The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations

Tess Neal, Thomas Grisso

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We integrate multiple domains of psychological science to identify, better understand, and manage the effects of subtle but powerful biases in forensic mental health assessment. This topic is ripe for discussion, as research evidence that challenges our objectivity and credibility garners increased attention both within and outside of psychology. We begin by defining bias and provide rich examples from the judgment and decision-making literature as they might apply to forensic assessment tasks. The cognitive biases we review can help us explain common problems in interpretation and judgment that confront forensic examiners. This leads us to ask (and attempt to answer) how we might use what we know about bias in forensic clinicians' judgment to reduce its negative effects.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)200-211
Number of pages12
JournalPsychology, Public Policy, and Law
Volume20
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mental Health
mental health
trend
evaluation
Psychology
examiner
Decision Making
objectivity
credibility
psychology
Research
decision making
interpretation
science
evidence

Keywords

  • Bias
  • Decision
  • Forensic
  • Judgment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Cite this

The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations. / Neal, Tess; Grisso, Thomas.

In: Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 20, No. 2, 01.05.2014, p. 200-211.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1aedf7715d764f6db50c94a182698d55,
title = "The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations",
abstract = "We integrate multiple domains of psychological science to identify, better understand, and manage the effects of subtle but powerful biases in forensic mental health assessment. This topic is ripe for discussion, as research evidence that challenges our objectivity and credibility garners increased attention both within and outside of psychology. We begin by defining bias and provide rich examples from the judgment and decision-making literature as they might apply to forensic assessment tasks. The cognitive biases we review can help us explain common problems in interpretation and judgment that confront forensic examiners. This leads us to ask (and attempt to answer) how we might use what we know about bias in forensic clinicians' judgment to reduce its negative effects.",
keywords = "Bias, Decision, Forensic, Judgment",
author = "Tess Neal and Thomas Grisso",
year = "2014",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/a0035824",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "200--211",
journal = "Psychology, Public Policy, and Law",
issn = "1076-8971",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations

AU - Neal, Tess

AU - Grisso, Thomas

PY - 2014/5/1

Y1 - 2014/5/1

N2 - We integrate multiple domains of psychological science to identify, better understand, and manage the effects of subtle but powerful biases in forensic mental health assessment. This topic is ripe for discussion, as research evidence that challenges our objectivity and credibility garners increased attention both within and outside of psychology. We begin by defining bias and provide rich examples from the judgment and decision-making literature as they might apply to forensic assessment tasks. The cognitive biases we review can help us explain common problems in interpretation and judgment that confront forensic examiners. This leads us to ask (and attempt to answer) how we might use what we know about bias in forensic clinicians' judgment to reduce its negative effects.

AB - We integrate multiple domains of psychological science to identify, better understand, and manage the effects of subtle but powerful biases in forensic mental health assessment. This topic is ripe for discussion, as research evidence that challenges our objectivity and credibility garners increased attention both within and outside of psychology. We begin by defining bias and provide rich examples from the judgment and decision-making literature as they might apply to forensic assessment tasks. The cognitive biases we review can help us explain common problems in interpretation and judgment that confront forensic examiners. This leads us to ask (and attempt to answer) how we might use what we know about bias in forensic clinicians' judgment to reduce its negative effects.

KW - Bias

KW - Decision

KW - Forensic

KW - Judgment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937733797&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937733797&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0035824

DO - 10.1037/a0035824

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 200

EP - 211

JO - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

JF - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

SN - 1076-8971

IS - 2

ER -