Clinician variation in rates of legal sanity opinions: Implications for self-monitoring

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

Volumn 36, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 519-524

  Murrie, Daniel C ^a   Warren, Janet I ^b  

^a SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Clinical opinion; Forensic assessment; Forensic evaluation; Insanity defense

Indexed keywords

EID: 27844579143     PISSN: 07357028     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0735-7028.36.5.519     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Borum, R., Otto, R., & Golding, S. (1993). Improving clinical judgment and decision making in forensic evaluation. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 21, 35-76.
2. Brodsky, S. L. (1991). Testifying in court: Guidelines and maxims for the expert witness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
3. Brodsky, S. L. (1999). The expert expert witness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4. Cochrane, R. E., Grisso, T., & Frederick, R. I. (2001). The relationship between criminal charges, diagnoses, and psycholegal opinions among federal pretrial defendants. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 565-582.
5. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
6. Colbach, E. M. (1981). Integrity checks on the witness stand. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 9, 285-288.
7. Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.
8. Elstein, A. S. (1999). Heuristics and biases: Selected errors in clinical reasoning. Academic Medicine, 74, 791-794.
9. Fulero, S. M., & Finkel, N. J. (1991). Barring ultimate issue testimony: An "insane" rule? Law and Human Behavior, 15, 495-507.
10. Grisso, T. (1987). The economic and scientific future of forensic psychological assessment. American Psychologist, 42, 831-839.
11. Hans, V. P. (1986). An analysis of public attitudes toward the insanity defense. Criminology, 24, 393-414.
12. Homant, R. J., & Kennedy, D. B. (1986). Judgment of legal insanity as a function of attitude towards the insanity defense. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 8, 67-81.
13. Homant, R. J., & Kennedy, D. B. (1987a). Subjective factors in clinicians' judgments of insanity: Comparison of a hypothetical case and an actual case. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 439-446.
14. Homant, R. J., & Kennedy, D. B. (1987b). Subjective factors in judgment of insanity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 14, 38-61.
15. Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (1997). Psychological evaluations for the courts (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
16. Otto, R. K. (1989). Bias and expert testimony of mental health professionals in adversarial proceedings: A preliminary investigation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7, 267-273.
17. Redding, R. E., & Reppucci, N. D. (1999). Effects of lawyers' socio-political attitudes on their judgments of social science in legal decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 31-54.
18. Rogers, R. (1987). Ethical dilemmas in forensic evaluations. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 149-160.
19. Rogers, R., & Ewing, C. P. (1989). Ultimate opinion proscriptions: A cosmetic fix and a plea for empiricism. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 357-374.
20. Rogers, R., & Shuman, D.W. (2000). Conducting insanity evaluations. New York: Guilford.
21. Shuman, D. W., & Greenberg, S. A. (2003). The expert witness, the adversary system, and the voice of reason: Reconciling impartiality and advocacy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 219-224.
22. Silver, E., Cirincione, C., & Steadman, H. (1994). Demythologizing inaccurate perceptions of the insanity defense. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 63-70.
23. Skeem, J. L., & Golding, S. L. (1998). Community examiners' evaluations of competence to stand trial: Common problems and suggestions for improvement. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 357-367.
24. Sweet, J. J., & Moulthrop, M. A. (1999). Self-examination questions as a means of identifying bias in adversarial assessments. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 1, 73-88.
25. van Gorp, W. G., & McMullen, W. J. (1997). Courting the clinician: Potential sources of bias in forensic neuropsychological evaluations. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 11, 180-187.
26. Warren, J. I. (1992). Forensic evaluation reimbursement study: The Virginia Supreme Court (Confidential report). Richmond, VA: Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse.
27. Warren, J. I., Murrie, D. C., Chahuan, P., Dietz, P. E., & Morris, J. (2004). Opinion formation in evaluating sanity at time of offense: An examination of 5175 pretrial evaluations. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 171-187.
28. Wrightsman, L. S., & Fulero, S. M. (2005). Forensic psychology (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.