Threats to the validity of the interpretation and conveyance of forensic neuropsychological results

Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 67-77

  Van Gorp, Wilfred G ^a,c   Kalechstein, Ari ^b  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Department of Orthopaedic Surgery   (United States)

Author keywords

Ethics; Forensic; Neuropsychological interpretation; Results; Validity

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; COURT; DATA ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; EVALUATION; FEE; FORENSIC SCIENCE; HUMAN; LAW; LAW SUIT; LAWYER; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; NEUROPSYCHOLOGY; PERFORMANCE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW; VALIDITY; WRITING;

EID: 32044452236     PISSN: 15211029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J151v04n03_05     Document Type: Review

References (6)

1. Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological Testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
2. American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073.
3. Bush, S.S., Connell, M.A., & Denney, R.L. (in press). Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4. Fisher, C.B. (2003). Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
5. Kalechstein, A., van Gorp, W.G., & Rapport, L. (1998). Variability in clinical classification of raw test scores across normative data sets. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 12, 339-347.
6. Malina, A.C., Nelson, N.W., & Sweet, J.J. (2005). Framing the relationships in forensic neuropsychology: Ethical issues. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 4(3), 21-44.