Research Briefs 4-10-10: Working memory, executive functioning and ID/MR

The cognitive neuroscience constructs of working memory and executive function (EF) are hot topics in all areas of cognition.  Although working memory measures are now showing up on most contemporary IQ tests, the measurement of executive functioning (EF) is not...and is typically measured by special purpose tests, tests that all suffer from a solid empirical foundation of research that clearly specifies the elements of, relations between, operational definitions of, etc. the components of EF.

I was thus excited to see the table of contents for the recent issue of the Journal of Intellectual Disability Research (see below), as it focuses primarily on working memory and EF research for people with ID/MR.  My excitement was short-lived as I found that, at least at my Universities library, access to articles in this journal are not allowed until one year after publication.  Darn.Re

Ball, S. L., Holland, A. J., Watson, P. C., & Huppert, F. A. (2010). Theoretical exploration of the neural bases of behavioural disinhibition, apathy and executive dysfunction in preclinical Alzheimer's disease in people with Down's syndrome: potential involvement of multiple frontal-subcortical neuronal circuits. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 320-336.

Carretti, B., Belacchi, C., & Cornoldi, C. (2010). Difficulties in working memory updating in individuals with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 337-345.

Henry, L., Cornoldi, C., & Mahler, C. (2010). Special issues on 'working memory and executive functioning in individuals with intellectual disabilities'. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 293-294.

Henry, L., & Winfield, J. (2010). Working memory and educational achievement in children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 354-365.

Lanfranchi, S., Jerman, O., DalPont, E., Alberti, A., & Vianello, R. (2010). Executive function in adolescents with Down Syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 308-319.

Mosse, E. K., & Jarrold, C. (2010). Searching for the Hebb effect in Down syndrome: evidence for a dissociation between verbal short-term memory and domain-general learning of serial order. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 295-307.

Schuchardt, K., Gebhardt, M., & Maehler, C. (2010). Working memory functions in children with different degrees of intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 346-353.

Willner, P., Bailey, R., Parry, R., & Dymond, S. (2010). Evaluation of executive functioning in people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 366-379.

Willner, P., Bailey, R., Parry, R., & Dymond, S. (2010). Evaluation of the ability of people with intellectual disabilities to 'weigh up' information in two tests of financial reasoning. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 380-391.

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, working memory, executive functions

Tiger Woods Masters Ability IQ scores within his "zone" (band): Real world example of SEM

After two rounds at the Masters, Tiger Woods first two scores are within expectations based on his prior 13 years of Round 1 and 2 scores.  Based on his prior 52 rounds (the first two rounds of each year over 13 prior years), I had previously calculated his "true" Masters Golf Ability (IQ) to be 70 with a standard error of measurement (SEM) of 3 points.  This means, based on psychometric theory and the importance of understanding the concept of SEM, going into this years tourney we could be 68% confident that his first two round scores would range somewhere between 67 and 73.  He shot a 68 and 70....well within his Masters Golf Ability 68% SEM.  You gotta love good stats and psychometrics!

If you are intrigued and want to learn more about SEM and its importance in psychological testing (using Masters golf performance as a real world example), click here to visit prior blog post and be sure to read the entire report that is mentioned (click on the report URL).

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, statistics and law, SEM, standard error of measurement, Tiger Woods

Spanish Woodcock-Johnson Battery III: Bateria III (BAT III) use in ID/MR assessmnet

As a coauthor of the WJ III/BAT III, I've been receiving increasing emails and phone calls for information describing the BAT III and its appropriateness for assessing intelligence in Atkins ID/MR cases.  I do have an obvious conflict of interest as a co-author, but I believe it is is one of the most psychometrically and theoretically sound measures of human intelligence for Spanish-speaking individuals where a Dx of ID/MR is in question.

To save everyone (including me) many e-mails and phone calls, I've decided to post everything I have (in e-form) regarding the BAT III.  In addition, I'm posting information re: the prior edition (BAT-R) as the procedures used to adapt, translate and norm (via US-equated norm procedures) are the same. 

Below are key documents.

• Technical report for development of BAT III
• Review of BAT III in APA Division 16 (School Psychology) newsletter
• An earlier review of the BAT-R
• A special report on the use of the WJ-R/BAT-R in neuropsychological assessment
• Select portions of a BAT-R chapter by Dr. Woodcock in Dr. Marcel Ponton's hispanic neuropsychology book that is viewable on-line via Google Scholar.
  

I hope people find this information useful.  I will also soon post a comparison of the CHC content of the two batteries (CHC DNA Fingerprint Analysis comparison of BAT-R and BAT III).

Finally, although I have not updated it for over a year, given that the BAT-III is parallel to the WJ III, individuals may want to review available published and unpublished research on the WJ III (and to a lessor extent the BAT III).  This can be found at the WJ III EWOK (v3.0; Evolving Web of Knowledge) at IQs Corner blog.

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, WJ III, WJ-R, BAT III, BAT-R, Hispanic, Spanish

Dufour v Florida (2010): Webcast of April 7, 2010 hearing

In case you missed the live webcast of the Dufour hearing in Florida a couple days ago (April 7, 2010), you can still view it by clicking here.  Also, PDF copies of all background brief documents (for the hearing) can be found by clicking here.  I've stated my major concerns re: the case in a number of posts, links which can be found by clicking here. 

As I stated previously, and what comes through during portions of the hearing, is that a critical problem for the state of Florida is its bright-line rule for MR/ID Dx....a score must be 70 or below...no allowance for considering SEM.  In my opinion, this is the most important issue  at stake in the Dufour hearing, as is evidenced by the frequent reference to the Cherry court or decision (decision that established this scientifically unsupportable criteria in Atkins cases in Florida).

I am interested in the views of experienced viewers of such proceedings regarding their "take-away" impressions of the hearing.  I was particularly impressed with the lawyer representing AAIDD and her valiant and reasonably clear attempt to explain SEM to the court.  At times Justice Barbara P. appeared to be "getting it"....and in my observation, seemed to understand the possibility of the error of the Cherry based bright-line rule. 

On the other hand, my belief is that most psychologists who engage in intelligence testing will be a bit shocked at how IQ scores and names of IQ (and other) tests are tossed around as mere commodities....with little discussion of the fact that some measures are better than others.  Of course, this is a very time-constrained hearing and all participants have read hundreds of pages of briefs.....so I need to cut them some slack.  Still....it is bothersome to me, as an intelligence test developer, scholar, and applied psychometrician, how the term IQ is discussed in such simple language...which suggests that the courts are not well educated on the science of intelligence testing...which in turn makes them rely on the expertise of different experts in different cases...experts who vary in depth of knowledge of the science, research, and psychometric underpinnings of psychological assessment instruments.

As I said above, I'd like to hear the comments of others who have viewed the hearing.  I would suggest that this may be a good topic to discuss at the Atkins MR/ID Death Penalty listserv.

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, SEM, standard error of measurement, Dufour v Florida

Law Review Articles: (Mis)Use of statistics in law; prosecutor misconduct in capital punishment cases

Bilz (2010).  Defending the (Mis)Use of Statistics in Law.  Journal of Institutional & Theoretical Economics, Vol. 166, pp. 194-198, 2010

In this brief Comment, I argue that the goals and craft norms of law differ so sharply from those of social science that it is a mistake to hold the two disciplines to the same set of standards for the use and interpretation of statistical evidence. First, we can lose more social value when policy makers are too cautious with empirical research than when they are too free. Second, the craft norms of law and policy making are capable of dealing with the misuses that do occur.

Kirchmeier, Greenwald, Reynolds & Sussman (2010). Vigilante Justice: Prosecutor Misconduct in Capital Cases.  Wayne Law Review, Vol. 55, pp. 1327-1385, 2009 

This Article examines categories of prosecutor misconduct that may occur in capital cases, and it discusses suggestions to help prevent and remedy such misconduct. The prosecutor’s role is especially important in death penalty cases because the prosecutor is a determining force in the decision of whether a defendant will live or die. Thus, even though prosecutor misconduct is an important concern for all types of cases, it has a special impact in capital cases.

Instances of prosecutor misconduct may occur prior to trial during discovery, during jury selection, and during trial and post-trial. In Part One of the Article, we discuss situations where prosecutors withhold exculpatory evidence from defendants in capital cases. In Part Two, we discuss the problem where prosecutors improperly use pretrial publicity to achieve convictions and death sentences in capital cases. Misconduct may occur during jury selection, and in Part Three, we examine situations where some prosecutors have improperly used peremptory challenges to exclude prospective jurors based upon race. Under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), this type of prosecutor misconduct may rise to constitutional significance. Next, in Part Four, we consider the trial itself and discuss situations where prosecutors improperly used false evidence or statements in capital cases.

In Part Five, we consider methods for addressing misconduct in capital cases. The Article considers three different categories of ways to deter instances of prosecutor misconduct in capital cases: (1) institutional and systemic methods of preventing prosecutor misconduct; (2) punishment of individual prosecutors responsible for egregious misconduct; and (3) remedies for defendants who are victims of misconduct. After giving an overview of various suggestions, the Article concludes with five specific proposals that should be the first steps toward deterring and remedying prosecutor misconduct in capital cases.

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, statistics and law, prosecutor misconduct

ICDP Atkins MR/ID public discussion listserv now operating

Given the success of the ICDP blog and the need expressed (by readers) for a mechanism to discuss issues in detail, the ICDP blog today announces the formation of the ATKINSMRDEATHPENALTY listserv.  This is a Yahoo Groups listserv that can be viewed and joined by clicking here.  Or, you can subscribe via the Yahoo dialogue button on the right side of the blog roll.  Below is a description of the goals, purposes and operating principles of the listserv. 

This public groups goal is to educate/inform psychologists, mental health professionals, lawyers and judges re: the science and best practices for identification of ID/MR (intellectual disability/mental retardation) in capital punishment cases (Atkins cases).  MR/ID assessment practices discussed should supported by standards of professional practice or authoritative sources.

This is NOT a forum for arguing the pros/cons of the death penalty or for advocates to take sides in individual cases.

When discussing prior rulings, members are to refrain from criticism's that mention the names of individuals who provided testimony or otherwise participated in the case. Members should refer to the "state's expert" or the "expert A for the defense". Individuals who violate this ESSENTIAL privacy requirement will be removed from the list.

The listserv is not the "ethical, legal, professional standard" monitor for member comments. Members are urged to recognize their professional, ethical, legal and contractual responsibilities before seeking advice, sharing insights, etc. re: active cases in which they are currently involved. Any statements made by individuals are made in their own capacity and should not be construed to represent the positions or opinions of any group or other individual associated with the listserv.  Moreover, the listserv is not a forum intended to be a source of legal, psychological, or other professional advice. Any individual needing or seeking advice should consult his or her own professional sources accordingly.

The group is unmoderated.  Moderation will begin if the above principles are violated. The listserv is linked with the Intellectual Competence and Death Penalty blog @ http://www.atkinsmrdeathpenalty.com.  Members with lengthy comments should submit drafts to the ICDP blog (for a guest post) rather than submitting long posts to the listserv. They should be submitted to iap@earthlink.net.

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

iPost: Must read on ID characteristics and issues in Atkins MR/ID cases

Just got an email alert on this article. It looks like a must read for all working in the area of Atkins cases. Plan to read as soon as I can land a copy

Offenders With Intellectual Disability: Characteristics, Prevalence, and Issues in Forensic Assessment 

Authors: Karen L. Salekin ^a; J. Gregory Olley ^b;Krystal A. Hedge ^a

Affiliations:	a Department of Psychology, The University of Alabama,
	b Center for Development and Learning, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,

DOI: 10.1080/19315861003695769

Publication Frequency: 4 issues per year

Published in:  Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities, Volume 3, Issue 2 April 2010 , pages 97 - 116

Formats available: HTML (English) : PDF (English)

Article Requests: Order Reprints : Request Permissions 

Single Article Purchase: US$30.00 - buy now  add to cart [ show other buying options ] 

• Sign In  
• Online Sample 

View Article:  View Article (PDF)  View Article (HTML)

Abstract Although the problem of people with disabilities as victims of crime has been well recognized, the known characteristics of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) also make them vulnerable to becoming perpetrators of crimes. Most such crimes are minor, but the 2002 Atkins v. Virginia decision called national attention to people with ID and people with dual diagnoses who commit capital crimes. This article reviews the data on offenders with intellectual and dual disabilities and the challenges related to their diagnoses and their roles in the criminal justice system. Offenders with ID are overwhelmingly individuals with mild intellectual disability, and their characteristics largely resemble those of offenders who do not have an ID diagnosis. They do not engage predominantly in any one form of criminal behavior, and their readily identifiable characteristics do not set them apart from offenders without a disability. However, their intellectual limitations make it more difficult for them to understand their Miranda rights; to work effectively with their attorneys; or for those found incompetent to stand trial, to profit from formal programs to restore them to competency. Assessment methods, particularly assessment of malingering of ID, have many limitations when applied in the criminal justice setting.

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-double click on it to make larger-if hard to see) 

Court Decisions: Williams v Thayer (TX, 2008, 2010) & Matamoros v Thayer (TX, 2010)

Two more Atkins decisions have been posted today to ICDP's Court Decisions blog roll.

A number of issues involved in the case of Williams versus Thayer (TX, 2008, 2010) has been discussed previously (with regard to the prior 2007 decision) by myself  and by Kevin Foley (guest blog post - "Judge Playing Psychologist"). This is clearly a case where there are a boatload of assessment related issues in the areas of an intelligence testing, academic achievement, and adaptive behavior (see two prior blog posts). The most recent 2010 decision denied Williams appeal.

The other is yet another Texas case that is posted "as is" (without comment or analysis).  Matamoros v Thayer (TX, 2010). I only briefly skimmed the ruling, but it appears to illustrate a quagmire of issues involved in ascertaining adaptive behavior functioning (prong two of MR/ID Dx), with the additional twist of the state of Texas' unique Briseno standard. Also, this case is complicated by the involvement of an expert for thie state whose methods of "adjusting scores "has been seriously questioned ("voodooo psychometrics") and challenged in the past (click here and here).

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, psychometrics, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, Briseno, Williams v Thayer, Williams v Texas, Matamoros v Thayer, Matamoros v Texas

Psychometric PS to Johnston v Florida (2010) denied appeal re: new WAIS-IV scores

This is a follow-up to my brief comments yesterday regarding the Johstone v Fl (2010) denied MR/ID appeal of two days ago.

As mentioned in the decision and my blog comment, the WAIS-III/WAIS-IV tests correlated .94 in a study reported in the WAIS-IV technical manual.  This is a very high correlation...but does NOT mean that the two tests should be expected to provide identical IQ scores.  I discuss these issues in a prior IAP AP101 report.

The tests have different norm dates and thus, the later version (WAIS-IV) would be expected to provide a lower score based on the Flynn effect.  More importantly, as reported in the IAP AP101 report, when one calculates the standard deviation of the difference score (see page 6 of that report) for a correlation of .94, the resulting value is 5.2 (round to 5 for ease of discussion).  This means that, on average, the WAIS-III/WAIS-IV (even if highly correlated at the .94 level) would in the general population be expected to display a range of difference scores from -5 to +5...or a range of 10 IQ points......in 68% of the population.  Please review that prior report for further explanation and discussion.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, psychometrics, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, scientific evidence, Flynn effect, validity, norms, practice effects, Johnstone v Florida, WAIS-III, WAIS-IV, CHC intelligence theory, CHC, Cattell-Horn-Carroll, Daubert standard

iTweet: Does death penalty deter crime @ ProCon.org

procon_org: Does the death penalty deter

crimehttp://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000983

Original Tweet: http://twitter.com/procon_org/status/11711621766

Sent via TweetDeck (www.tweetdeck.com)

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

Court Decision: Johnston v Florida appeal denied--interesting expert opinions re: old vs new IQ scores

Last month I passed along an urgent plea re: an appeal of the non-MR/ID determination of Johnstone (Johnstone v Florida, 2010).  Yesterday the judge ruled against Johnstone an indicated that the burden of proof that he was MR/ID was not meet.

Although I have only glanced at the ruling (it was just yesterday), it provides some very interesting insights into how multiple IQ test scores across many years and different instruments are treated by different psychological experts and the court.  An interesting twist in the appeal was an attempt to make the case that scores from a new version (WAIS-IV) of a previously administered WAIS-III constituted "new evidence" that should be used in the MR/ID determination.  This brought up the issues of practice effects and the Flynn Effect...and the very interesting issue of how to treat scores on a new revision of a previously administered (but older) IQ test.  The discussion of how to evaluate the old and new WAIS scores (and old vs new norms) by the different experts is interesting, and in some places troubling.

I find it amazing that two of the psychological experts did not know the correlation between the WAIS-III/WAIS-IV as reported in the WAIS-IV technical manual.  One admitted not knowing the correlation and another suggested it was probably in the "mid .8."  The correct value, as reported in the WAIS-IV technical manual is .94----a point accurately made by the states psychological expert.  One would think that psychological experts testifying in Atkins cases would review the latest available research re: new instruments about which they are to testify...esp. the information in the technical manuals.  On this point the states expert was much more credible.

Also of interest was the introduction of the controversial 2009 Flynn article where Flynn suggests that the WAIS-III test norms are flawed.  Weiss (2007) has challenged the basis of Flynn's claim, and in an article I have "in press" (McGrew, in press; The Flynn Effect and Its Critics: Rusty Linchpins and “Lookin’ for g and Gf in Some of the Wrong Places”, Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment---special issue on the Flynn effect due to be published Dec 2010 or early 2011) I concur with Weiss's arguments.  Issues surrounding the Flynn effect are starting to heat up among IQ scholars.

Finally, the defense argues that the newer norms of the WAIS-IV make it a more accurate measure.  On this point I agree.  They then further argue that the change in the factor scores from the WAIS-III/WAIS-IV, which results in a different interpretation system of major component scores, makes the WAIS-IV a better indicator of intelligence.  Although I agree with the fact that the WAIS-IV factor-based index score system is a more valid system for interpreting cognitive strengths and weaknesses, this argument overlooks the more important central IQ score comparison issue..which is at the core of MR/ID Dx in Atkins cases.  Namely, as I have reported previously, despite the new organizational structure of the WAIS-IV, the ability composition of the FS IQ score (which is the best indicator of general intelligence -- baring concerns for the validity of the FS score and the need to look at part scores) is nearly identical across editions.

Using the consensus CHC model of intelligence as the cognitive ability taxonomy for understanding what IQ tests measure, CHC analysis of the FS IQ scores reveals that the WAIS-III/WAIS-IV FS IQ scores are not dramatically different in CHC ability representation (Gc- 31.8 v 30 %; Gv - 22.7 v 20 %; Gs - 18.2 v 20%; Gq - 4.6 v 5 %; Gsm - 13.6 v 15 %; Gf - 9.1 v 10%).  The high .94 WAIS-III/WAIS-IV correlation reported in the TM is not surprising given this CHC content comparative analysis.

Lots more to think about and discuss in the examination of all the IQ scores.  Maybe a future post...or, if anyone is interested, a good opportunity for a guest post.

I think there is a good chance that this case may try to get before SCOTUS   Correction----this case needs to go to the FL Supreme Court first.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, psychometrics, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, scientific evidence, Flynn effect, validity, norms, practice effects, Johnstone v Florida, WAIS-III, WAIS-IV, CHC intelligence theory, CHC, Cattell-Horn-Carroll, Daubert standard

iPost: Death Penalty decreasing world wide

Story at link below
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/worldview/100402/death-penalty-decreasing-trend
Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

Research Briefs: Russell (2010) on test validity across different versions/updates of tests

Russell, W. E. (2010). The 'Obsolescence' of Assessment Procedures. Journal Applied Neuropsychology, 17(1),60-67


Abstract

The concept that obsolescence or being “out of date” makes a test or procedure invalid (“inaccurate,” “inappropriate,” “not useful,” “creating wrong interpretations,” etc.) has been widely accepted in psychology and neuropsychology. Such obsolescence, produced by publishing a new version of a test, has produced an extensive nullification of research effort (probably 10,000 Wechsler studies). The arguments, attempting to justify obsolescence, include the Flynn Effect, the creation of a new version of a test or simply time. However, the Flynn Effect appears to have plateaued. In psychometric theory, validated tests do not lose their validity due to the creation of newer versions. Time does not invalidate tests due to the improvement of neurological methodology, such as magnetic resonance imaging. This assumption is unscientific, unproven, and if true, would discredit all older neuropsychological and neurological knowledge. In science, no method, theory, or information, once validated, loses that validation merely due to time or the creation of another test or procedure. Once validated, a procedure is only disproved or replaced by means of new research.

Keywords: assessment; Flynn Effect; obsolescence; validation; Wechsler tests

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, psychometrics, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, scientific evidence.Flynn effect, validity, norms

Law Review Article: Tuerkheimer (2010) on science-dependent prosecution in criminal justice

Although not dealing specifically with Atkins cases, the role of science (i.e., the science of psychometics and psychological testing) in criminal justice cases is no doubt a critical issue.

Tuerkheimer, D. (2010). Criminal Justice at a Crossroads: Science-Dependent Prosecution and the Problem of Epistemic Contingency.  Alabama Law Review.  Click here to visit site where article can be downloaded.

  Abstract:     

Increasingly in our criminal justice system, guilt is proven on the basis of science – a phenomenon I call science-dependent prosecution. This trend likely will continue, and even accelerate. Yet legal scholars have not grappled with the larger implications of this shift. Recent attacks on the validity of a number of forensic disciplines beg the question: must law perpetually chase science?


Science is subject to a process of constant revision, upending accepted “truths” in unpredictable ways. I argue that our justice system is ill-equipped to deal with the provisional nature of scientific knowledge. The problem I identify challenges fundamental tenets of criminal law and procedure: the privileging of finality; the deference afforded juries; the virtues of plea bargaining; the wisdom of adversarial models of justice; and, at bottom, our commitment to the presumption of innocence. Now is the time to reckon with the proper place of science in determining guilt. This article begins this conversation, using Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) as a case study.


Criminal law’s reliance on science should not be jettisoned. But our system must be armed to deal with the inevitability of scientific change. I conclude by offering suggestions for reform.

Keywords: Shaken Baby Syndrome, Forensic Science, Expert Testimony

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, scientific evidence

Court decisions: Mitchell v Epps (MS, 2010)

Mitchell v Epps (MS, 2010) has been added to the Court Decisions blog roll section.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, Mitchell v Epps, Mitchell v MS

Court decisions: Ortiz v US (2007)

Ortiz v US (2007) has been added to the Court Decisions (n=93) blog roll section.

Law Review Article: The Geography of Criminal Law

New law review article by Adam Benforado (Drexel University - Earle Mack School of Law):  The Geography of Criminal Law (Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2010) on SSRN (click here to go to download link).

Abstract

When Westerners explain the causes of actions or outcomes in the criminal law context, they demonstrate a strong tendency to overestimate the importance of dispositional factors, like thinking, preferring, and willing, and underestimate the impact of interior and exterior situational factors, including environmental, historical, and social forces, as well as affective states, knowledge structures, motives, and other unseen aspects of our cognitive frameworks and processes. One of the situational factors that we are particularly likely to overlook is physical space - that is, landscapes, places, natures, boundaries, and spatialities. Our shortsightedness comes at a great cost. Spatial concerns shape legal structures, order interactions, and influence behavior.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, criminal law, geography of crimnal law

AAIDD Manual on intellectual disability: Interviews related to legal, education and background of 11th edtion

 

The AAIDD web site now has three video interviews available for viewing that deal with three broad topics related to the new green manual.  The titles, presenters, and links are provided below.  Click here for prior blomgaster (Dr. Kevin McGrew) critiques of the manual's chapter on intellectual functioning.

On Legal Aspects of the New Intellectual Disability Definition Manual.  Co-author Ruth Luckasson, JD Distinguished Professor, University of New Mexico

On the New Intellectual Disability Definition Manual.  Co-author Bob Shalock, PhD Professor Emeritus and Former Psychology Chair, Hastings College

On Education Aspects of the New Intellectual Disability Definition Manual.  Co-author Martha E. Snell, PhD Professor of Special Education, University of Virginia