The predictive power of intelligence: Miranda abilities of individuals with intellectual disability.

OBJECTIVE: The Miranda v. Arizona (1966) decision was intended to protect individuals' rights in custodial situations. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate Miranda abilities of individuals with intellectual disability and evaluate the utility of intelligence in predicting these abilities. Additionally, we aimed to provide an updated resource for forensic examiners regarding the performance of individuals with intellectual disability on the Standardized Assessment of Miranda Abilities (SAMA). HYPOTHESES: We hypothesized that IQ, particularly verbal intelligence and working memory, would significantly predict abilities related to recall, vocabulary, knowledge, and acquiescence in a sample with intellectual disability. METHOD: Sixty-two individuals diagnosed with intellectual disability completed the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-4th ed. (WAIS-IV), the SAMA, and a background questionnaire. RESULTS: Participants demonstrated significantly worse Miranda abilities when compared to the normative sample of the SAMA apart from acquiescence, which they demonstrated at significantly higher rates. Participants exhibited limited existing knowledge of Miranda rights and showed minimal improvement following exposure to a Miranda warning. Verbal abilities were a significant predictor of recall and vocabulary abilities with large effect sizes on average (i.e., ds > 1). IQ was not predictive of misconceptions about Miranda or acquiescence. CONCLUSIONS: Verbal intelligence was an important contributor to understanding Miranda. This study provided data related to performance on the SAMA by a sample of individuals with intellectual disability. It may serve as a reference for evaluators, legal professionals, and law enforcement officers when working with justice-involved persons with suspected intellectual disability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Involuntary civil commitment: communicating with the court regarding "danger to other".

Beginning in the 1990s, researchers in the field of violence risk assessment recognized that even the most accurate and valid assessment could not assist fact-finders if the information was communicated in an unclear, imprecise, and/or incomplete manner (Monahan & Steadman, 1996; Schopp, 1996). The purpose of the current study was to investigate judges' opinions regarding the probative value of risk communication messages in civil commitment proceedings. Three types of risk communication messages were investigated: (1) description; (2) prediction; and (3) management. Additionally, the risk prediction model was investigated more in-depth by varying the format used to communicate the prediction: (1) categorical; (2) frequency; and (3) probabilistic. A national sample of 403 judges completed the study and via random selection, each received one of 10 risk vignettes. The vignettes described a situation in which a person underwent an evaluation for civil commitment based on the danger to other criteria; danger to self criteria was not at issue in this case. Risk messages and risk level were systematically varied. This study found that the risk models (i.e., description, prediction, and management) were viewed as equally probative. However, within the risk prediction model, categorical messages were viewed as the having the highest probative value. Results also indicated that of the three models, the risk prediction model led to rulings that are more strict than the other risk models, but no one risk prediction format resulted in higher restrictiveness. Results of this study can be used to provide mental health professionals some guidance as to how to present their data such that judges find the information easy to interpret and probative to their decisions.

Does a booster intervention augment the preventive effects of an abbreviated version of the coping power program for aggressive children?

Booster interventions have been presumed to be important methods for maintaining the effects of evidence-based programs for children with behavioral problems, but there has been remarkably little empirical attention to this assumption. The present study examines the effect of a child-oriented booster preventive intervention with children who had previously received an abbreviated version (24 child sessions, 10 parent sessions) of the Coping Power targeted prevention program. Two hundred and forty-one children (152 boys, 89 girls) were screened as having moderate to high levels of aggressive behavior in 4th grade, then half were randomly assigned to receive the abbreviated Coping Power program in 5th grade, and half of the preventive intervention children were then randomly assigned to a Booster condition in 6th grade. The Booster sessions consisted of brief monthly individual contacts, and were primarily with the children. Five assessments across 4 years were collected from teachers, providing a three-year follow-up for all children who participated in the project. Results indicated that the abbreviated Coping Power program (one-third shorter than the full intervention) had long-term effects in reducing children's externalizing problem behaviors, proactive and reactive aggression, impulsivity traits and callous-unemotional traits. The Booster intervention did not augment these prevention effects. These findings indicate that a briefer and more readily disseminated form of an evidence-based targeted preventive intervention was effective. The findings have potential implications for policy and guidelines about possible intervention length and booster interventions.

Malingering intellectual disability: the value of available measures and methods.

Atkins v. Virginia (2002) is a case that has changed the landscape in relation to the assessment of malingering in a legal context. This landmark decision abolished the death penalty for defendants found to have intellectual disability (ID; formally known as mental retardation), but limitations in our assessment techniques lead to questions regarding the veracity of ID claims. In fact, Justice Scalia noted with clarity that concerns exist regarding the ability of individuals to feign ID and to do so successfully. At the time of writing, little empirical research has been completed, but that which exists demonstrates an overall lack of validity for traditional measures of cognitive malingering for use with this population. This manuscript provides an overview of the utility of many of the traditional measures of malingering for use with an ID population and serves as a call for research in this very important area.

Susceptibility of current adaptive behavior measures to feigned deficits.

The current study examined the susceptibility of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-2nd edition (ABAS-II; Harrison & Oakland, 2003) and the Scales of Independent Behavior-Revised (S1B-R; Bruininks, Woodcock, Weatherman, & Hill, 1996) to the feigning of adaptive functioning deficits. Using four different instruction sets, the authors evaluated whether the provision of diagnostic information (a form of coaching) improved participants' ability to simulate adaptive deficits commensurate with a diagnosis of mental retardation. The authors found that the ABAS-II was quite vulnerable to believable manipulation by raters, while the SIB-R was not. In fact, exaggeration on the SIB-R was easily detected regardless of the information provided. Implications regarding the use of these measures in Atkins mental retardation evaluations are discussed.

Assessing Axis I symptomatology on the SADS-C in two correctional samples: the validation of subscales and a screen for malingered presentations.

The Schedule of Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Change Version (SADS-C; Spitzer & Endicott, 1978b) is a brief, highly reliable structured interview with clinical applications to diverse populations. This investigation involved reanalyses of data from 2 earlier studies (Rogers, Grandjean, Tillbrook, Vitacco, & Sewell, 2001; Ustad, Rogers, & Salekin, 1998). Focusing on 2 clinical samples from a metropolitan jail, we investigated its subscales via exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. A good model fit was found (comparative fit index =.92; robust comparative fit index =.94) for 4 subscales (Dysphoria, Psychosis, Mania, and Insomnia) with good interrater reliability (M intraclass coefficient =.95) and clinical relevance. As a preliminary screen for feigned mental disorders, 2 detection scales (Symptom Combinations and Symptom Selectivity) were moderately successful. By maximizing negative predictive power, the SADS-C detection strategies proved effective at ruling out feigning for mentally disordered offenders with a high likelihood of genuine disorders.