Collateral Consequences for Third-Party Interviewees in Forensic Contexts.

Collateral interviews can be an integral source of third-party information used in a range of forensic mental health assessments. Although family members and spouses often have the most knowledge about the evaluee, research suggests that they may also experience distress related to the legal proceedings. This article discusses the nature and purpose of collateral interviewing with close collateral contacts, comparing collateral interviews with direct interviews with evaluees. The secondary consequences of having a justice-involved family member are considered, including the possibility of vicarious trauma. Finally, the responsibilities of evaluators are considered, especially in the context of trauma-informed principles applied to collateral interviewing. Recommendations regarding consent, the use of empathy, and feedback to collateral are provided.

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).

What's risk got to do with it: Judges' and probation officers' understanding and use of juvenile risk assessments in making residential placement decisions.

OBJECTIVE: This hypothetical vignette-based experiment was designed to better understand judges' and probation officers' interpretations and use of juvenile risk assessment tools in their decision-making around restrictive sanctions and confinement of youths on the basis of the youths' risk level and race. HYPOTHESES: We expected that estimates of the probability of juvenile recidivism would significantly mediate the relationship between a categorical risk descriptor and decisions regarding the ordering confinement of youths. We also hypothesized that youths' race would serve as a significant moderator in the model. METHOD: Judicial and probation staff (N = 309) read a two-part vignette about a youth who was arrested for the first time; in this vignette, race (Black, White) and risk level (low, moderate, high, very high) of the youth were varied. Participants were asked to estimate the likelihood that the youth would recidivate in the following year and their likelihood of ordering or recommending residential placement. RESULTS: Although we found no simple, significant relationship between risk level and confinement decisions, judicial and probation staff estimated higher likelihoods of recidivism as risk-level categories increased and ordered out-of-home placements at increased rates as their estimations of the youth's likelihood of recidivation increased. The youth's race did not moderate the model. CONCLUSION: The greater the probability of recidivism, the more likely each judge or probation officer was to order or recommend out-of-home placement. However, importantly, legal decisionmakers appeared to apply categorical risk assessment data to their confinement decisions using their own interpretations of risk category rather than being guided empirically on the basis of risk-level categories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Psychological Testing in Forensic Contexts Conducted Remotely.

The use of videoconferencing technology to conduct forensic psychiatric and forensic psychological evaluations remotely has grown considerably in the last decade. This commentary addresses a number of points made by Recupero regarding the use of remote technology to conduct forensic psychiatric evaluations. These points include the research supporting telepsychiatry and its generalizability to forensic assessment, the error rate associated with remote forensic assessment, and its general acceptance in the field. The commentary also considers the inclusion of psychological testing and specialized forensic measures in forensic assessment and describes criteria for considering tests and measures that can reasonably be included in a remotely conducted forensic assessment.

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.

Using the MMPI-3 in Legal Settings.

In this paper, we review the historical evolution of the MMPI instruments, consider the empirical foundations for its use in Forensic Mental Health Assessments (FMHAs) with particular emphasis on the applicability of MMPI-2-RF research to these evaluations, and identify ways in which the inventory can be effectively but also inappropriately used in these assessments. We also review appellate court decisions related to forensic uses of the MMPI and discuss implications for cross-examination on MMPI-3-based testimony, emphasizing the need for forensic practitioners to be familiar with the empirical research available to guide MMPI-3 use in FHMAs. We identify areas needing further research, including the utility of the test in assessments of persons of color, investigations of the applicability of MMPI-3 results in various specific forensic assessments and rehabilitative applications, and further research on implications of the new English and Spanish-language norms. Potential contributions of studies using the updated MMPI-3 scales in descriptive research on forensic populations are also discussed. We conclude that when used properly to assess for evidence of invalid responding that may affect FMHAs, or psychological functioning relevant to answering psycho-legal referral questions, the MMPI-3 rests on solid empirical foundations that can withstand the scrutiny inherent in forensic evaluations.

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).

Juvenile Justice Anger Management (JJAM) Treatment for Girls: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

This study examined the efficacy of the Juvenile Justice Anger Management (JJAM) Treatment for Girls, an anger management and aggression reduction treatment designed to meet the unique needs of adolescent girls in residential juvenile justice facilities. This randomized controlled trial of JJAM compared changes in levels of anger and aggression among girls who participated in the JJAM treatment with those of girls who participated in treatment as usual (TAU) at the facilities. This study also investigated the theoretical model underlying the JJAM treatment, which proposed that reductions in hostile attribution biases, development of emotion regulation skills, and improvement in social problem solving would serve as mechanisms of action in JJAM. Participants were 70 female youth who ranged in age from 14 to 20 years (M = 17.45, SD = 1.24) and were placed at 1 of 3 participating juvenile justice facilities; 57 youth completed the study and were included in analyses. Results revealed greater reductions in anger, reactive physical aggression, and reactive relational aggression among girls in the JJAM treatment condition when compared to girls in the TAU control condition. The proposed theoretical model was partially supported via significant mediation findings; changes in hostile attribution bias were identified as a significant mechanism of action in the JJAM treatment. Results suggest that JJAM is a promising treatment to effectively reduce anger and reactive aggression among adolescent girls in juvenile justice placements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Risk assessment and juvenile resentencing: A critical analysis.

Recent United States Supreme Court decisions in Miller v. Alabama (2012) and Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016) have created the need to resentence individuals who received a sentence of mandatory life without parole (LWOP) for offenses committed when they were younger than 18 years old. Neither of these decisions explicitly cite reoffense risk as a sentencing criterion, but a careful reading of the reasoning in these cases suggests that such a risk should be among the considerations addressed by resentencing courts. If so, important theoretical and scientific questions are raised about the nature of risk assessment tools, in particular the distinction between static and dynamic risk factors. Additionally, the novelty of LWOP resentencing raises further questions about the applicability of these tools to individuals who have been incarcerated for long periods of time. We address these questions, call for additional research on dynamic risk factors, and offer recommendations for professionals involved in these types of assessments.

Life-sentenced juveniles: Public perceptions of risk and need for incarceration.

Pursuant to recent United States Supreme Court decisions in Miller v. Alabama (2012) and Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016), individuals convicted of crimes committed when they were younger than 18 and for which they received mandatory life sentences are entitled to new sentencing hearings. This study examined public perceptions of such individuals (life-sentenced juveniles, or LSJs). Study participants were 663 adults (52.3% male) ages 22-71 years (M = 36.00, SD = 11.46) recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Each participant received one of a possible four vignettes about a man who was incarcerated for a crime that occurred when he was 17 years old and subsequently sentenced to mandatory life in prison following conviction. Two variables (risk of harming others if released to the community, and circumstances of the crime) were manipulated in a 2 × 2 between-subjects design. Each participant read one vignette and then answered questions relating to appropriateness for release from prison. Results indicate that risk, but not circumstances of the crime, strongly influenced participants' views regarding resentencing. When the individual in the vignette was labeled as high risk, participants described him as less appropriate for release, more deserving of punishment, needing more rehabilitation, and more appropriate for specific and general deterrence. The circumstances of the crime had no effect on participants' responses. This may be important for various reasons, as applicable law does not explicitly identify risk as a consideration in juvenile resentencing. The nonetheless noteworthy empirical influence of risk on perceptions regarding LSJs is discussed in their implications for research, policy, and practice.

Diversion at re-entry using criminogenic CBT: Review and prototypical program development.

Society and the criminal justice system prioritize the reduction of reoffending risk as part of any criminal justice intervention. The Sequential Intercept Model identifies five points of interception at which justice-involved individuals can be diverted into a more rehabilitative alternative: (1) law enforcement/emergency services; (2) booking/initial court hearings; (3) jails/courts; (4) re-entry; and (5) community corrections/community support. The present article focuses on diversion as part of Intercept 5 - re-entry planning and specialized services in the community. We describe the challenges associated with diversion at this stage, and review the relevant research. Next, we describe a "criminogenic cognitive behavioral therapy" project that has been developed and implemented as part of a federal re-entry court. Finally, we discuss the implications of the challenges of intervention at this stage, and the recently developed "Re-entry Project," for research, policy, and practice.

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.

Tablet computers and forensic and correctional psychological assessment: A randomized controlled study.

Mobile computing technology presents various possibilities and challenges for psychological assessment. Within forensic and correctional psychology, assessment of justice-involved persons facilitated by such technology has not been empirically examined. Accordingly, this randomized controlled experiment involved administering questionnaires about risk-needs, treatment readiness, and computerized technology opinions to a large (N = 212) and diverse sample of individuals under custodial correctional supervision using either a tablet computer or traditional paper-and-pencil materials. Results revealed that participants in the paper-and-pencil condition completed the packet of questionnaires faster but omitted items more frequently. Older participants and those with lower levels of education tended to take longer to complete the tablet-administrated measures. The tablet format was rated as more usable irrespective of demographic and personal characteristics, and most participants across the 2 conditions indicated that they would prefer to use computerized technology to complete psychological testing. Administration format did not have a clear effect on attitudes toward correctional rehabilitation services. Noteworthy for researchers is the substantial time saved and absence of practical problems with the tablet condition. Implications for practitioners include the general usability of the devices, their appeal to incarcerated persons, and the potential for tablets to facilitate clinical and administrative tasks with corrections clients. Considering the novel nature of this study, its promising results, and its limitations, future research in this area is warranted. (PsycINFO Database Record

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.

Diagnostic Changes to DSM-5: The Potential Impact on Juvenile Justice.

Legal decision-makers have discretion at every stage of processing in the juvenile justice system, and individual youth characteristics (e.g., a particular psychiatric diagnosis) influence how a youth progresses through the system. As a result, changes in diagnostic criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) may affect the rates of diagnoses among justice-involved youths and subsequently influence youths' experiences within the justice system. In this article, we identify the diagnoses most likely to exert such influences and review the prevalence of diagnosis and psychiatric disorder symptomatology in justice-involved youths. We highlight the DSM-5 changes in diagnostic criteria for internalizing and externalizing disorders that commonly occur among justice-involved youths and the potential impact of these changes on the rates of diagnoses within this population. Finally, we address the limitations of using psychiatric diagnoses in juvenile justice decision making, including the potential for biasing legal decision-makers and the importance of considering context as part of diagnosis.

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.