PSY100H1 Lecture Notes - Lecture 10: Malingering, Pediatrics, Sex Offender

21 views6 pages
Published on 13 Apr 2013
School
UTSG
Department
Psychology
Course
PSY100H1
Page:
of 6
LECTURE 10 – WK 11 MAR 26TH 2013
Forensic Applications of Assessment & Ethics in
Assessment
A multitude of Forensic Applications
- Evaluation of suspected malingering
- Assessment of Mental State for the Insanity Plea
- Competency to stand trial
- Prediction of Violence and Assessment of Risk
- Evaluation of Child Custody in Divorce
- Personal Injury and Related Testimony
- Specialized Personality Assessment in Forensic Settings
APA Ethical Principles available @
apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx?item=1
- Free (on website)
- Contains principles specific to Assessment (standard 9) and
related to areas such as Human Relations (standard 3)
Jodi Arias Trial: Psychologists Testimony in Question
- Charged w/murder of ex-bf on June 4/08
- Forensic psy. Diagnosed her w/ PTSD which may be based on
supposed “lies” from his patient
- APA 9.01 a) Psy. Didn’t follow the rules
- Standard 9 and 3
Standards for the Expert Witness
- Federal Rules of Evidence
oWitness must be a qualified expert based on judges
assessment of education training, xp
- Must present information beyond the knowledge and xp of
the avg. juror
- Evidence presented must not confuse the issue or prejudice
the jury
- Experts testimony should be in accordance w/ a generally
accepted explanatory theory w/guidance provided by Frye
vs. USA
Frye vs. USA (1923)
- Expert testimony must be based on scientific methods that
are sufficiently established and accepted
- Counsel for murder defendant attempted to introduce results
of a polygraph
- Court concluded the test had not gained acceptance by
psychological authorities, therefore refused the use of the
test
How does this Affect Assessment?
- A test inventor/assessment technique must have history of
general acceptance
- Experts should choose well-established extensively
researched instruments as the basis for testimony
Daubert & Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993)
- Factors used to establish validity of a test
oEmpirical testing, theory/technique must be falsifiable,
refutable, and testable
- Subjected to peer review and publication
- Known or potential error rate
- Existence & maintenance of standards and controls
concerning its operation manual
- Degree to which the theory/technique is generally accepted
by a relevant scientific community
Guidelines for Practice of Forensic Psychological Assessment
Heilbrun (‘92) recommended reliability 0.8+
- Test should be commercially available and well documented
oRelevant to the legal issue
oStandard administration w/ ideal testing conditions
oValidated in relevant population
oObjective tests w/ actuarial formulae (when available)
- Include symptoms validity tests
oUnlikely symptoms (are you faking symptoms)
R vs. Mohan (1994) (conclusion)
- Leading supreme court of Canada decision on the use of
experts in trial testimony
- Expert evidence, to be necessary, must likely be outside
the experience and knowledge of a judge or jury and
must be assessed in light of its potential to distort the
fact-finding process necessity should not be judged by too
strict a standard. The possibility that evidence will
overwhelm the jury and distract them from their task can
often be offset by proper instructions
- Mohan (pediatrician) assaulted 4 teens
oGot Dr. Hill (expert on sexual assault) said Mohan did
not have traits of a sexual offender therefore he
couldn’t have done it
oMohan was convicted and Hill’s testimony inadmissible
oJustice Sopinka said evidence should be excluded
oExpert evidence should be admitted based on 4 criteria
1) Should be relevant
2) Necessary to assist
3) Should not trigger any exclusionary rules
4) Must be given by a properly qualified expert
- Ruled insufficient data that there is any standard for
determining the profile of a pedophile/psychopath therefore
expert evidence was not considered reliable or sufficiently
relevant to be of any help
Nature of Forensic Assessment
- Molded by prerequisites of the legal system
- Narrow focus
- Client has little choice
- Malingering
Malingering
- Intentional production of false or grossly exaggerated
physical or psychological symptoms, motivated by external
incentives. Such as avoiding work, obtaining financial
compensation, evading, criminal prosecution, or obtaining
drugs (APA) 1994 p.683
Evaluating Suspected malingering
- Structured interview of reported symptoms (SIRS)
oRare symptoms, absurd symptoms, improbable
symptom combinations
- Test of memory malingering (Tomm)
ocut-off score of 45/50 on trial 2 and or retention trial
- show pictures then show them 100 and ask which were
shown before
- MMPI-2 validity scales
oThe F (infrequency) scale
High score equals more exaggerating
- Usually people fail one and not another

Document Summary

Lecture 10 wk 11 mar 26th 2013. Assessment of mental state for the insanity plea. Prediction of violence and assessment of risk. Expert testimony must be based on scientific methods that. Counsel for murder defendant attempted to introduce results are sufficiently established and accepted of a polygraph. Contains principles specific to assessment (standard 9) and related to areas such as human relations (standard 3) Jodi aria"s trial: psychologists testimony in question supposed lies from his patient. Charged w/murder of ex-bf on june 4/08. Diagnosed her w/ ptsd which may be based on. Standards for the expert witness assessment of education training, xp: witness must be a qualified expert based on judges. Must present information beyond the knowledge and xp of the avg. juror. Evidence presented must not confuse the issue or prejudice the jury. Experts testimony should be in accordance w/ a generally accepted explanatory theory w/guidance provided by frye vs. usa.