Overcoming stigma: Community support for overdose prevention sites.

Overdose prevention sites (OPS) are beginning to be examined for their feasibility of implementation in the United States to curb the fatality of overdoses. Support for these sites varies greatly and can impact local policy, implementation, and the long-term viability of such programs. This study examined two communications strategies - research and anecdotal evidence - and their effect on public support for an OPS. One group (n= 106) was presented with a summary of research evidence for the efficacy of implementing an OPS in their community. The other group (n= 109) received similar information framed as personal anecdotes from people who use drugs (PWUD), people who work with PWUD, and community members of neighborhoods with an OPS. Communicating the efficacy of OPS as research evidence was associated with increased support for implementation and a decreased belief that an OPS will attract crime. Lower stigma towards PWUD was also associated with increased support. However, neither condition was associated with changes in stigma towards PWUD. Jurisdictions implementing OPS should utilize research evidence in communicating the program proposal to the public. Further research is needed regarding best practices for reducing stigma towards PWUD and the subsequent support for the implementation of an OPS.

Appraising Jackson-based unrestorability to competence to stand trial: The demonstration model.

Under United States law, criminal prosecution may not proceed against a defendant who is incompetent to participate in this process. The vast majority of defendants who are adjudicated incompetent to stand trial (IST) will subsequently regain sufficient capacities to be adjudicated competent to stand trial (CST). However, a small subgroup of defendants do not show sufficient improvement in clinical functioning and functional-legal capacities to regain CST. Under Jackson v. Indiana (1972), such individuals should be adjudicated unrestorably IST, with associated actions (e.g., dropping of criminal charges, civil commitment, transfer to a less restrictive environment or released) specified under the particular jurisdictional statutes. But the present practices associated with the evaluation of unrestorability do not appear well supported by research. In particular, statutorily specified evaluative procedures are overly dependent on prediction in some instances and allow an unnecessarily long restoration period in others. In the present article, we propose and describe an alternative approach-the Demonstration Model-that would address both challenges, providing a more consistent and standard approach to assessing CST and the possibility that a defendant may not recover needed capacities within the foreseeable future. Implementation of this approach can potentially guide restoration planning and intervention, decrease unsupported reliance upon prediction in favor of observing and documenting the results of selected interventions, and provide legal decision-makers with clearer and more transparent evidence, while acknowledging the liberty interests of IST defendants set forth in Jackson. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Further action toward valid science in Law and Human Behavior: Requiring open data, analytic code, and research materials.

In 2019, the inaugural editorial of Law and Human Behavior promised a measured approach to increasing transparency, openness, and replicability practices in the journal. Now, 3 years later, and on the brink of the present authors' last year as the editorial team, it seems only fitting that they take further action to bolster the validity of science published in the journal by requiring that authors openly report data, analytic code, and research materials. The purpose of this editorial is to briefly outline Law and Human Behavior's new requirements. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Psychopathic Personality in Early Childhood: A Critical Comment on Lopez-Romero et al. (2021).

A recent article published in the Journal of Personality Disorders (López-Romero et al., 2021) described the identification of "putative psychopathic personality" in a school cohort of 3-6-year-old children from Spain. This comment offers cautionary considerations of the original article on scientific grounds and critical comments on policy grounds. We caution researchers, policymakers, attorneys, judges, and the general public about the dangers of using this label given present knowledge about the antecedents, early indicators, and stability of the adult disorder of psychopathic personality when assessed in childhood.

Use of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in Legal Contexts: Validity, Reliability, Admissibility, and Evidentiary Issues.

The construct of psychopathy has received considerable attention from clinicians, researchers, and legal practitioners because of its demonstrated association with a range of outcomes of interest to the criminal justice system. The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) is generally regarded as the premier assessment tool for measuring psychopathy in correctional and legal contexts, and the PCL-R is being used with increased frequency to address a variety of legal questions. This article provides a comprehensive examination and review of the PCL-R's use in legal contexts. We begin by reviewing various uses (appropriate and inappropriate) of the PCL-R in legal contexts, using the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model as the conceptual framework. After reviewing available data regarding the use of the PCL-R in legal contexts, we review and synthesize psychometric research with psycholegal relevance, with a focus on the PCL-R's construct validity, predictive validity, and interrater reliability. We then discuss the scientific acceptability and clinical utility of the PCL-R's structural, predictive, and measurement properties for credibility in court, followed by sample cross-examination questions. We conclude with a review of admissibility issues relating to the use of the PCL-R in various legal proceedings.

The Personality Assessment Inventory in U.S. Case Law: A Survey and Examination of Relevance to Legal Proceedings.

The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), a popular measure of personality, psychopathology, and interpersonal functioning, has demonstrated utility to address various psycholegal questions. This case law review examines a large sample of randomly selected published U.S. case law decisions to ascertain how the PAI has been applied and considered by legal decision makers. The review indicates the instrument is popular in criminal and civil legal settings, particularly in preadjudication forensic mental health evaluations (e.g., competency to proceed) and cases considering social security disability benefits. Forensic evaluators and legal actors primarily consider the results of the PAI as indicators of examinee impression management, psychopathology, and interpersonal functioning, although this varied by psycholegal context. The admissibility of the instrument was rarely challenged, although some challenges to the forensic evaluator's interpretation and conclusions emerged. Despite the PAI's popularity, the utility of the instrument is determined by specific, empirically supported, contexts. As such, forensic evaluators must consider how the PAI may inform decision making given examinee characteristics and the psycholegal question.

Introduction to the special issue on technology in the legal and criminal justice systems.

Given the increased role of technology in many aspects of the legal system, we sought articles that addressed the most up-to-date research highlighting the application of digital technology to the fields of mental health, law, and justice. After describing the impetus and goals for the special issue, this Introduction summarizes the articles included in the special issue. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The role of data in facilitating discussion: Reply to Jackson (2021).

A comment on the recent American Psychologist article, "In the Immediate Wake of Hoffman's Independent Review: Psychologist and General Public Perceptions" (Thornewill et al., 2020) raised concerns regarding some interpretations of the data (Jackson, 2021). In this reply, we emphasize that the primary aim of the study was to present initial data regarding a sensitive and hotly debated issue to promote more empirically based discussion and lay the groundwork for future research in this domain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

In the immediate wake of Hoffman's independent review: Psychologist and general public perceptions.

In 2015, the American Psychological Association (APA) commissioned an independent review (IR) to examine APA's potential involvement with "enhanced interrogation" procedures following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The IR concluded that certain APA officials acted together with the Department of Defense to "align APA and curry favor with" the Department of Defense to allow the involvement of psychologists in such enhanced interrogations (Hoffman et al., 2015, p. 9). Discussion following the IR's release underscored differences in the views of psychologists regarding the IR's conclusions. Despite extensive discussion, there is only anecdotal evidence regarding the views of psychologists on many of the questions investigated in the IR. This study examined the opinions of psychologists and the public shortly after the IR's release regarding the roles of psychologists in national security interrogations and other non-treatment-focused contexts. This survey of psychologists (N = 1,146) engaged in treatment-focused and non-treatment-focused activities, and of the general public (N = 522), sheds light on the broader perceptions of the IR's conclusions, and is relevant in considering future directions for the profession. Results suggest that the public is more accepting of psychologists' involvement in national security settings, including involvement in many of the activities highlighted as problematic in the IR, than are psychologists. The perceptions of treatment-focused and non-treatment-focused psychologists regarding the appropriate roles of psychologists in national security settings did not differ significantly. These empirical data should help inform the ongoing discussion in this area. None of the authors is associated with an unequivocal position on the IR or the issues addressed as part of it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Taking the next steps: Promoting open science and expanding diversity in Law and Human Behavior.

In this editorial, the authors note that steady submission rate and a rejection rate that hovers at 80%, indicates the journal is flourishing and provides them with the fortunate opportunity to make an excellent journal even better. To that end, they describe three initiatives they are working on and explain the changes readers can expect as they begin to implement them in the journal. Specifically, these initiatives include: (1) promoting transparency, openness, and reproducibility in published research; (2) improving author-reviewer fit; and (3) expanding the diversity of journal content and decision makers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

An update and expansion on the role of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide and Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 in United States case law.

An individual's risk for future violent behavior may be considered in various legal contexts, including civil commitment, criminal sentencing, or suitability for parole. Among the assessment tools forensic evaluators use to assess violence risk are the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG; Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, ) and the Historical Clinical Risk Managment-20 (HCR-20)/Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, Version 3 (HCR-20V3 ) (Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, and Douglas, Hart, Webster, & Belfrage, , respectively). Previous surveys and case law research suggest that these measures are widely used and perceived to be useful in aiding forensic clinicians. This study provides an update to Vitacco, Erickson, Kurus, and Apple () and examines the use of the HCR-20 and VRAG in United States case law. A LexisNexis review revealed 134 cases decided between 1 January 2010 and 21 December 2016 that included the HCR-20, VRAG, or both. Results revealed that these measures are typically introduced by the prosecution to inform opinions regarding general violence risk. In addition, consistent with previous research, these data suggest the introduction of the HCR-20 and VRAG is rarely challenged and, when challenged, these challenges are rarely successful. However, data suggest that courts and parole boards may focus on specific risk factors (e.g., lack of insight) at the expense of other, more objective factors. Finally, we offer suggestions for clinicians who have transitioned to the newest version of the HCR-20.

The Sequential Intercept Model and Juvenile Justice: Review and Prospectus.

Behavioral health needs in justice-involved adolescents are an increasing concern, as it has been estimated that two-thirds of youths in the juvenile justice system now meet the criteria for one or more psychological disorders. This article describes the application of the Sequential Intercept Model (SIM), developed to describe five "points of interception" from standard prosecution into rehabilitation-oriented alternatives for adults (Munetz & Griffin, 2006), to juvenile justice. The five SIM intercepts are: (1) first contact with law enforcement or emergency services; (2) initial hearings and detention following arrest; (3) jails and courts (including problem-solving courts); (4) re-entry from jails, prisons and forensic hospitals; and (5) community corrections and community support, including probation and parole. Modifying the SIM for application with justice-involved adolescents, this article describes three examples of interventions at different intercepts: Intercept 1 (the Philadelphia Police School Diversion Program), Intercept 3 (problem-solving courts for juveniles), and Intercept 5 (juvenile probation). Relevant research evidence for each example is reviewed, and the further application of this model to juveniles is described. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Assessing "credible fear": A psychometric examination of the Trauma Symptom Inventory-2 in the context of immigration court evaluations.

Recent immigration trends indicate that the United States is home to a remarkably diverse and rapidly growing population of displaced persons. Many of these individuals have survived exceptional trauma and are thus particularly vulnerable to trauma-related behavioral health disorders. Mental health professionals are commonly asked to assess immigrants within this population in the service of immigration court decision making. These assessments present a variety of challenges for clinicians, including the assessment and documentation of trauma-related symptoms across cultural bounds. The Trauma Symptom Inventory-2 (TSI-2) may be uniquely suited to the demands of immigration court assessments, but it has not been previously examined in a culturally diverse sample. The current study provided an examination of the TSI-2 within a sample of immigrants with histories of trauma. De-identified TSI-2 data were drawn from several clinicians' existing immigration assessment files. Reliability and standardization sample comparison results indicated that the TSI-2 exhibits sufficient internal consistency within this population, and that immigrants with histories of trauma generally respond similarly to individuals in trauma-specific clinical samples (with several notable exceptions). Specific clinical implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

How Media Exposure Relates to Laypersons' Understanding of Psychopathy.

While conceptualization of psychopathy has evolved, so too has the public's relationship with psychology changed. Concurrently, portrayal of psychopaths has made several shifts, both through nonfiction sources and in popular film and television. Psychopathic villains of the mid-20th century have made space for a growing cast of protagonist psychopaths. This study examined whether a relationship existed between exposure to fictional psychopaths and how lay individuals conceptualize psychopathy. Specifically, this study explored conceptualization differences based on exposure to antagonist versus protagonist fictional psychopaths. Surveyed community participants supported earlier research suggesting mixed misunderstanding of psychopathy. Additionally, higher exposure to protagonist psychopaths was associated with higher endorsement of flattering distractor traits, reflecting a kind of romanticized psychopathy. These findings have legal, practical, and ethical implications, including the potential for biased jurors, confounded research about psychopathy's labeling effect, and questions about how psychologists should respond on an individual and systemic level.

The Neuropsychological Assessment of Justice-Involved Men: Descriptive Analysis, Preliminary Data, and a Case for Group-Specific Norms.

OBJECTIVE: Neuropsychological expertise has played an increasing role in legal decision-making in criminal contexts. Valid neuropsychological evidence in criminal forensic contexts requires normative data that are representative of justice-involved individuals. Unfortunately, existing normative data appear unlikely to represent justice-involved individuals due to significant demographic and clinical factors specific to this population. As a result, the interpretation of neuropsychological performance with justice-involved individuals using existing normative data may increase the risk of inaccurate description, invalid clinical conceptualization, misdiagnosis of impairment, and misattribution of deficits in functional-legal capacities. The current study aimed to examine the use of neuropsychological assessment with justice-involved men. METHOD: A sample of incarcerated men (N = 95) was assessed using a battery of demographic, clinical, and neuropsychological measures. RESULTS: Descriptive analyses showed the demographic and clinical diversity of justice-involved men. Inferential statistical analyses, effect size calculations, and clinical analyses demonstrated that a sample of justice-involved men performed significantly differently and was more impaired than commonly referenced normative samples across multiple measures of intellectual functioning, attention, verbal fluency, and executive functioning. Preliminary data are provided to aid the use of the selected neuropsychological measures with justice-involved men. CONCLUSIONS: Justice-involved men appear to represent a distinct neuropsychological population. Group-specific normative data will be useful to help ensure that opinions about these individuals are relevant, valid, and admissible within legal decision-making in criminal contexts. The current data can guide future efforts to develop substantive normative data on neuropsychological measures likely to be used in the assessment of justice-involved men.

How reliable are Psychopathy Checklist-Revised scores in Canadian criminal trials? A case law review.

The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003) is a professional rating scale that enjoys widespread use in forensic and correctional settings, primarily as a tool to inform risk assessments in a variety of types of cases (e.g., parole determinations, sexually violent predator [SVP] civil commitment). Although widely described as "reliable and valid" in research reports, several recent field studies have suggested that PCL-R scores provided by examiners in forensic cases are significantly less reliable than the interrater reliability values reported in research studies. Most of these field studies, however, have had small samples and only examined SVP civil commitment cases. This study builds on existing research by examining the reliability of PCL-R scores provided by forensic examiners in a much more extensive sample of Canadian criminal cases. Using the LexisNexis database, we identified 102 cases in which at least 2 scores were reported (of 257 total PCL-R scores). The single-rater intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(A1)) was .59, indicating that a large percentage of the variance in individual scores was attributable to some form of error. ICC values were somewhat higher for sexual offending cases (.66) than they were for nonsexual offending cases (.46), indicating that poor interrater reliability was not restricted specifically to the assessment of sexual offenders. These and earlier findings concerning field reliability in legal cases suggest that the standard error of measurement for PCL-R scores that are provided to the courts is likely to be much larger than the value of 2.90 reported in the instrument's manual.

An agenda for advancing research on crisis intervention teams for mental health emergencies.

The popularity of crisis intervention teams (CITs) for law enforcement agencies has grown dramatically over the past decade. Law enforcement agencies and advocates for individuals with mental illness view the model as a clear improvement in the way the criminal justice system handles individuals with mental illness. There is, however, only limited empirical support for the perceived effectiveness of CITs. This Open Forum analyzes research needs in this area and offers recommendations. Two major gaps in CIT research are identified: verifying that changes in officers' attitudes and skills translate into behavioral change and determining how criminal justice-mental health partnerships affect officers' behavior. Research addressing these gaps could help set benchmarks of success and identify evidence-based practices for CIT, substantially increasing the empirical base of support for CIT.

The role and reliability of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in U.S. sexually violent predator evaluations: a case law survey.

The civil commitment of offenders as sexually violent predators (SVPs) is a highly contentious area of U.S. mental health law. The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) is frequently used in mental health evaluations in these cases to aid legal decision making. Although generally perceived to be a useful assessment tool in applied settings, recent research has raised questions about the reliability of PCL-R scores in SVP cases. In this report, we review the use of the PCL-R in SVP trials identified as part of a larger project investigating its role in U.S. case law. After presenting data on how the PCL-R is used in SVP cases, we examine the reliability of scores reported in these cases. We located 214 cases involving the PCL-R, 88 of which included an actual score and 29 of which included multiple scores. In the 29 cases with multiple scores, the intraclass correlation coefficient for a single evaluator for the PCL-R scores was only .58, and only 41.4% of the difference scores were within 1 standard error of measurement unit. The average score reported by prosecution experts was significantly higher than the average score reported by defense-retained experts, and prosecution experts reported PCL-R scores of 30 or above in nearly 50% of the cases, compared with less than 10% of the cases for defense witnesses (κ = .29). In conjunction with other recently published findings demonstrating the unreliability of PCL-R scores in applied settings, our results raise questions as to whether this instrument should be admitted into SVP proceedings.