Forensic assessment of violence risk in adversarial proceedings: Pursuing objectivity and avoiding bias

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 141-153

  Murrie, Daniel C ^a   Balusek, Kenneth ^a  

^a SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Ethics; Forensic evaluation; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EXPERT WITNESS; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PSYCHOLOGIST; PUNISHMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEXUAL CRIME; VIOLENCE;

EID: 67649094674     PISSN: 15228932     EISSN: 15229092     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J158v07n04_06     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Boccaccini, M. T. and Brodsky, S. L. (2002) Believability of expert and law witnesses: Implications for trial consultation. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 33, pp. 384-388.
2. Borum, R. (1996) Improving the clinical practice of violence risk assessment: Technology, guidelines, and training. American Psychologist, 51, pp. 945-956.
3. Borum, R. (2000) Assessing violence risk among youth. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, pp. 1263-1288.
4. Borum, R., Otto, R. and Golding, S. (1993) Improving clinical judgment and decision making in forensic evaluation. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 21, pp. 35-76.
5. Brodsky, S. L. (1991) Testifying in court: Guidelines and maxims for the expert witness., American Psychological Association., Washington, DC
6. Brodsky, S. L. (1999) The expert expert witness., American Psychological Association., Washington, DC
7. Campbell, T. W. (in press). The validity of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in adversarial proceedings. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice.
8. Colbach, E. M. (1981) Integrity checks on the witness stand. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law, 9, pp. 285-288.
9. Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. (1991) Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law & Human Behavior, 15, pp. 655-665.
10. Cooper, J. and Neuhas, I. M. (2000) The "hired gun" effect: Assessing the effect of pay, frequency of testifying, and credentials on the perception of expert testimony. Law & Human Behavior, 24, pp. 149-171.
11. Cornell, D. G. (1987) Role conflict in forensic clinical psychology: A reply to Arcaya. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 18, pp. 429-432.
12. Doren, D. M. (2002) Evaluating sex offenders: A manual for civil commitment and beyond., Sage., Thousand Oaks, CA
13. Douglas, K. S. and Skeem, J. L. (2005) Violence risk assessment: Getting specific about being dynamic. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 11, pp. 347-383.
14. Edens, J. F. and Vincent, G. M. (in press). Juvenile psychopathy: A clinical construct in need of restraint?. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice.
15. Hagen, M. A. (1997) Whores of the court: The fraud of psychiatric testimony and the rape of American justice., Harper-Collins., New York
16. Hans, V. P. (1986) An analysis of public attitudes toward the insanity defense. Criminology, 24, pp. 393-414.
17. Hanson, R. K. (1997) The development of a brief actuarial risk scale for sexual offense recidivism., Department of the Solicitor General of Canada., Ottawa, Ontario
18. Hanson, R. K. and Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005) The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 73, pp. 1154-1163.
19. Hanson, R. K. and Thornton, D. (2000) Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law & Human Behavior, 24, pp. 119-136.
20. Hare, R. D. (1991) The Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised., Multi-Health Systems., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
21. Hare, R. D. (2003) The Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised-Second Edition., Multi-Health Systems., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
22. Heilbrun, K. (2001) Principles of forensic mental health assessment., Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press., New York
23. Heilbrun, K., Dvoskin, J., Hart, S. and McNiel, D. (1999) Violence risk communication: Implications for research, policy, and practice. Health, Risk, & Society, 1, pp. 91-106.
24. Heilbrun, K., Warren, J. and Picarello, K. (2003) Use of third party information in forensic assessment. Volume 11: Forensic psychology, Comprehensive handbook of psychology. pp. 69-86. Wiley., New York
25. Jensen, E. (1993) When "hired guns" backfire: The witness immunity doctrine and the negligent expert witness. University of Missouri at Kansas City Law Review, 62, pp. 185-207.
26. Litwack, T., Zapf, P., Groscup, J. and Hart, S. D. (2006) Violence risk assessment: Research, legal, and clinical considerations. The handbook of forensic psychology,, pp. 487-533. Wiley., New York
27. Monahan, J. (1996) Violence prediction: The past twenty years and the next twenty years. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 23, pp. 107-120.
28. Murrie, D. C., Boccaccini, M. T., Johnson, J. T. and Janke, C. (2006) Interrater (dis)agreement on Psychopathy Checklist-Revised Scores in sexual-offender civil commitment proceedings: Evidence of bias in forensic evaluation?. Manuscript submitted for publication.
29. Murrie, D. C. and Warren, J. I. (2005) Clinician variation in rates of legal sanity opinions: Implications for self-monitoring. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 36, pp. 519-524.
30. Otto, R. K. (1989) Bias and expert testimony of mental health professionals in adversarial proceedings: A preliminary investigation. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 7, pp. 267-273.
31. Otto, R. K. (2000) Assessing and managing violence risk in outpatient settings. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56:10, pp. 1239-1262.
32. Otto, R. K. (2006) Panel discussion at the annual meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, St. Petersburg, FL. Discussion of the Forensic Specialty Guidelines.
33. Rogers, R. (1987) Ethical dilemmas in forensic evaluations. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 5, pp. 149-160.
34. Shah, S. A. (1978) Dangerousness and mental illness: Some conceptual, prediction, and policy dilemmas. Dangerous Behavior: A problem in law and mental health, pp. 153-191. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
35. Shuman, D. W. and Greenberg, S. A. (2003) The expert witness, the adversary system, and the voice of reason: Reconciling impartiality and advocacy. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 34, pp. 219-224.
36. Silver, E., Cirincione, C. and Steadman, H. (1994) Demythologizing inaccurate perceptions of the insanity defense. Law & Human Behavior, 18, pp. 63-70.
37. Slovic, P., Monahan, J. and MacGregor, D. G. (2000) Violence risk assessment and risk communication: The effects of using actual cases, providing instruction, and employing probability versus frequency formats. Law & Human Behavior, 24, pp. 271-296.
38. Sweet, J. J. and Moulthrop, M. A. (1999) Self-examination questions as a means of identifying bias in adversarial assessments. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 1, pp. 73-88.