Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Commentary: Reply to “A Critical Review of Published Competency-to-Confess Measures’‘

  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Educational Research Association [AERA], American Psychological Association [APA], and National Council on Measurement in Education [NCME]. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

  • Frumkin, B., & Garcia, A. (2003). Psychological evaluations and the competency to waive Miranda rights. Champion, 9, 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, N., Condie, L., Kalbeitzer, R., Osman, D., & Geier, J. (2003). Juvenile offenders’ Miranda rights comprehension and self-reported likelihood of false confessions. Assessment, 10, 359–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (1986). Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and instruments. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (1998a). Forensic evaluation of juveniles. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (1998b). Instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda Rights. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (2003). Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and instruments (2nd ed.). New York: Kluwer/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, J., & Slobogin, C. (1987). Psychological evaluations for the courts. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberlander, L., Goldstein, N., & Goldstein, A. (2003). Competence to confess. In I. Wiener and A. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 22. Forensic psychology (pp. 335–357). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Jordan, M., & Harrison, K. (2004). A critical review of published competency-to-confess measures. Law and Human Behavior

  • Rogers, R., Tillbrook, C., & Sewell, K. (2004). Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R): Professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Massachusetts Medical School, MA, USA

    Thomas Grisso

Authors
  1. Thomas Grisso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Grisso, T. Commentary: Reply to “A Critical Review of Published Competency-to-Confess Measures’‘. Law Hum Behav 28, 719–724 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-004-0795-y

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-004-0795-y

Search

Navigation