Ethical Considerations of Multiple Roles in Forensic Services

Attorneys increasingly rely on the services of mental health practitioners. Although some practitioners lack training, the promise of professional rewards lead some to accept opportunities with resulting ethical quandaries. Due to significant differences between the objectives of traditional mental health services and expert testimony, problems occur when clinicians venture into forensic services. Attorneys and judges, unfamiliar with mental health specialties, may seek to press a mental health practitioner into multiple roles. Although not all multiple roles are ethically inappropriate, caution demands careful parsing of particular roles: (a) academic/behavioral science expert; (b) fact witness as a treating therapist; (c) expert witness based on a clinically oriented assessment; (d) pretrial and/or trial consultant; and (e) professional critic of other experts. Possible ethical issues and risks associated with accepting multiple roles are identified and strategies for avoiding or minimizing harm or exploitation are discussed.     

Quality of maternal thinking and mother-child interaction in at-risk contexts

This study investigates how the maternal level of perspectivistic reasoning and the level of socialization goals in the representation of their actions are related to the quality of mother-child behaviors as well as to the expert ratings on maternal practices in at-risk contexts. It also investigated whether there is any direct link between mother and child behaviors and expert ratings. A sample of 75 mothers of children between 8 and 12 years old reported on their level of perspectivistic reasoning and were characterized by the social workers of municipal services as being coercive, neglectful or meeting their child's needs. Interactions during a collaborative task were observed to obtain information on level of socialization goals and mother-child behaviors. Structural equation models showed that mothers' higher levels of perspectivism and higher levels of socialization goals positively predicted the mother's and child's sensitivity and active involvement in the task and negatively predicted avoidance and passivity. Higher levels of perspectivism consistently predicted experts' views on maternal practices. However, only mother's avoidance predicted negatively expert ratings on coercion practice, indicating that expert views were mostly derived from the mothers' perspective on their child. The implications of these results for parental assessment and intervention programs are discussed.     

Maternal conceptions of the parenting role and mother–child collaborative behaviours in at-risk context

This study investigated to what extent mothers' conceptions of the parenting role drive mother–child collaborative behaviour as well as expert ratings on maternal practices. It also investigated whether there is any direct link between mother and child behaviours and expert ratings. Self-report measures for maternal conceptions and observed mother–child behaviours in the shopping task were obtained from a sample of 75 at-risk mothers with a child 8 to 12 years old. Social workers reported on mothers' negligent, coercive and resilient practices. Structural equation models showed that high power conception had a negative influence on mother and child's collaborative efforts, whereas reciprocity and parental support conceptions had a positive influence. Reciprocity, low power and parental support schemas consistently predicted experts' view on maternal practices. However, only mother's passivity predicted negatively expert ratings on resilient practice, indicating that expert views were mostly derived from mothers' reflections on their parenting role. Results suggested ways for improving experts' assessment of parental capacities and the use of intervention programmes to promote mothers' positive conceptions and actions.     

Live Showups and Their Influence on a Subsequent Video Line‐up

A live showup (known as a street identification in the UK) allows the perpetrator to be identified shortly after a street crime. If the suspect disputes the identification, a video line‐up often ensues. Four experiments examined the reliability of live showups and their influence on a subsequent video line‐up using realistic procedures and conditions. Similar proportions of culprits and innocent suspects were identified from live showups and video line‐ups. Both culprits and innocent suspects previously identified were likely to be identified again in a subsequent line‐up, with delays from a few minutes to a month. Only a weak effect of clothing bias was observed. There was strong evidence of commitment to a previous identification but no reliable evidence of source monitoring errors. The results suggest that a live showup is not less fair than a line‐up, but the use of repeated identification procedures introduces an unfair bias against innocent suspects. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Expert and Target Scoring: Their relation,corresponding test instructions,and their effects on the construct validity of the video‐based social understanding test (VSU)

This study investigated the relation between expert and target scoring of a video‐based social understanding test (VSU) under two different types of instructions (internal and observer). The effects of the scoring methods and instructions on the VSU's construct validity were also examined. A total of 529 pilot applicants completed the VSU (some with internal and some with observer instructions), cognitive ability and knowledge tests, and a personality questionnaire. A subsample (n = 132) completed the VSU again with the other instructions and participated in an assessment center (AC). The two scores were moderately correlated; correlations decreased when the instructions were considered. Neither expert nor target scores showed convergent validity with AC variables; none of the scoring‐instruction combinations showed significant associations with the remaining measures.     

An assessment of the accuracy of self-assessment for career decision making

During the past few years, there has been a marked increase in the number of publications which focus on advice for individuals engaged in the process of career decision making. Most of these publications rely on self-assessment as the major input to the decision making process. This study compared the accuracy of self-assessment to expert assessment based on an assessment center procedure for a sample of potential college graduates. Significant discrepancies were found between the student's and assessor's ratings on 10 of the 13 dimensions assessed. Implications of these results are discussed and suggestions for further study are made.     

The Body Image Boundary Construct: A Reply to Fisher and Cleveland

The ability of expert and naive judges to discriminate between genuine and Barnum assessment statements was assessed. In a 2 x 2 x 2 design (naive vs. expert judges, genuine vs. Barnum test statements, sex), judges rated assessment statements for their information value, usefulness, social desirability, and typicalness. Results indicated that judges were able to make expected discriminations between genuine and Barnum statements. These results were discussed in terms of previous findings which have suggested that judges have seen Barnum statements as "accurate" or "good" as genuine statements. In the present study, the discriminations seemed due to the use of a population of judges more representative of clinical assessment consumers and to the more specific judgments required.     

Measuring Functional Creativity: Non‐Expert Raters and the Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale

The Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS) is a 30‐item scale based on a core of four criteria: Relevance & Effectiveness, Novelty, Elegance, and Genesis. The CSDS offers potential for the consensual assessment of functional product creativity. This article describes an empirical study in which non‐expert judges rated a series of mousetrap designs using the 30‐item CSDS. A confirmatory factor analysis revealed a simple structure that corresponded closely to the a priori theoretical model of functional creativity, resulting in a revised 24‐item CSDS. Non‐expert judges were able to use the scale with a high degree of reliability and internal consistency. The revised CSDS paves the way for further research into the use of non‐expert judges as a possible replacement for more costly, harder‐to‐obtain experts when measuring product creativity using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT).     

Evaluating Complex Collaborative Expertise: The Case of Climate Change

Science advisory committees exercise complex collaborative expertise. Not only do committee members collaborate, they do so across disciplines, producing expert reports that make synthetic multidisciplinary arguments. When reports are controversial, critics target both report content and committee process. Such controversies call for the assessment of expert arguments, but the multidisciplinary character of the debate outstrips the usual methods developed by informal logicians for assessing appeals to expert authority. This article proposes a multi-dimensional contextualist framework for critical assessment and tests it with a case study of the controversies over reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The case study shows (1) how the critical contextualist framework can illuminate the controversy and guide evaluation of the various arguments and counterarguments; (2) how cases of this sort open up avenues for fruitful interdisciplinary collaboration between argumentation theorists and other fields; and (3) where further work is required in argumentation theory.     

Beurteilerübereinstimmung von Psychotherapie-Gutachtern

The access to outpatient psychotherapy in Germany is regulated by an application and expert opinion procedure in a peer-review system. In an external assessment procedure, the application of each patient is considered concerning the existence of a mental disorder, a positive prognosis as well as the adequacy of the chosen therapy rationale. The present paper examines the reliability of this procedure by reanalysing the data from three studies on interrater agreement in the expert opinions about psychoanalytic/psychodynamic therapy, behaviour therapy or child and youth behaviour therapy. In the study of Rudolf et al. (2002) 48 experts re-examined two already assessed cases, in the studies of Sulz et al. (2003) as well as Sulz and Peterander (2004) each of 30 and respectively 7 experts had judged five non selected or seven selected applications. The interrater agreement was calculated using the kappa coefficient by Fleiss for the agreement among many raters, which tests the observed agreement probability against the expected agreement probability that would occur by chance. The level of agreement among the experts differs between 46% and 70%. With the chosen method it is mostly not possible to show that there is a significant higher agreement than by chance. The generalizability of the results to the usual assessment procedure is discussed as well as their potential for the advancement of the application procedure and expert peer-review system.     

‘The witness who saw, /he left little doubt’: a comparative consideration of expert testimony in mental disability law cases in common and civil law systems

The question of how courts assess expert evidence—especially when mental disability is an issue—raises the corollary question of whether courts adequately evaluate the content of the expert testimony or whether judicial decision making may be influenced by teleology (‘cherry picking’ evidence), pretextuality (accepting experts who distort evidence to achieve socially desirable aims), and/or sanism (allowing prejudicial and stereotyped evidence). Such threats occur despite professional standards in forensic psychology and other mental health disciplines that require ethical expert testimony. The result is expert testimony that, in many instances, is at best incompetent and at worst biased. The paper details threats to competent expert testimony in a comparative law context—in both the common law (involuntary civil commitment laws and risk assessment criminal laws) and, more briefly, civil law. We conclude that teleology, pretextuality, and sanism have an impact upon judicial decision making in both the common law and civil law. Finally, we speculate as to whether the new United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is likely to have any impact on practices in this area. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Abnormal psychosocial development and legal responsibility--results of psychopathometric studies

The introduction (1968) of the legal concept of Grave Abnormal Development of the Personality Amounting to a Disorder into the penal code, made possible criminal deculpation on the basis of psychosocial maldevelopment. On the basis of an intelligence- and personality-diagnostic test-battery (Psychopathometry), the findings obtained in the examination of a sample of culprits on probation under this legal provision, has been compared with a control group homogeneous in respect of the significant parameters. Psychopathometric methods can and should reasonably supplement expertises of this culprits with defective psychosocial development.     

Begutachtung der posttraumatischen Belastungsstörung

There is a high prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder in community-based samples; therefore psychiatric assessment and expert opinion is often required. Professional standards of psychiatric expert opinion in the assessment of posttraumatic stress disorder are outlined. The significance of symptom validity tests is critically discussed. Test results have to be considered carefully in the medicolegal context and require thorough clinical assessment.     

Effects of an expert-modeled attentional focus cue structure on skilled jump rope performance and learning

Instructions that direct attention externally have been shown to enhance motor performance. However, research on skilled performers and on learning effects has produced some distinct findings. Further, many studies have presented an overly simplistic view of attention and learning, such that all-internal focus protocols are contrasted with all-external focus protocols. Contrary to this approach, skilled performers have reported adopting combined focus strategies, revealing the need to test more realistic instructional protocols. The current study provided an experimental test of focus instructions that were modeled after the strategies of elite jump rope athletes. Four groups of skilled jump rope athletes practiced novel skills under various focus instructions. The internal focus (IF) and external focus (EF) groups were given traditional internal and external focus instructions, respectively. The expert modeled (EM) group was given a set of instructions that were based on experts' reported focus strategies. The expert modeled-autonomous (EM-A) group was allowed to choose how they used each of the expert-modeled instructions. All groups completed a baseline assessment, four practice sessions, and a learning assessment. Results of a chi-square test of independence revealed no relationship between group assignment and performance during baseline or practice. There was a significant relationship between group assignment and performance during the learning assessment (p < .05). Specifically, the IF group performed below expected values while the EM group performed better than expected. Findings support previous research showing learning detriments associated with internal focus instructions and also provide new insight into the advantages of using instructional approaches that are modeled after experts' strategies. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

Arguments from Expert Opinion and Persistent Bias

Accounts of arguments from expert opinion take it for granted that expert judgments count as (defeasible) evidence for propositions, and so an argument that proceeds from premises about what an expert judges to a conclusion that the expert is probably right is a strong argument. In Mizrahi (Informal Log 33:57–79, 2013), I consider a potential justification for this assumption, namely, that expert judgments are significantly more likely to be true than novice judgments, and find it wanting because of empirical evidence suggesting that expert judgments under uncertainty are not significantly more likely to be true than novice judgments or even chance. In this paper, I consider another potential justification for this assumption, namely, that expert judgments are not influenced by the cognitive biases novice judgments are influenced by, and find it wanting, too, because of empirical evidence suggesting that experts are vulnerable to pretty much the same cognitive biases that novices are vulnerable to. If this is correct, then the basic assumption at the core of accounts of arguments from expert opinion, namely, that expert judgments count as (defeasible) evidence for propositions, remains unjustified.     

Sexual predator evaluations and phrenology: considering issues of evidentiary reliability

This article reviews six assessment procedures used for assessing the recidivism risk of previously convicted sexual offenders. The review of these procedures examines whether they comply with generally accepted ethical and practice standards. With few exceptions, most risk assessment instruments fail to comply with these standards. Currently used instruments for risk assessment continue to rely excessively on clinical judgment; and, as a result, they remain at a preliminary stage of development. Consequently, these instruments amount to experimental procedures; and, therefore, they cannot support expert testimony in a legal proceeding.     

Berufliche Leistungsfähigkeit

In different fields of law the assessment of capability of performance is important and often poses a particular challenge for medical or psychological experts. The present article introduces a model for the assessment of capability of performance developed on the background of a multicenter and interdisciplinary research project. This approach of assessment assumes that the performance capability of a person with psychiatric or psychosomatic disorders does not arise from symptomatology alone; instead, it is also a consequence of interactions between coping processes of the individual and environmental factors. The presented model of the assessment of performance capability is mainly oriented to the “International Classification of Functioning” (ICF; WHO) whose central diagnostic categories are, in addition to the disorder and the somatic and psychiatric functions, the levels of activity and participation. The different assessing levels are operationalized in the assessment model. In this article the various diagnostic levels and their interactions and the criteria which have been formulated are described. The process of decision-making is explored as well. This assessment model aims to make a more reliable, valid and transparent process of expert decision-making in order to increase the objectivity and justice of the assessment procedure.     

Expert assessment of competence to make a will following the death of the testator

The paper expounds the legal basis in the DDR for preparing a retrospective assessment of a deceased person's capacity to make a will, and examines the special features and the conclusions of 26 expert psychiatric opinions. A commentary is supplied on the characteristics of the situation.