The use of the MacCAT-CA with adolescents: An item response theory investigation of age-related measurement bias

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 283-297

  Viljoen, Jodi L ^a   Slaney, Kathleen L ^a   Grisso, Thomas ^b  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Adjudicative competence; Adolescents; Competence to stand trial; Juvenile offenders; MacCAT CA

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COURT; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HUMAN; LEGAL COMPETENCE; LEGAL PROCEDURE; MACARTHUR COMPETENCE ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR CRIMINAL ADJUDICATION; MEASUREMENT; PSYCHOLOGIC ASSESSMENT; RATING SCALE;

ADOLESCENT; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CHILD; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; MALE; MENTAL COMPETENCY; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 68049144567     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-008-9154-8     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. S Balsis M Gleason C Woods T Oltmanns 2007 An item response theory analysis of DSM-IV personality disorder criteria across younger and older age groups Psychology and Aging 22 171 185 10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.171 (Pubitemid 46494627)
2. DM Bolt RD Hare JE Vitale JP Newman 2004 A multi-group item response theory analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised Psychological Assessment 16 155 168 10.1037/1040-3590.16.2.155 (Pubitemid 38802757)
3. RJ Bonnie 1992 The competence of criminal defendants: A theoretical reformulation Behavioral Sciences & the Law 10 291 316 10.1002/bsl. 2370100303
4. DMR Burnett CD Noblin V Prosser 2004 Adjudicative competency in a juvenile population Criminal Justice and Behavior 31 438 462 10.1177/0093854804265175 (Pubitemid 39015974)
5. Carey, 615 N.W.2d 742 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
6. E Cauffman L Steinberg 2000 (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why adolescents may be less culpable than adults Behavioral Sciences & the Law 18 741 760 10.1002/bsl.416 (Pubitemid 32158289)
7. DV Cicchetti S Sparrow 1981 Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: Applications to assessment of adaptive behavior American Journal of Mental Retardation 86 127 137
8. AS Cohen S-H Kim JA Wollack 1996 An investigation of the likelihood ratio test for detection of differential item functioning Applied Psychological Measurement 20 15 26 10.1177/014662169602000102
9. MO Edelen D Thissen JA Teresi M Kleinman K Ocepek-Welikson 2006 Identification of differential item functioning using item response theory and the likelihood-based model of comparison approach Medical Care 44 S134 S142 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245251.83359.8c (Pubitemid 44632039)
10. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Everington, C., & Luckasson, R. (1992). The competence assessment for standing trial for defendants with mental retardation (CAST-MR). Worthington, OH: IDS.
12. C Fried N Reppucci 2001 Criminal decision making: The development of adolescent judgment, criminal responsibility, and culpability Law and Human Behavior 25 45 61 10.1023/A:1005639909226 (Pubitemid 33635915)
13. Grisso, T. (2005). Evaluating juveniles' adjudicative competence: A guide for clinical practice. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
14. T Grisso L Steinberg J Woolard E Cauffman E Scott S Graham 2003 Juveniles' competence to stand trial: A comparison of adolescents' and adults' capacities as trial defendants Law and Human Behavior 27 333 363 10.1023/A:1024065015717 (Pubitemid 36918983)
15. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16. Hollingshead, A. (1975). Four factor index of social status. New Haven, CT: Department of Sociology, Yale University.
17. L Hu P Bentler 1999 Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives Structural Equation Modeling 6 1 55
18. Hyrum, H., 212 Ariz. 328, 131 P. 3d 1058, 2006 Ariz. App. LEXIS 30 (Ariz. Ct. App., 2006).
19. Jacob, M. W., 690 N.W.2d 886 (Wis. App. 2004).
20. Joreskog, K., & Sorboom, D. (2004). LISREL (version 8.7) [computer program]. Lincolnwood, IL: SSI.
21. S-H Kim AS Cohen 1992 Effects of linking methods on detection of DIF Journal of Educational Measurement 29 551 566 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1992.tb00367.x
22. S-H Kim AS Cohen 1995 A comparison of Lord's chi-square, Raju's area measures, and the likelihood ratio test on detection of differential item functioning Applied Measurement in Education 8 291 312 10.1207/s15324818ame0804- 2
23. E Kristjansson R Aylesworth I Mcdowell BD Zumbo 2005 A comparison of four methods for detecting differential item functioning in ordered response items Educational and Psychological Measurement 65 6 935 953 10.1177/0013164405275668 (Pubitemid 41795485)
24. IP Kruh L Sullivan M Ellis F Lexcen J McClellan 2006 Juvenile competence to stand trial: A historical and empirical analysis of a juvenile forensic evaluation service International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 5 109 123
25. S LaVelle Ficke KJ Hart PA Deardorff 2006 The performance of incarcerated juveniles on the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA) The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 34 360 373
26. N Mantel 1963 Chi-square tests with one degree of freedom: Extensions of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure Journal of the American Statistical Association 58 690 700 10.2307/2282717
27. N Mantel W Haenszel 1959 Statisical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease Journal of the National Cancer Institute 22 719 748
28. Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (3rd edn.). New York: Guilford Press.
29. R Otto N Poythress R Nicholson J Edens J Monahan R Bonnie 1998 Psychometric properties of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication Psychological Assessment 10 435 443 10.1037/1040-3590.10.4.435 (Pubitemid 29031515)
30. D Pinals CE Tillbrook DL Mumley 2006 Practical application of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA) in a public sector forensic setting The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 34 179 188
31. N Poythress FJ Lexcen T Grisso L Steinberg 2006 The competence-related abilities of adolescent defendants in criminal court Law and Human Behavior 30 75 92 10.1007/s10979-006-9005-4 (Pubitemid 44257248)
32. Poythress, N., Nicholson, R., Otto, R. K., Edens, J. F., Bonnie, R. J., Monahan, J., et al. (1999). The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal adjudication: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
33. R Redding L Frost 2001 Adjudicative competence in the modern juvenile court Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law 9 353 410
34. AD Redlich M Silverman H Steiner 2003 Pre-adjudicative and adjudicative competence in juveniles and young adults Behavioral Sciences & the Law 21 393 410 10.1002/bsl.543 (Pubitemid 36834807)
35. NL Ryba VG Cooper PA Zapf 2003 Juvenile competence to stand trial evaluations: A survey of current practices and test usage among psychologists Professional Psychology, Research and Practice 34 499 507 10.1037/0735-7028.34. 5.499 (Pubitemid 37239716)
36. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, Monograph Supplement, 17.
37. E Scott T Grisso 2005 Developmental incompetence, due process, and juvenile justice policy North Carolina Law Review 83 101 147
38. Thissen, D. (2003). Multilog (version 7.0) [computer program]. Lincolnwood, IL: SSI.
39. D Thissen L Steinberg M Gerrard 1986 Beyond group-mean differences: The concept of item bias Psychological Bulletin 99 118 128 10.1037/0033-2909.99.1. 118
40. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace line. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. JL Viljoen R Roesch 2005 Competence to waive interrogation rights and adjudicative competence in adolescent defendants: Cognitive development, attorney contact, and psychological symptoms Law and Human Behavior 29 723 742 10.1007/s10979-005-7978-y (Pubitemid 44257255)
43. NG Waller JS Thompson E Wenk 2000 Using IRT to separate measurement bias from true group differences on homogenous and heterogeneous scales: An illustration with the MMPI Psychological Methods 5 125 146 10.1037/1082-989X.5. 1.125
44. W Wang 2004 Effects of anchor item methods on detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models Journal of Experimental Education 72 221 261 10.3200/JEXE.72.3.221-261
45. JI Warren J Aaron E Ryan P Chauhan J DuVal 2003 Correlates of adjudicative competence among psychiatrically impaired juveniles The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 31 299 309
46. Woods, C. (2008). Empirical selection of anchors for tests of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, first published on March 18, 2008, doi: 10.1177/0146621607314044. Accessed on Aug 5, 2008.
47. Woolard, J. L., & Harvell, S. (2005). MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal adjudication. In T. Grisso, G. Vincent, & D. Seagrave (Eds.), Mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice (pp. 283-294). Guildford Press.
48. PA Zapf JL Skeem SL Golding 2005 Factor structure and validity of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal adjudication Psychological Assessment 17 433 445 10.1037/1040-3590.17.4.433 (Pubitemid 43098490)