it is long, send me a personal back channel email (iap@earthlink.net) nd I'll post as a guest blog response. Thank you.
Question: If someone is being tried in a capital case, is it likely for them to do worse, intentionally or unintentionally, on the WAIS-III or other IQ tests than if not experiencing that stress or facing the prospect of death if they do too well? Are there any studies comparing the results of the WAIS-III or other IQ tests given to people before they were arrested and afterwards? In short, are there any studies regarding how the stress (or incentives) of facing the death penalty might depress their scores?
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, educational psychology, criminal psychology, IQ tests, malingering, SCOTUS, Atkins cases, psychometrics, IQ scores, clinical psychology, intelligence, mental retardation, MR, developmental disabilities
Monday, September 21, 2009
In the News blog: Thanks
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, IQ, intelligence, IQ tests, Atkins cases, MR, mental retardation, capital punishment, death penalty
New blog added to blog roll: In the News
I just learned of another potentially informative blog for readers of Intellectual Competence and the Death Penalty. The blog is "In the News: Forensice psychology, criminology, and psychology-law." Readers may want to check it out. The blog does have a place where you can enter your email address to receive a regular e-newsletter. I'm adding "In the News" to my RSS feed so I can monitor the posts and post FYI messages re: content that is related to the purpose of Intellectual Competence and the Death Penalty. I've also added a link to my blog roll.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
FYI: NERONORMA Project: Spanish norms for common neuropsychological tests
Today, during my weekly literature search, I ran across a series of articles providing results from the NERONORMA project (Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies). The project is described in a free on-line copy of an article available in the Archives of Clinical Psychology. The abstract for the article is below. Psychologists who engage in forensic testing related to Atkins cases may find this information informative. I have not read the series of articles in depth yet.
This paper describes the methods and sample characteristics of a series of Spanish normative studies (The NEURONORMA project). The primary objective of our research was to collect normative and psychometric information on a sample of people aged over 49 years. The normative information was based on a series of selected, but commonly used, neuropsychological tests covering attention, language, visuo-perceptual abilities, constructional tasks, memory, and executive functions. A sample of 356 community dwelling individuals was studied. Demographics, socio-cultural, and medical data were collected. Cognitive normality was validated via informants and a cognitive screening test. Norms were calculated for midpoint age groups. Effects of age, education, and sex were determined. The use of these norms should improve neuropsychological diagnostic accuracy in older Spanish subjects. These data may also be of considerable use for comparisons with other normative studies. Limitations of these normative data are also commented
Other articles published in the series are listed below:
- PenaCasanova, J., Blesa, R., Aguilar, M., GramuntFombuena, N., GomezAnson, B., Oliva, R., Molinuevo, J. L.,Robles, A., Barquero, M. S., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Fernandez, M., Alfonso, V., & Sol, J. M. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies (NEURONORMA Project): Methods and Sample Characteristics. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 307-319.
- PenaCasanova, J., GramuntFombuena, N., QuinonesUbeda, S., SanchezBenavides, G., Aguilar, M., Badenes, D., Molinuevo, J. L., Robles, A., Barquero, M. S., Payno, M., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Fernandez, M., Alfonso, V., Solk, J. M., & Blesa, R. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies (NEURONORMA Project): Norms for the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure (Copy and Memory), and Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 371-393.
- PenaCasanova, J., QuinonesUbeda, S., GramuntFombuena, N., Aguilar, M., Casas, L., Molinuevo, J. L., Robles, A., Rodriguez, D., Barquero, M. S., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Fernandez, M., Molano, A., Alfonso, V., Sol, J. M., & Blesa, R. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies (NEURONORMA Project): Norms for Boston Naming Test and Token Test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 343-354.
- PenaCasanova, J., QuinonesUbeda, S., GramuntFombuena, N., Quintana, M., Aguilar, M., Molinuevo, J. L., Serradell, M., Robles, A., Barquero, M. S., Payno, M., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Fernandez, M., Alfonso, V., Sol, J. M., & Blesa, R. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies
- (NEURONORMA Project): Norms for the Stroop Color-Word Interference Test and the Tower of London-Drexel. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 413-429.
- PenaCasanova, J., QuinonesUbeda, S., GramuntFombuena, N., QuintanaAparicio, M., Aguilar, M., Badenes, D., Cerulla, N., Molinuevo, J. L., Ruiz, E., Robles, A., Barquero, M. S., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Fernandez, M., Alfonso, V., Sol, J. M., & Blesa, R. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies (NEURONORMA Project): Norms for Verbal Fluency Tests. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 395-411.
- PenaCasanova, J., QuinonesUbeda, S., QuintanaAparicio, M., Aguilar, M., Badenes, D., Molinuevo, J. L., Torner, L., Robles, A., Barquero, M. S., Villanueva, C., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Sanz, A., Fernandez, M., Alfonso, V., Sol, J. M., & Blesa, R. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies (NEURONORMA Project): Norms for Verbal Span, Visuospatial Span, Letter and Number Sequencing, Trail Making Test, and Symbol Digit Modalities Test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 321-341.
- PenaCasanova, J., QuintanaAparicio, M., QuinonesUbeda, S., Aguilar, M., Molinuevo, J. L., Serradell, M., Robles, A., Barquero, M. S., Villanueva, C., Antunez, C., MartinezParra, C., FrankGarcia, A., Aguilar, M. D., Fernandez, M., Alfonso, V., Sol, J. M., & Blesa, R. (2009). Spanish Multicenter Normative Studies (NEURONORMA Project): Norms for the Visual Object and Space Perception Battery-Abbreviated, and Judgment of Line Orientation. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(4), 355-370.
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, neurosciences, clinical neuropsychology, psychological testing, NERONORMA, Hispanic, bilingual, Spanish
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Strengthing Forensic Science in US webcast: US Senate Committee on the Judiciary
I just received an FYI re: this webcast: Strengthing Forensic Science in the United States. Information can be found at U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary hearing and meetings web page.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, forensic science, US Senate, Judiciary Committee
Dr. Tedd Judd guest comment post re: adaptive behavior and Switzky and Greenspan (2005) chapter
Guest comment post re: adaptive behavior by Dr. Tedd Judd, a neuropsychologist and current President of the Hispanic Neuropsychological Society.
Dr. Tedd Judd contacted the blogmaster via email as he had tried to post comments to the recent post re: the adaptive behavior chapter by Switzky and Greenspan, but the comment box was too limited for his complete set of comments. Posted below are Dr. Tedd Judd's comments ("as is") regarding the Switzky and Greenspan chapter post.
It is gratifying to see individuals reading and responding to the content of this blog. Thanks to all current and future readers. Active scholarly discourse is one of the goals of this blog.
Dr. Tedd Judd's comments below:
Very good chapter which addressed many pertinent issues well. I especially like the general principle of putting greater emphasis on adaptive functioning, even though the measuring of adaptive functioning is and will likely continue to be more problematic than IQ testing. For too long we have been looking for the keys under the street lamp where the light is good instead of over in the dark where we dropped them.
I also like the emphasis on refining what we really mean by adaptive functioning. The available adaptive behavior scales, in my reading of them, not only fail to measure gullibility adequately, that actually seem to reward it by giving higher ratings to compliant behavior (something that, for me, reflects the nicey nice world of MR services). There are more details in my chapter except below.
I take a bit of exception with this chapter placing gullibility so centrally, however. Some people with MR are not very nice or compliant or gullible, but may be somewhat paranoid, egocentric, and angry, although perhaps for reasons of faulty thinking that are similar to the faulty thinking of those who are gullible. Those individuals may look much more like someone with an antisocial personality disorder (they may even be diagnosable with ASP), but with a cognitive deficit underlying that disorder. It seems to me that it is for just such individuals that the SCOTUS included in their reasons for the Atkins decision that for people with MR "their demeanor may create an unwarranted impression of lack of remorse for their crimes." So, while social skills deficits need greater elaboration and emphasis, they can take various forms.
I am hopeful that readers who have stuck with me thus far may be willing to pursue some discussion of related points from my chapter section below from
Adaptive Behavior Scales
Adaptive behavior rating scales are not tests of abilities. The focus person and/or an informant who knows that person well rate the person on the ability to carry out various everyday activities. These scales are particularly important in the diagnosis of mental retardation because the accepted definitions of mental retardation (American Association on Mental Retardation, 2002; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) require impairment not only on IQ testing but also in adaptive behavior. Such scales are typically normed by age on a nationally representative sample (Scales of Independent Behavior—Revised, Bruininks, Woodcock, Weatherman, & Hill, 1996; Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, Harrison & Oakland, 2000; AAMR Adaptive Behavior Scale, Nihira, Leland, & Lambert, 1993; Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale, Sparrow, Balla, & Cicchetti, 1985). These scales typically do not have validity scales to determine if there is response bias on the part of the rater. The cultural competence to complete the rating scales and potential biases of the informant must be taken into account.
Adaptive behavior is clearly culturally relative, and this is evident in the rating scales. For example, the referenced scales contain items referring to the use of telephones, microwaves, small electrical appliances, clothes washers and dryers, repair services, cars, seatbelts, air conditioners, thermometers, handkerchiefs, televisions, menus, dictionaries, alphabetizing, phone books, zip codes, bathroom cleaning supplies, electricity, scales, rulers, schedules, Christmas, Hanukah, forks, reading materials, ticket reservations, shoelaces, clocks, classified ads, and checkbooks. Access to these items is not universal and is related to culture, urbanization, and social class. There are no items referring to clotheslines, chopsticks, domestic animals, Ramadan, etc.
Other items depend upon cultural norms of behavior or values that are not universal (looking at others’ faces when talking, ending conversations, not interrupting, carrying identification, traveling independently in the community, stores with hours of operation, obeying street signs, needing time alone, choosing to join group activities, haircuts, daily bathing, punctuality, hospitality, controlling temper, “pleasant breath,” saying “thank you,” conversational distance, dating, etc.). Although several of these scales have been translated into Spanish (and possibly other languages) there has been minimal cultural adaptation of the items, and there are minimal instructions in the manuals concerning cross-cultural applications.
Some items imply that it is more functional to be compliant than to stand up for oneself. These items include: controlling anger when someone else breaks the rules, when an activity is cancelled, when disagreeing with friends, or when not getting one’s way; not telling a lie to escape punishment; saying “thank you” for gifts (something that is not a part of many Native American cultures); moving out of another person’s way; offering assistance and sympathy; selecting “good” friends; avoiding embarrassing others; doing extra work willingly; and following supervisor’s suggestions. There are no items giving credit for knowing: when and how to direct one’s anger, when it is wise to lie, when to offer assistance and sympathy and when not, when to use one’s own judgment and when to follow others’ in selecting friends, when it is appropriate to embarrass others, when it makes sense to do extra work or follow the supervisor and when to object or go on strike, etc. There are no items saying, “Asserts ones rights.” Or “Stands up for others who are treated unjustly.” It is sobering to realize that people might be declared legally stupid for having bad breath, not telling jokes, not making their beds, or not buying tickets in advance.
Adaptive behavior scales can play an important role in cross-cultural neuropsychology. At times they may help document that an individual who does not “test well” on standardized cognitive tests, perhaps for cultural reasons, nevertheless is able to function adequately and competently in this society. Adaptive behavior scales in brain injury cases can document the changes in a way that cognitive tests cannot. However, interpretation of low scores is problematic because the scales are culture bound. In some instances the adaptive behavior scale may function more as a measure of acculturation than of ability. At present such interpretations may require an item-by-item analysis of low scored items, perhaps including a discussion of those items with the rater and/or other cultural informant. In spite of their cultural limitations, however, these standardized scales have advantages over the evaluation of adaptive behavior exclusively by interview. They are more thorough than typical interviews, they allow for objective comparisons to known populations, and they allow for greater clarity regarding the database for opinions and decisions. They do not, however, replace the evaluation of adaptive behavior via interview, since interviews are likely to bring out the most pertinent impairments in adaptive behavior and may cover areas not found in the scales.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensice psychology, criminal justice, criminal psychology, developmental disabilities, educational psychology, neuropsychology, school psychology, mental retardation, MR, Atkins cases, death peantly, capital punishment, adpative behavior, adaptive functioning, gullibility
Dr. Tedd Judd contacted the blogmaster via email as he had tried to post comments to the recent post re: the adaptive behavior chapter by Switzky and Greenspan, but the comment box was too limited for his complete set of comments. Posted below are Dr. Tedd Judd's comments ("as is") regarding the Switzky and Greenspan chapter post.
It is gratifying to see individuals reading and responding to the content of this blog. Thanks to all current and future readers. Active scholarly discourse is one of the goals of this blog.
Dr. Tedd Judd's comments below:
Very good chapter which addressed many pertinent issues well. I especially like the general principle of putting greater emphasis on adaptive functioning, even though the measuring of adaptive functioning is and will likely continue to be more problematic than IQ testing. For too long we have been looking for the keys under the street lamp where the light is good instead of over in the dark where we dropped them.
I also like the emphasis on refining what we really mean by adaptive functioning. The available adaptive behavior scales, in my reading of them, not only fail to measure gullibility adequately, that actually seem to reward it by giving higher ratings to compliant behavior (something that, for me, reflects the nicey nice world of MR services). There are more details in my chapter except below.
I take a bit of exception with this chapter placing gullibility so centrally, however. Some people with MR are not very nice or compliant or gullible, but may be somewhat paranoid, egocentric, and angry, although perhaps for reasons of faulty thinking that are similar to the faulty thinking of those who are gullible. Those individuals may look much more like someone with an antisocial personality disorder (they may even be diagnosable with ASP), but with a cognitive deficit underlying that disorder. It seems to me that it is for just such individuals that the SCOTUS included in their reasons for the Atkins decision that for people with MR "their demeanor may create an unwarranted impression of lack of remorse for their crimes." So, while social skills deficits need greater elaboration and emphasis, they can take various forms.
I am hopeful that readers who have stuck with me thus far may be willing to pursue some discussion of related points from my chapter section below from
- Judd, T. & Beggs, B. (2005). Cross-cultural forensic neuropsychological assessment (pp. 141-162). In K. Barrett & W. H. George (Eds.) Race, Culture, Psychology and Law. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Press. Reprinted (2006) (pp. 175-186) in C.R. & A.M. Bartol (Eds.) Current Perspectives in Forensic Psychology and Criminal Justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Press.
Adaptive Behavior Scales
Adaptive behavior rating scales are not tests of abilities. The focus person and/or an informant who knows that person well rate the person on the ability to carry out various everyday activities. These scales are particularly important in the diagnosis of mental retardation because the accepted definitions of mental retardation (American Association on Mental Retardation, 2002; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) require impairment not only on IQ testing but also in adaptive behavior. Such scales are typically normed by age on a nationally representative sample (Scales of Independent Behavior—Revised, Bruininks, Woodcock, Weatherman, & Hill, 1996; Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, Harrison & Oakland, 2000; AAMR Adaptive Behavior Scale, Nihira, Leland, & Lambert, 1993; Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale, Sparrow, Balla, & Cicchetti, 1985). These scales typically do not have validity scales to determine if there is response bias on the part of the rater. The cultural competence to complete the rating scales and potential biases of the informant must be taken into account.
Adaptive behavior is clearly culturally relative, and this is evident in the rating scales. For example, the referenced scales contain items referring to the use of telephones, microwaves, small electrical appliances, clothes washers and dryers, repair services, cars, seatbelts, air conditioners, thermometers, handkerchiefs, televisions, menus, dictionaries, alphabetizing, phone books, zip codes, bathroom cleaning supplies, electricity, scales, rulers, schedules, Christmas, Hanukah, forks, reading materials, ticket reservations, shoelaces, clocks, classified ads, and checkbooks. Access to these items is not universal and is related to culture, urbanization, and social class. There are no items referring to clotheslines, chopsticks, domestic animals, Ramadan, etc.
Other items depend upon cultural norms of behavior or values that are not universal (looking at others’ faces when talking, ending conversations, not interrupting, carrying identification, traveling independently in the community, stores with hours of operation, obeying street signs, needing time alone, choosing to join group activities, haircuts, daily bathing, punctuality, hospitality, controlling temper, “pleasant breath,” saying “thank you,” conversational distance, dating, etc.). Although several of these scales have been translated into Spanish (and possibly other languages) there has been minimal cultural adaptation of the items, and there are minimal instructions in the manuals concerning cross-cultural applications.
Some items imply that it is more functional to be compliant than to stand up for oneself. These items include: controlling anger when someone else breaks the rules, when an activity is cancelled, when disagreeing with friends, or when not getting one’s way; not telling a lie to escape punishment; saying “thank you” for gifts (something that is not a part of many Native American cultures); moving out of another person’s way; offering assistance and sympathy; selecting “good” friends; avoiding embarrassing others; doing extra work willingly; and following supervisor’s suggestions. There are no items giving credit for knowing: when and how to direct one’s anger, when it is wise to lie, when to offer assistance and sympathy and when not, when to use one’s own judgment and when to follow others’ in selecting friends, when it is appropriate to embarrass others, when it makes sense to do extra work or follow the supervisor and when to object or go on strike, etc. There are no items saying, “Asserts ones rights.” Or “Stands up for others who are treated unjustly.” It is sobering to realize that people might be declared legally stupid for having bad breath, not telling jokes, not making their beds, or not buying tickets in advance.
Adaptive behavior scales can play an important role in cross-cultural neuropsychology. At times they may help document that an individual who does not “test well” on standardized cognitive tests, perhaps for cultural reasons, nevertheless is able to function adequately and competently in this society. Adaptive behavior scales in brain injury cases can document the changes in a way that cognitive tests cannot. However, interpretation of low scores is problematic because the scales are culture bound. In some instances the adaptive behavior scale may function more as a measure of acculturation than of ability. At present such interpretations may require an item-by-item analysis of low scored items, perhaps including a discussion of those items with the rater and/or other cultural informant. In spite of their cultural limitations, however, these standardized scales have advantages over the evaluation of adaptive behavior exclusively by interview. They are more thorough than typical interviews, they allow for objective comparisons to known populations, and they allow for greater clarity regarding the database for opinions and decisions. They do not, however, replace the evaluation of adaptive behavior via interview, since interviews are likely to bring out the most pertinent impairments in adaptive behavior and may cover areas not found in the scales.
Technorati Tags: psychology, forensice psychology, criminal justice, criminal psychology, developmental disabilities, educational psychology, neuropsychology, school psychology, mental retardation, MR, Atkins cases, death peantly, capital punishment, adpative behavior, adaptive functioning, gullibility
Adaptive behavior: Use of the ABAS-II in adult forensic cases (Olley (2008)
I was given permission by Dr. Tom Oakland to post a PDF pre-publication version of chapter that was published in the following book covering one of the major adaptive behavior instruments used in the field of mental retardation/developmental disabilities (conflict of interest note - Dr. Oakland is a co-author of the ABAS-II).
Thank you Tom.
Olley, G. J. & Cox, A. W. (2008). Assessment of Adaptive Behavior in Adult Forensic Cases: The Use of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-II. In Oakland, T. and Harrison, P. (2008). Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-II: Clinical use and interpretation, Elsevier. A pre-pub copy of the chapter can be viewed by clicking here.
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, adaptive behavior, adaptive functioning, ABAS, ABAS-II, MR, mental retardation, developmenal disabilities, Atkins cases, SCOTUS, death penalty, capital punishment
Thank you Tom.
Olley, G. J. & Cox, A. W. (2008). Assessment of Adaptive Behavior in Adult Forensic Cases: The Use of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-II. In Oakland, T. and Harrison, P. (2008). Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-II: Clinical use and interpretation, Elsevier. A pre-pub copy of the chapter can be viewed by clicking here.
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, adaptive behavior, adaptive functioning, ABAS, ABAS-II, MR, mental retardation, developmenal disabilities, Atkins cases, SCOTUS, death penalty, capital punishment
Monday, September 7, 2009
Use of the Mexican WAIS-III in MR capital Atkin cases: Controversy reported in Applied Neuropsychology journal
As background note, I've blogged previously about a special issue of this journal that dealt with Atkins cases. I've not completed reading all of those articles yet...there simply is not enough time in my day.
Given my obvious conflict of interest [I'm a coauthor of the competing WJ III and BAT III], I will not render any judgment "pro" or "con" regarding the debate. Instead, I'm making available (below) the abstract of a series of three articles published in the latest issue of Applied Neuropsychology that address the issue. Suen and Greenspan (2009a) make the case against the use of the Mexican WAIS-III. Escobedo and Hollingworth (2009) respond to Suen and Greenspan (2009a). Suen and Greenspan (2009b) then respond to Escobedo and Hollingworth (2009).
Readers will need to review the articles and make their own informed judgments. I would like to invite appropriatelly qualified scholars to consider submitting a guest comment post on all three articles and any other journal published research that bears on this specific controversy. If interested, contact me at my email in my "About Me" section of this blog. In addition, given my conflict of interest, I am requesting that anyone familiar with any similar controversies or questions regarding the BAT III to bring them to my attention as I would make those published articles available for review...also without comment.
Suen, H. K. & Greenspan, S. (2009a). Serious Problems with the Mexican Norms for the WAIS-III when Assessing Mental Retardation in Capital Cases. Applied Neuropsychology, 16 (3), 214-222. (click here).
A Spanish-language translation of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III (WAIS-III), normed in Mexico, is sometimes used when evaluating Spanish-speaking defendants in capital cases in order to diagnose possible mental retardation (MR). Although the manual for the Mexican test suggests use of the U.S. norms when diagnosing MR, the Mexican norms—which produce full-scale scores on average 12 points higher— are sometimes used for reasons that are similar to those used by proponents for ‘‘race-norming’’ in special education. Such an argument assumes, however, that the Mexican WAIS-III norms are valid. In this paper, we examined the validity of the Mexican WAIS-III norms and found six very serious problems with those norms: (1) extremely poor reliability, (2) lack of a meaningful reference population, (3) lack of score normalization, (4) exclusion of certain groups from the standardization sample,(5) use of incorrect statistics and calculations, and (6) incorrect application of the true score confidence interval method. An additional problem is the apparent absence of any social policy consensus within Mexico as to the definition and boundary parameters of MR. Taken together, these concerns lead one to the inescapable conclusion that the Mexican WAIS-III norms are not interpretable and should not be used for any high-stakes purpose, especially one as serious as whether a defendant should qualify for exemption against imposition of the death penalty.
Escobedo, P. S. & Hollingworth, L. (2009) Annotations on the Use of the Mexican Norms for the WAIS-III. Applied Neuropsychology, 16 (3), 223-227 (click here).
This article provides crucial information to judge the appropriateness of the Mexican version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition and recognizes some limitations in both the process of its adaptation to the Mexican population and the norm development process. This is an effort to contribute to the debate initiated by Suen and Greenspan (2008), who argued in court against the use of Mexican norms in a death penalty case, which depended upon establishing the diagnosis of mental retardation. As a part of the defense team, these scholars argued a number of points against the use of the Mexican norms. With input from the lead researcher on the Mexican standardization process, some of the criticisms are addressed, and further information about the norm development process for this test in Mexico is provided in an attempt to be critical about the strengths and weaknesses of the use of existing Mexican norms. Finally, we argue that results from a single test must not be used to make life and death decisions and that test development is a continuous process influenced by culture,language, and indeed by norm-developing procedures and debates.
Suen, H. K. & Greenspan, S. (2009). Reply to Sanchez-Escobedo and Hollingworth: Why the Mexican Norms for the WAIS-III Continue to be Inadequate. Applied Neuropsychology, 16 (3), 228-229 (click here).
The discussion in Drs. Sanchez-Escobedo and Hollingworth’s paper independently confirms virtually all our observations regarding the psychometric and interpretive deficiencies of the Mexican norms for very high-stakes decisions, such as that involved in an Atkins hearing. Test publishers have an ethical obligation to caution potential users against the premature use of a developing assessment that does not yet meet the needed precision and evidence of validity required for very high-stakes decisions.
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, criminal psychology, forensic psychology, clinical psychology, mental retardation, MR, Mexican WAIS-III, WAIS-III, WJ III, BAT III, norms, standardization, psychometrics, Atkins, capital punishmen, death penalty, Applied Neuropsychology
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Why might expert witness IQ scores differ? Intelligence theory and IQ tests
Why are divergent IQ score results often presented by different experts testifying in Atkin's cases? The reasons are many. I intend to explore the major measurement/psychometric reasons in a number of future posts.
One of the primary reasons may be the use of different IQ tests (by different psychologists) that vary in their breadth of measurement of the major domains of human intelligence. In particular, I will focus on the contemporary consensus psychometric theory known as CHC theory to explain score differences. What is CHC theory?
The Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory of Cognitive Abilities (aka., CHC theory) is now serving as the blueprint for the development and/or revision of most major intelligence tests. It is only a matter of time before the courts begin receiving expert testimony (and or reports) based on CHC-designed IQ batteries or non-CHC IQ batteries interpreted via the CHC lens.
This current post is intended to make readers aware of the prominence of CHC theory in intelligence testing circles. Its application to IQ test results in Atkin's cases will be discussed in future posts. For now, readers should check out the two best overview articles the describe CHC theory. Yes...they are written by the blogmaster. This is not boasting...this is just a factual statement. The two references are listed below. One was an invited editorial in the journal Intelligence and the other a recent book chapter. Links to the sources are provided below (note - the link for the book chapter is to a 2004 pre-publication web-based version of the eventual 2005 book chapter).
Stay tuned. Much more on this topic in the future. If readers want to stay abreast re: the most recent CHC theory and assessment research, I post this information at a sister blog (Intelligent Insights on Intelligence Theories and Tests; aka., IQs Corner)
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, developmental psychology, clinical psychology, neuropsychology, intelligence, cognition, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, CHC theory, Cattell-Horn-Carroll, psychometrics, death penalty, capital punishment, Atkin's procedures, Atkin's cases, MR, mental retardation, intellectual competence.ISIR
One of the primary reasons may be the use of different IQ tests (by different psychologists) that vary in their breadth of measurement of the major domains of human intelligence. In particular, I will focus on the contemporary consensus psychometric theory known as CHC theory to explain score differences. What is CHC theory?
The Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory of Cognitive Abilities (aka., CHC theory) is now serving as the blueprint for the development and/or revision of most major intelligence tests. It is only a matter of time before the courts begin receiving expert testimony (and or reports) based on CHC-designed IQ batteries or non-CHC IQ batteries interpreted via the CHC lens.
This current post is intended to make readers aware of the prominence of CHC theory in intelligence testing circles. Its application to IQ test results in Atkin's cases will be discussed in future posts. For now, readers should check out the two best overview articles the describe CHC theory. Yes...they are written by the blogmaster. This is not boasting...this is just a factual statement. The two references are listed below. One was an invited editorial in the journal Intelligence and the other a recent book chapter. Links to the sources are provided below (note - the link for the book chapter is to a 2004 pre-publication web-based version of the eventual 2005 book chapter).
- McGrew, K. (2009). Editorial: CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research, Intelligence, 37, 1-10. (click here to view or download pdf)
- McGrew, K. S. (2005). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities: Past, present and future. In D. Flanagan, & Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (p.136-202). New York: Guilford Press. (click here to view web-based version of chapter)
Stay tuned. Much more on this topic in the future. If readers want to stay abreast re: the most recent CHC theory and assessment research, I post this information at a sister blog (Intelligent Insights on Intelligence Theories and Tests; aka., IQs Corner)
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, developmental psychology, clinical psychology, neuropsychology, intelligence, cognition, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, CHC theory, Cattell-Horn-Carroll, psychometrics, death penalty, capital punishment, Atkin's procedures, Atkin's cases, MR, mental retardation, intellectual competence.ISIR
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Definition: Forensic Psychology
What is forensic psychology?
The Wikipedia definition page can be found by clicking here.
According to the American Board of Forensic Psychology:
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, developmental psychology, neuropsychology, clinical psychology, forensic psychology, intelligence, IQ tests, IQ scores, MR, mental retardation, intellectual disability, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, American Board of Forensic Psychology
The Wikipedia definition page can be found by clicking here.
According to the American Board of Forensic Psychology:
Forensic Psychology is the application of the science and profession of psychology to questions and issues relating to law and the legal system. The word "forensic" comes from the Latin word "forensis," meaning "of the forum," where the law courts of ancient Rome were held. Today forensic refers to the application of scientific principles and practices to the adversary process where specially knowledgeable scientists play a role.
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, developmental psychology, neuropsychology, clinical psychology, forensic psychology, intelligence, IQ tests, IQ scores, MR, mental retardation, intellectual disability, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, American Board of Forensic Psychology
APA Atkin's relevant professional divisions: 33 and 41
Psychologists involved in Atkin's proceedings need to be aware of certain standards, ethics, etc. On the right-side of this blog I'm adding (on a continual basis) important professional resources. As recommended in a recent article by Olley (2009; I'm currently skimming this article and will provide a post sometime soon), membership in certain American Psychological Association Divisions can be helpful in securing information, networking with others involved in Atkin's cases, etc. Two in particular are suggested:
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, developmental psychology, clinical psychology, forensic psychology, Atkins cases, MR, mental retardation, intellectual disability, death penalty, capital punishment, American Psychological Association
Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, developmental psychology, clinical psychology, forensic psychology, Atkins cases, MR, mental retardation, intellectual disability, death penalty, capital punishment, American Psychological Association
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)