Assessment in Forensic Practice

An Objective Approach
  • James N. Butcher

Keywords

Psychological Test Psychological Assessment Expert Testimony Expert Witness Professional Psychology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ball, J. D., Archer, R.P., Imhof, E. A. (1994). Time requirements of psychological testing: A survey of practitioners. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 239–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Belter, R. W. & Piotrowski, C. (1999). Current status of Master’s level training in psychological assessment. Journal of Psychological Practice, 5 (1), 1–5.Google Scholar
  3. Boccaccini, M. T. & Brodsky, S. L. (1999). Diagnostic test use by forensic psychologists in emotional injury cases. Professional psychology: Research and Practice, 31, (1), 251–259.Google Scholar
  4. Borum, R. & Grisso, T. (1995). Psychological test use in criminal forensic evaluations. Professional Psychology, 26, 465–473.Google Scholar
  5. Butcher, J. N. & Williams, C. L. (1992). MMPI-2 and MMPI-A: Essentials of clinical interpretation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  6. Butcher, J. N. (1999). A beginner’s guide to the MMPI-2. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  7. Butcher, J. N. (2000). Dynamics of personality test responses: The empiricist’s manifesto revisited. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 56 (3), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butcher, J. N. (in press). Computer-based assessment strategies for clinical decision making. In J. R. Graham & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.). Handbook of assessment psychology.Google Scholar
  9. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. 113S. Ct 2786 (1993).Google Scholar
  10. Downey, R. B., Sinnett, E. R. & Seeberger, W. (1998) The changing face of MMPI practice. Psychological Reports, 83 (3, Pt 2), 1267–1272.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Frauenhoffer, D., Ross, M. J., Gfeller, J., Searight, H. R., & Piotrowski, C. (1998). Psychological test usage among licensed mental health practitioners: A multidisciplinary survey. Journal of Psychological Practice, 4 (1), 28–33.Google Scholar
  12. Goodman-Delahunty, J. & W. E. (1995). Compensation for pain and suffering and other psychological injuries: The impact of Daubert on employment discrimination claims. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13, 183–206.Google Scholar
  13. Goodman-Delahunty, J. (1997). Forensic psychological expertise in the wake of Daubert. Law and Human Behavior, 21(2), 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graham, J. R. (2000). MMPI-2: Assessing personality and psychopathology. Third Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Greene, R. L. (1991). MMPI-2/MMPI: An interpretive manual, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  16. Grove, W. M. & Meehl, P. E. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hess, A. K. (1999). Serving as an expert witness. In A. Hess & I. Wiener (Eds.) Handbook of forensic psychology (Second edition). (Pp. 521–555). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Lees-Haley, P. R. (1992). Psychodiagnostic test usage by forensic psychologists. Amerian Journal of Forensic Psychology, 10, 25–30.Google Scholar
  19. Lees-Haley, P. R., Smith, H. W., Williams, C. W. & Dunn, J. T. (1996). Forensic neuropsychological test usage: An empirical survey. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 11, 45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. London Times (1999, December 3). U. S. lawyer in clash with QC over Al Fayad (p.6).Google Scholar
  21. McMinn, M. R., Buchanan, T., Ellens, B. M., & Ryan, M. (1999). Technology, professional practice, and ethics: Survey of findings and implications. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30 (2), 165–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meehl, P. E. (1997). Credentialed persons, credentialed knowledge. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 4, 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Melton, G. et al. (1999). Training in forensic psychology and the law. In A. K. Hess & I. I. Weiner (Eds). The handbook of forensic psychology. (Pp. +++). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Millon, T. F. (1994). MCMI-III: Manual. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems.Google Scholar
  25. Nelson, L. D., Pham, D., & Uchiyama, C. (1996). Subtlety of the MMPI-2 Depression Scale: A subject laid to rest? Psychological Assessment, 8, 331–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. News Release (1999). Expert witnesses and the new civil procedure rules. The Psychologist, 12, (12), p. 582.Google Scholar
  27. Penrod, S. D., Solomon, M., Fulero, J. D., and Cutler, B. (1995). Expert testimony on eyewitness reliability before and after Daubert: The state of the law and the science. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13, 229–259.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Piotrowski, C. (1993). Legal issues in the inpatient setting: A framework for literature retrieval strategies. In M. B. Squire, et al. (Eds.) Current advances in inpatient psychiatric care: A handbook. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.Google Scholar
  29. Piotrowski, C. (1998). Assessment of pain: A survey of practicing clinicians. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 181–182.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Pope, K. S., Butcher, J. N., & Seelen, J. (2000). MMPI/MMPI-2/MMPI-Ain court: Assessment, testimony, and cross-examination for expert witnesses and attorneys. (Second edition) Washington, D.C.: American Psychological AssociationGoogle Scholar
  31. Reed, J. E. (1995). Fixed vs. flexible neuropsychological test batteries under the Daubert Standard for the admissibility of evidence. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13, 315–322.Google Scholar
  32. Rogers, R., Gillis, J. R., Dickens, S. E. & Bagby, M. (1991). Standardized assessment of malingering: Validation of the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms. Psychological Assessment, 3(1), 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rogers, R., Salekin, R. T. & Sewell, K. W. (1999). Validation of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory for Axis II disorders: Does it meet Daubert standard? Law & Human Behavior, 23, (4), 425–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rorschach Workshops, “MMPI-2 Workshops,” Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Asheville, Minneapolis, Minnesota.Google Scholar
  35. Rorschach Workshops, “MMPI-2 Workshops,” Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Asheville, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  36. Rotgers, F. & Barrett, D. (1996). Daubert v Merrell Dow and expert testimony by clinical psychologists: Implications and recommendations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 27 (5), 467–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schopp, R. F. & Quattrocchi, M. R. (1995). Predicting the present: Expert testimony and civil commitment. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13, 159–181.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Weed, N. C., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Butcher, J. N. (1990). Failure of the Weiner-Harmon MMPI subtle scales as predictors of psychopathology and as validity indicators. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2, 281–283.Google Scholar
  39. Wiener, D. N. (1948). Subtle and obvious keys for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory/ Journal of Consulting Psychology, 12, 164–170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Weiner, I. (1999). Writing forensic reports. In A. K. Hess & I.I. Weiner (Eds). The handbook of forensic psychology. (Pp. +++). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  41. Wetter, M. W. & Corrigan, S. K. (1995). Providing information to clients about psychological tests: A survey of attorney’s and law student’s attitudes. Professional Psychology, 26, 495–474.Google Scholar
  42. Zonana, H. (1994). Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals: A new standard for scientific evidence in the courts. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 22 (2), 309–325.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • James N. Butcher
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis

Personalised recommendations