Unreasonable Minds and Imperfect Self-Defense
In: Int J Law Psychiatry. 2022 Apr 22;82:101794. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2022.101794. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35468313.
7 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Int J Law Psychiatry. 2022 Apr 22;82:101794. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2022.101794. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35468313.
SSRN
In: Houston Journal of Health Law and Policy, Band 11
SSRN
In: Psychology, Public Policy and Law, Forthcoming
SSRN
In: Family court review: publ. in assoc. with: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Band 45, Heft 2, S. 157-174
ISSN: 1744-1617
Psychologists are frequently consulted by the courts to provide forensic evaluations in a variety of family court proceedings. As part of their evaluations, psychologists often use psychological tests to assess parents, guardians, and children. These tests can have profound effects on how psychologists arrive at their opinions and are often cited in their reports to the court. However, psychological tests vary substantially in their suitability for these purposes. Most projective tests in particular appear to possess little scientific merit for evaluations within family court proceedings. Despite these serious limitations, expert testimony derived from evaluations using both projective and objective tests is often admitted uncontested. This article reviews the psychometric properties of psychological tests that are widely used in family court proceedings, cautions against their unfettered use, and calls upon attorneys to inform themselves of the limitations of evaluations that incorporate these tests.
In: Family court review: publ. in assoc. with: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Band 45, Heft 2, S. 185-192
ISSN: 1744-1617
In: Psychological services, Band 8, Heft 4, S. 332-342
ISSN: 1939-148X
In: Psychological services, Band 5, Heft 2, S. 118-125
ISSN: 1939-148X