首页> 外文学位 >Construction of a Forced-Choice Task for the Assessment of Factual Understanding and Feigning in Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations.
【24h】

Construction of a Forced-Choice Task for the Assessment of Factual Understanding and Feigning in Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations.

机译:构建用于评估事实理解能力和假冒能力以进行审判评估的强制选择任务。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Psychologists are commonly called upon to conduct evaluations of a defendant's competency to stand trial. Under Dusky v. United States (1960) the legal criteria for competency to stand trial were enumerated and since then, a number of standardized assessment instruments that aim to assess those criteria have been developed, each with its own noted strengths and weaknesses. Although there are several instruments available to aid clinicians in these types of evaluations, only three include screens for feigning, and only one assesses for feigned cognitive impairment. In the current research an instrument was constructed to assess for competence related knowledge, while also incorporating several logical and statistical methods to assess for a feigned lack of knowledge of the legal system, including forced-choice testing, floor effect strategies, and completion time methodologies. The Factual Understanding Instrument (FUI) was constructed over five studies. Studies 1-3 involved instrument construction and included a review of the literature, a critical incidents phase with experts in the field, and item construction. Studies 4-5 focused on item evaluation and included an expert review of the constructed items and the pilot testing of the FUI in a simulation study with unimpaired college students. In study 5, multiple statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate the FUI items and the various feigning detection strategies. In this sample reliability of the FUI was high. Items were relatively easy for honest responding participants, with many scoring near perfect. Feigning participants did not score as low as would be predicted by symptom validity testing, as responses varied from less than 50% correct to values seen in honest responders. Intelligence level, item difficulty, and response condition were found to be significant predictors in responses to FUI items. Completion time was not supported as a feigning detection method as hypothesized, however, alternative interpretations of the theory are offered. Further research on the FUI with a known-groups sample in forensic settings is needed to establish a floor value, to further evaluate item performance, and to improve the external validity of the current research. Research methodologies and future directions are offered.
机译:通常要求心理学家对被告的受审能力进行评估。在Dusky诉美国案(1960年)下,列举了受审判权的法律标准,从那时起,开发了许多旨在评估这些标准的标准化评估工具,每种工具都有其自身的优点和缺点。尽管在这些类型的评估中可以使用多种工具来帮助临床医生,但只有三种工具包含伪装屏幕,并且只有一种评估伪装性认知障碍。在当前的研究中,构建了一种工具来评估与能力相关的知识,同时还结合了几种逻辑和统计方法来评估对法律系统的假冒知识,包括强制选择测试,场上效果策略和完成时间方法。事实理解工具(FUI)涵盖了五项研究。研究1-3涉及仪器的构造,包括文献回顾,与该领域专家的关键事件阶段以及项目构造。研究4-5的重点是项目评估,并在对未受损大学生的模拟研究中包括对构造项目的专家审查和FUI的先导测试。在研究5中,进行了多种统计分析以评估FUI项目和各种伪装检测策略。在此示例中,FUI的可靠性很高。对于诚实回应的参与者而言,项目相对容易,许多得分都接近完美。假装参与者的得分没有症状有效性测试所预测的那样低,因为回答的正确率从不到50%到诚实的响应者中所见值不等。发现智力水平,项目难度和响应条件是对FUI项目响应的重要预测因素。假设假装检测方法不支持完成时间,但是提供了该理论的替代解释。需要在法医环境中使用已知组样本对FUI进行进一步研究,以确定下限,进一步评估项目性能并提高当前研究的外部有效性。提供了研究方法和未来方向。

著录项

  • 作者

    Arias, Elizabeth.;

  • 作者单位

    City University of New York.;

  • 授予单位 City University of New York.;
  • 学科 Clinical psychology.;Law.;Quantitative psychology.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 136 p.
  • 总页数 136
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号