Clinician variation in findings of competence to stand trial
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12434070 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel C Murrie (0000-0002-4195-1238, University of Virginia, corresponding author), Marcus T Boccaccini (0000-0002-1590-4905, Sam Houston State University), Patricia A Zapf (0000-0003-1402-6298, City University of New York), Janet I Warren (0000-0003-3005-1282), Craig E Henderson (0000-0002-1071-941X, Sam Houston State University) |
| Year | 2008 |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 177-193 |
| Publication date | 2008-08-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Psychology Public Policy and Law (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1076-8971 • E-ISSN: 1939-1528 |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1037/a0013578 |
| OpenAlex | W2027571350 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 11 |
| References cited | 3 |
Are some forensic evaluators more likely than others to find criminal defendants incompetent to stand trial (IST)? Although studies report aggregate IST rates of around 20% across large samples of criminal defendants, these aggregate rates tell us little about the patterns of findings among individual evaluators. This study uses 2 statewide samples to present the first available data addressing how individual clinicians vary in rates of IST opinions. Across 60 clinicians who conducted a combined total of more than 7,000 evaluations, the rates of IST findings varied considerably (range: 0% to 62%). Results suggested that some of the variability across evaluators may be attributable to the evaluator's discipline and how the evaluator considered the relationship between competence and psychosis. However, these findings raise questions about the many other evaluator, system, and policy-level characteristics that may influence evaluator variability. Thus, we suggest a research agenda that may better identify explanations for some of the variability in IST findings across evaluators
Competence (human resources · Physics · Variation (astronomy · Clinical Psychology · Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints · Psychology · Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending · Schizophrenia research and treatment · Social Psychology
A meta-analytic review of competency to stand trial research
Assessment of Competence to Stand Trial
Clinical Forensic Psychology
Probation Officer Assessments of Risk when the Youth Look Different
Competency to stand trial evaluations
Adversarial Allegiance among Expert Witnesses
The Law Meets Psychological Expertise
Prospects for developmental evidence in juvenile sentencing based on Miller v. Alabama
The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations
Do some evaluators report consistently higher or lower PCL-R scores than others? Findings from a statewide sample of sexually violent predator evaluations
Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the least biased of them all? Dangers and potential solutions regarding bias in forensic psychological evaluations
| Citations per year | 0.61 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2008 - 2022 (15) |
| Highly cited | No |