...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law >An Evaluation of Procedures for Assessing Competency to Stand Trial
【24h】

An Evaluation of Procedures for Assessing Competency to Stand Trial

机译：审判能力评估程序的评估

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In a field experiment involving 120 defendants at Bridgewater State Hospital in Massachusetts, the authors evaluated three instruments for assessing competency to stand trial: the Competency Screening Test (CST), Competency Assessment Instrument (CAI), and Interdisciplinary Fitness Interview (IFI). The CST (a paper-and-pencil test) was administered by a research assistant and scored by trained graduate students. Lawyers, psychologists, and social workers were recruited and trained in the use of the other instruments, then assigned as individuals (CAI) or teams (IFI) to conduct interviews and assess subjects. The performance of the project interviewers was compared against two yardsticks: (1) actual decisions reached by the regular Bridgewater staff, and (2) a consensus of two nationally respected experts who reviewed the cases and formed independent competency judgments. Both the CAI and IF1 performed well under these conditions, indicating that one-time interviews by well-trained persons can lead to accurate competency decisions in the majority of cases. The authors conclude that hospitalization for competency assessment is rarely necessary.
机译：在马萨诸塞州布里奇沃特州立医院进行的涉及120名被告的现场试验中，作者评估了三种评估受审能力的工具：能力筛选测试（CST），能力评估工具（CAI）和跨学科适应性访谈（IFI）。 CST（纸笔测试）由一名研究助理管理，并由受过训练的研究生评分。招募了律师，心理学家和社会工作者使用其他工具，并对他们进行了培训，然后分配为个人（CAI）或团队（IFI）进行访谈和评估主题。将项目访问员的表现与两个标准进行了比较：（1）布里奇沃特（Bridgewater）常规工作人员做出的实际决定，以及（2）两位受国家尊重的专家的共识，他们审查了案件并形成了独立的胜任力判断。在这种情况下，CAI和IF1均表现良好，这表明受过良好培训的人员进行的一次面试可以在大多数情况下做出准确的胜任决定。作者得出结论，很少需要住院以进行能力评估。

著录项

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