Forensic psychologists' perceptions of bias and potential correction strategies in forensic mental health evaluations

Tess Neal, Stanley L. Brodsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A qualitative study with 20 board-certified forensic psychologists was followed up by a mail survey of 351 forensic psychologists in this mixed-methods investigation of examiner bias awareness and strategies used to debias forensic judgments. Rich qualitative data emerged about awareness of bias, specific biasing situations that recur in forensic evaluations, and potential debiasing strategies. The continuum of bias awareness in forensic evaluators mapped cogently onto the "stages of change" model. Evaluators perceived themselves as less vulnerable to bias than their colleagues, consistent with the phenomenon called the "bias blind spot." Recurring situations that posed challenges for forensic clinicians included disliking or feeling sympathy for the defendant, disgust or anger toward the offense, limited cultural competency, preexisting values, colleagues' influences, and protecting referral streams. Twenty-five debiasing strategies emerged in the qualitative study, all but 1 of which rated as highly useful in the quantitative survey. Some of those strategies are consistent with empirical evidence about their effectiveness, but others have been shown to be ineffective. We identified which strategies do not help (such as introspection), focused on promising strategies with empirical support, discussed additional promising strategies not mentioned by participants, and described new strategies generated by these participants that have not yet been subjected to empirical examination. Finally, debiasing strategies were considered with respect to future directions for research and forensic practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)58-76
Number of pages19
JournalPsychology, Public Policy, and Law
Volume22
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2016

Fingerprint

psychologist
Mental Health
mental health
Psychology
trend
evaluation
Cultural Competency
Optic Disk
Anger
Postal Service
Emotions
Referral and Consultation
Research
introspection
mail survey
examiner
sympathy
anger
Surveys and Questionnaires
offense

Keywords

  • Bias
  • Decision making
  • Expert judgment
  • Forensic
  • Mixed methods
  • Qualitative

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Cite this

Forensic psychologists' perceptions of bias and potential correction strategies in forensic mental health evaluations. / Neal, Tess; Brodsky, Stanley L.

In: Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 22, No. 1, 01.02.2016, p. 58-76.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f68c8dc4d8a84c189545bc3fca644cfa,
title = "Forensic psychologists' perceptions of bias and potential correction strategies in forensic mental health evaluations",
abstract = "A qualitative study with 20 board-certified forensic psychologists was followed up by a mail survey of 351 forensic psychologists in this mixed-methods investigation of examiner bias awareness and strategies used to debias forensic judgments. Rich qualitative data emerged about awareness of bias, specific biasing situations that recur in forensic evaluations, and potential debiasing strategies. The continuum of bias awareness in forensic evaluators mapped cogently onto the {"}stages of change{"} model. Evaluators perceived themselves as less vulnerable to bias than their colleagues, consistent with the phenomenon called the {"}bias blind spot.{"} Recurring situations that posed challenges for forensic clinicians included disliking or feeling sympathy for the defendant, disgust or anger toward the offense, limited cultural competency, preexisting values, colleagues' influences, and protecting referral streams. Twenty-five debiasing strategies emerged in the qualitative study, all but 1 of which rated as highly useful in the quantitative survey. Some of those strategies are consistent with empirical evidence about their effectiveness, but others have been shown to be ineffective. We identified which strategies do not help (such as introspection), focused on promising strategies with empirical support, discussed additional promising strategies not mentioned by participants, and described new strategies generated by these participants that have not yet been subjected to empirical examination. Finally, debiasing strategies were considered with respect to future directions for research and forensic practice.",
keywords = "Bias, Decision making, Expert judgment, Forensic, Mixed methods, Qualitative",
author = "Tess Neal and Brodsky, {Stanley L.}",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/law0000077",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "58--76",
journal = "Psychology, Public Policy, and Law",
issn = "1076-8971",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Forensic psychologists' perceptions of bias and potential correction strategies in forensic mental health evaluations

AU - Neal, Tess

AU - Brodsky, Stanley L.

PY - 2016/2/1

Y1 - 2016/2/1

N2 - A qualitative study with 20 board-certified forensic psychologists was followed up by a mail survey of 351 forensic psychologists in this mixed-methods investigation of examiner bias awareness and strategies used to debias forensic judgments. Rich qualitative data emerged about awareness of bias, specific biasing situations that recur in forensic evaluations, and potential debiasing strategies. The continuum of bias awareness in forensic evaluators mapped cogently onto the "stages of change" model. Evaluators perceived themselves as less vulnerable to bias than their colleagues, consistent with the phenomenon called the "bias blind spot." Recurring situations that posed challenges for forensic clinicians included disliking or feeling sympathy for the defendant, disgust or anger toward the offense, limited cultural competency, preexisting values, colleagues' influences, and protecting referral streams. Twenty-five debiasing strategies emerged in the qualitative study, all but 1 of which rated as highly useful in the quantitative survey. Some of those strategies are consistent with empirical evidence about their effectiveness, but others have been shown to be ineffective. We identified which strategies do not help (such as introspection), focused on promising strategies with empirical support, discussed additional promising strategies not mentioned by participants, and described new strategies generated by these participants that have not yet been subjected to empirical examination. Finally, debiasing strategies were considered with respect to future directions for research and forensic practice.

AB - A qualitative study with 20 board-certified forensic psychologists was followed up by a mail survey of 351 forensic psychologists in this mixed-methods investigation of examiner bias awareness and strategies used to debias forensic judgments. Rich qualitative data emerged about awareness of bias, specific biasing situations that recur in forensic evaluations, and potential debiasing strategies. The continuum of bias awareness in forensic evaluators mapped cogently onto the "stages of change" model. Evaluators perceived themselves as less vulnerable to bias than their colleagues, consistent with the phenomenon called the "bias blind spot." Recurring situations that posed challenges for forensic clinicians included disliking or feeling sympathy for the defendant, disgust or anger toward the offense, limited cultural competency, preexisting values, colleagues' influences, and protecting referral streams. Twenty-five debiasing strategies emerged in the qualitative study, all but 1 of which rated as highly useful in the quantitative survey. Some of those strategies are consistent with empirical evidence about their effectiveness, but others have been shown to be ineffective. We identified which strategies do not help (such as introspection), focused on promising strategies with empirical support, discussed additional promising strategies not mentioned by participants, and described new strategies generated by these participants that have not yet been subjected to empirical examination. Finally, debiasing strategies were considered with respect to future directions for research and forensic practice.

KW - Bias

KW - Decision making

KW - Expert judgment

KW - Forensic

KW - Mixed methods

KW - Qualitative

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84958977342&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84958977342&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/law0000077

DO - 10.1037/law0000077

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84958977342

VL - 22

SP - 58

EP - 76

JO - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

JF - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

SN - 1076-8971

IS - 1

ER -