Abstract
A primary reason for the widespread use of psychological tests is the objectivity of the information they provide. When used and designed properly, tests provide objective standardized information about the skills, abilities, and competencies of individuals and so are important tools that help professionals make important decisions. An area where objectivity and fairness are of special importance is in the courtroom. Tests are used by forensic psychologists in a courtroom setting to help establish scientifically sound and objective opinions that can be used to inform a trial or legal hearing. This chapter provides an overview of psychological test use in criminal and civil forensic settings, including expert witness testimony, competency to stand trial, sentencing mitigation and severity, personal injury, divorce/custody, and other legal matters. It also discusses the use of third-party observers in forensic testing and the detection of malingering and other forms of dissimulation. A brief review of the Daubert standard is provided, which addresses the admissibility of testimony based on psychological testing.
The courts of our nation rely on science and the results of objective study. Psychology in the legal system has much to offer in understanding and evaluating states, traits, and extant behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Dr. Milam has evaluated defendants and testified at more than 30 Capital Murder Trials and numerous lesser crimes. She has performed more than 5000 evaluations for Child Protective Services and testifies often in these hearings. In addition, she provides risk assessments for sex offenders and performs competency to stand trial evaluations. She is a licensed psychologist and board certified in clinical neuropsychology.
References
American Psychological Association [APA]. (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. American Psychologist, 68(1), 7–19.
Binder, L. M., & Johnson-Greene, D. (1995). Observer effects on neuropsychological performance: A case report. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 9, 74–78.
Kamphaus, R. W., & Reynolds, C. R. (2015). BASC-3 parenting relationship questionnaire. Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.
Lilienfeld, S., Lynn, S., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. (2010). 50 Great myths of popular psychology. Oxford: Wiley.
McCaffrey, R. J., Fisher, J. M., Gold, B. A., & Lynch, J. K. (1996). Presence of third parties during neuropsychological evaluations: Who is evaluating whom? The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 10, 435–449.
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (1997). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Reynolds, C. R., & Horton, A. M. (2010). Detection of malingering in head injury litigation (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1992). Behavior assessment system for children: Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2002). Clinical and research applications of the BASC. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Reynolds, C. R., Niland, J., Wright, J. E., & Rosenn, M. (2010). Failure to apply the Flynn correction in death penalty litigation: Standard practice of today maybe, but certainly malpractice of tomorrow. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28(5), 477–481.
Reynolds, C. R., Price, R. J., & Niland, J. (2004). Applications of neuropsychology in capital felony (death penalty) defense. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 3, 89–123.
Yantz, C. L., & McCaffrey, R. J. (2005). Effects of a supervisor’s observation on memory test performance of the examinee: Third party observer effect confirmed. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 4, 27–38.
Youngjohn, J. R. (1995). Confirmed attorney coaching prior to a neuropsychological evaluation. Assessment, 2, 279–283.
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269–274.
Additional Reading
Atkins v. Virginia 122 S.Ct. 2242 (June 20, 2002).
Daubert v. Merrill Dow 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786 (1993).
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts, Third Edition: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
Reynolds, C. R., Hays, J. R., & Ryan-Arredondo, K. (2001). When judges, laws, ethics, and rules of practice collide: A case study of assent and disclosure in assessment of a minor. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2, 41–52.
Reynolds, C. R., Price, R. J., & Niland, J. (2004). Applications of neuropsychology in capital felony (death penalty) defense. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 3, 89–123.
Wiggins v. Smith 123 S.Ct. 2527 (2003).
Youngjohn, J. R. (1995). Confirmed attorney coaching prior to a neuropsychological evaluation. Assessment, 2, 279–283.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
14.1 Electronic Supplementary Material
Supplementary File 14.1
(PPTX 92 kb)
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Reynolds, C.R., Altmann, R.A., Allen, D.N. (2021). Forensic Applications of Psychological Assessment. In: Mastering Modern Psychological Testing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59455-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59455-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-59454-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-59455-8
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)