Premium
Evaluator Agreement in Placement Recommendations for Insanity Acquittees
Author(s) -
Stredny Rebecca V.,
Parker Amber L. S.,
Dibble Ashley Engels
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
behavioral sciences and the law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.649
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1099-0798
pISSN - 0735-3936
DOI - 10.1002/bsl.1995
Subject(s) - insanity , concordance , psychology , criminal responsibility , psychiatry , discipline , forensic psychiatry , recidivism , forensic science , reliability (semiconductor) , clinical psychology , medicine , criminology , criminal law , political science , law , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , veterinary medicine
Research has examined differences between psychologists and psychiatrists in opinions on trial competency and criminal responsibility, but there is little research on such differences in risk assessment. This study examined the impact of disciplinary affiliation on opinions regarding whether new insanity acquittees should be hospitalized or released, and the risk factors given the most weight by each discipline. There was no significant difference between disciplines in the frequency of recommendations for hospitalization versus release. However, the concordance rate at the individual case level was only moderate when controlling for chance, which raises questions about the reliability and validity of forensic risk assessments in real‐world settings. A number of variables emerged as significant in the decision‐making of each discipline, with some differences noted. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.