Mitigation evaluations

A survey of current practices

Michelle E. Barnett, Stanley L. Brodsky, Tess Neal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

This study examined the scope and components of mitigation assessments in a first effort to develop some guidelines for conducting mitigation evaluations. Using the mitigation evaluations survey (MES) we developed for this research, we surveyed 266 psychologists about the characteristics and content of mitigation evaluations. A high percentage of participants endorsed each of the 14 content areas presented in the MES as essential or recommended for inclusion in mitigation evaluations. However, when the participants were given a hypothetical open-end referral question regarding a mitigation evaluation, fewer participants included all 14 content areas in their responses. This discrepancy and information regarding the qualifications and expertise of the participants are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)21-41
Number of pages21
JournalJournal of Forensic Psychology Practice
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Surveys and Questionnaires
Referral and Consultation
Guidelines
Psychology
Research

Keywords

  • Essential content of assessments
  • Mitigation evaluations
  • Mitigation experience
  • Psychologists survey

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Mitigation evaluations : A survey of current practices. / Barnett, Michelle E.; Brodsky, Stanley L.; Neal, Tess.

In: Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, Vol. 11, No. 1, 01.2011, p. 21-41.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Barnett, Michelle E. ; Brodsky, Stanley L. ; Neal, Tess. / Mitigation evaluations : A survey of current practices. In: Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice. 2011 ; Vol. 11, No. 1. pp. 21-41.
@article{5f17b03385624a1e85fe7ca9414d7d19,
title = "Mitigation evaluations: A survey of current practices",
abstract = "This study examined the scope and components of mitigation assessments in a first effort to develop some guidelines for conducting mitigation evaluations. Using the mitigation evaluations survey (MES) we developed for this research, we surveyed 266 psychologists about the characteristics and content of mitigation evaluations. A high percentage of participants endorsed each of the 14 content areas presented in the MES as essential or recommended for inclusion in mitigation evaluations. However, when the participants were given a hypothetical open-end referral question regarding a mitigation evaluation, fewer participants included all 14 content areas in their responses. This discrepancy and information regarding the qualifications and expertise of the participants are discussed.",
keywords = "Essential content of assessments, Mitigation evaluations, Mitigation experience, Psychologists survey",
author = "Barnett, {Michelle E.} and Brodsky, {Stanley L.} and Tess Neal",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1080/15228932.2011.521724",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "21--41",
journal = "Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice",
issn = "1522-8932",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mitigation evaluations

T2 - A survey of current practices

AU - Barnett, Michelle E.

AU - Brodsky, Stanley L.

AU - Neal, Tess

PY - 2011/1

Y1 - 2011/1

N2 - This study examined the scope and components of mitigation assessments in a first effort to develop some guidelines for conducting mitigation evaluations. Using the mitigation evaluations survey (MES) we developed for this research, we surveyed 266 psychologists about the characteristics and content of mitigation evaluations. A high percentage of participants endorsed each of the 14 content areas presented in the MES as essential or recommended for inclusion in mitigation evaluations. However, when the participants were given a hypothetical open-end referral question regarding a mitigation evaluation, fewer participants included all 14 content areas in their responses. This discrepancy and information regarding the qualifications and expertise of the participants are discussed.

AB - This study examined the scope and components of mitigation assessments in a first effort to develop some guidelines for conducting mitigation evaluations. Using the mitigation evaluations survey (MES) we developed for this research, we surveyed 266 psychologists about the characteristics and content of mitigation evaluations. A high percentage of participants endorsed each of the 14 content areas presented in the MES as essential or recommended for inclusion in mitigation evaluations. However, when the participants were given a hypothetical open-end referral question regarding a mitigation evaluation, fewer participants included all 14 content areas in their responses. This discrepancy and information regarding the qualifications and expertise of the participants are discussed.

KW - Essential content of assessments

KW - Mitigation evaluations

KW - Mitigation experience

KW - Psychologists survey

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78751475187&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78751475187&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/15228932.2011.521724

DO - 10.1080/15228932.2011.521724

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 21

EP - 41

JO - Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

JF - Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

SN - 1522-8932

IS - 1

ER -