TY - JOUR
T1 - The Law Meets Psychological Expertise
T2 - Eight Best Practices to Improve Forensic Psychological Assessment
AU - Neal, Tess M.S.
AU - Martire, Kristy A.
AU - Johan, Jennifer L.
AU - Mathers, Elizabeth M.
AU - Otto, Randy K.
N1 - Funding Information:
T.M.S.N. was supported by a PLuS Alliance Fellowship from Arizona State University and the University of New SouthWales, as well as a Fulbright Scholarship from the Australian-American Fulbright Commission. This manuscript is not an official Department of State publication, and the views and information presented here are the authors' and do not represent the Fulbright Commission or the host country's government or institutions. A version of this manuscript is posted on PsyArXiv at https://psyarxiv.com/6vtf2. Supplementary documents are available on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/nsur2/.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2022 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - We review the state of forensic mental health assessment. The field is in much better shape than in the past; however, significant problems of quality remain, with much room for improvement. We provide an overview of forensic psychology's history and discuss its possible future, with multiple audiences in mind. We distill decades of scholarship from and about fundamental basic science and forensic science, clinical and forensic psychology, and the law of expert evidence into eight best practices for the validity of a forensic psychological assessment. We argue these best practices should apply when a psychological assessment relies on the norms, values, and esteem of science to inform legal processes. The eight key considerations include (a) foundational validity of the assessment; (b) validity of the assessment as applied; (c) management and mitigation of bias; (d) attention to quality assurance; (e) appropriate communication of data, results, and opinions; (f) explicit consideration of limitations and assumptions; (g) weighing of alternative views or disagreements; and (h) adherence with ethical obligations, professional guidelines, codes of conduct, and rules of evidence.
AB - We review the state of forensic mental health assessment. The field is in much better shape than in the past; however, significant problems of quality remain, with much room for improvement. We provide an overview of forensic psychology's history and discuss its possible future, with multiple audiences in mind. We distill decades of scholarship from and about fundamental basic science and forensic science, clinical and forensic psychology, and the law of expert evidence into eight best practices for the validity of a forensic psychological assessment. We argue these best practices should apply when a psychological assessment relies on the norms, values, and esteem of science to inform legal processes. The eight key considerations include (a) foundational validity of the assessment; (b) validity of the assessment as applied; (c) management and mitigation of bias; (d) attention to quality assurance; (e) appropriate communication of data, results, and opinions; (f) explicit consideration of limitations and assumptions; (g) weighing of alternative views or disagreements; and (h) adherence with ethical obligations, professional guidelines, codes of conduct, and rules of evidence.
KW - best practices
KW - forensic
KW - law
KW - psychological assessment
KW - psychological evaluation
KW - psychology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85142224741&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85142224741&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-050420-010148
DO - 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-050420-010148
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85142224741
SN - 1550-3585
VL - 18
SP - 169
EP - 192
JO - Annual Review of Law and Social Science
JF - Annual Review of Law and Social Science
ER -