Forensic psychology.txt

  1. Pathogenic
    Mentally disordered
  2. Criminological
  3. Adaptational
    Attempting to meet their objectives in opposing circumstances
  4. Pathogenic model
    Model in which the patient fakes symptoms
  5. Criminological model
    Models presuppose malingering is likely to occur with (1) a person with antisocial personality disorder (APD), (2) evaluations conducted for forensic purposes, (3) persons uncooperative with evaluation and treatment, and (4) persons whose claims are discrepant with objective findings

    -- ADP * forensic context * uncooperative * wrong symptoms --
  6. Adaptational model
    Model in which would-be malingerers engage on cost-benefit analysis with an assessment they perceive as indifferent to their needs
  7. Explanatory model
    Model that attempted to test the efficacy of DSM-IV indicators of malingering on a forensic sample
  8. Psychopathy
    Demonstrating characteristics including (1) glibness and superficial charm, (2) pathological lying, (3) conning and manipulativeness, basically just takes advantage of others
  9. Malingering
    Conscious misrepresentation of physical and/or psychological symptoms for an external goal
  10. Defensiveness
    The conscious denial or gross minimization of physical and/or psychological symptoms
  11. Irrelevant responding
    A response style in which the individual does not become psychologically engaged in the assessment process
  12. Random responding
    Irrelevant responding in which a random pattern can be identified
  13. Honest responding
    A patient's sincere attempt to be accurate in his/her responses
  14. Hybrid responding
    Using any combination of responding styles
  15. Dissimulation
    Deliberately misrepresenting psychological symptoms
  16. Unreliability
    response of no use to the case
  17. Deception
    To distort or misrepresent a self-reporting
  18. Self-disclosure
    What a person reveals about him/herself
  19. Social desirability
    The denial of negative characteristics and the attribution of positive qualities
  20. Impressions management
    Social behaviors by attempting to create a positive image and avoid embarrassment and other negative emotions
  21. Simulation-malingering paradox
    In order to learn about dishonest people who do not comply with instructions to answer tests honestly, we study honest people who are complying with the instruction to answer tests dishonestly.
  22. self-report with limited reliability
    The patient answers fairly accurately, but leaves out some information
  23. self-report without reliability
    unbelievable response of symptoms due to exaggeration, denial, and guardedness
  24. mild malingering
    There is clear evidence that the patient is attempting to malinger, primarily through exaggeration.
  25. moderate malingering
    The patient, either through exaggeration or fabrication, attempts to present him/herself as considerably more disturbed than is the case.
  26. severe malingering
    The patient is extreme in his or her fabrication of symptoms to the point that the presentation is fantastic or preposterous
  27. mild defensiveness
    There is clear evidence that the patient's severity of symptoms are downsized but present
  28. moderate defensiveness
    The patient minimizes or denies substantial psychological impairment.
  29. severe defensiveness
    The patient denies any problem
  30. degree of certainty
    the level of experimental support and theoretical basis for justifying a diagnostic conclusion
  31. simulation design
    design in which participants are offered small incentives for faking particular symptoms
  32. honest responders
    patients responding accurately
  33. differential prevalence design
    design where persons with different settings are assumed to have contrasting rates or dissimulation
  34. cognitive prong
    defense that a person may be excused if his thinking was severely disordered
  35. volitional prong
    defense that a person may be excused if his ability to control his behavior was severely impaired
  36. mens rea
    criminal intent
  37. unsupported level of certainty
    conflicting research findings
  38. speculative level of certainty
    conclusions that are consistent with accepted theory and supported by one or two studies of limited genalizability
  39. tentative(guarded) level of certainty
    research studies consistently show statistical significance in the expected direction, but have little or no practical value in classifying individuals
  40. probable level of certainty
    research studies consistently establish statistical significance in which cutting scores, measures of central tendency, or a similar statistic accurately differentiate between at least 75% of the criterion groups
  41. definite level of certainty
    accurate classification of 90% or more of individual persons based on extensive, cross-validated research. Finding are congruent with accepted theory.
  42. adjudicative competence
    The set of abilities necessary for a criminal defendant to understand the proceedings in which he or she is participating and to make rational decisions about the alternative courses of action that are available.
  43. affirmative defense
    In a trial, a position by the defendant that places the burden on the defendant to prove his/her claim.
  44. Brawner rule
    Not responsible if:lacks capacity to determine “wrongfulness” (cognitive)OR unable to conform conduct to requirements of the law (volitional)

    (ALI rule)
  45. competence
    understanding of the the nature and purpose of the criminal proceeding
  46. competence to plead guilty
    The ability of a defendant to understand the possible consequences of pleading guilty to criminal charges instead of going to trial, and to make a rational choice between these alternatives.
  47. competence to stand trial
    Sufficient ability to understand the legal proceedings in which one is involved and to consult with one's attorney.
  48. diminished capacity
    A variation of the insanity defense that is applicable if the defendant (in the words of the law) lacks the ability to understand the consequences of their act
  49. insanity
    mental state at the time of the crime
  50. M'Naghten rule
    A rule applied in the history of the insanity defense, in which the defendant must show that he did not know the nature and quality of the act or did not know the difference between right and wrong.
  51. nolo contendere
    A plea of no contest.
  52. stipulate
    To agree about a fact in a legal proceeding without further argument or examination.
  53. 6th Amendment
    Protects the rights of the accused to jury trial, confront opposition, and right to counsel
  54. 14th Amendment
    Right to due process of law and equal protection
  55. Positive symptoms of Psychosis (4)
    • (1)Delusions
    • (2)Disorganized thoughts/speech
    • (3)Hallucinations
    • (4)Inappropriate Affect/Emotion
  56. Negative Symptoms of Psychosis (4)
    • (1)Poverty of Speech
    • (2)Flat Affect
    • (3)Apathy/Amotivational
    • (4)Ambivalence
  57. Prodromal Phase of Psychosis
    gradual deterioration
  58. Active Phase of Psychosis
    Pronounced Positive Symptoms
  59. Residual Phase of Psychosis
    Positive symptoms decrease, negative symptoms remain
  60. Dusky v. United States (1960)
    “…sufficient present ability to consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of rational understanding—and…has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him”
  61. psycholegal abilities
    Those psychological factors that directly bear on the legal issue at hand
  62. Competency Screening Test (CST)
    Initial screening test
  63. Competency Assessment Instrument (CAI)
    Interview that covers the patient's legal competency
  64. Interdisciplinary Fitness Interview (IFI)
    Screening test that combined legal competence with psychopathological symptoms
  65. Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT)
    highly reliable test that tapped into the patients general legal knowledge, courtroom layout and specific legal knowledge
  66. MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA)
    Assesses understanding, reasoning, and appreciation of relevant legal issues
  67. Jackson v. Indiana (1972)
    a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that determined a state violated due process by involuntarily committing a criminal defendant for an indefinite period of time solely on the basis of his permanent incompetency to stand trial on the charges filed against him.

    - release of patients IST in decent time frame -
  68. Wilson v. United States (1968)
    led to the consideration of six factors when deciding competency with amnesia
  69. Amnesia - 6 things to consider
    • (1)ability to consult counsel
    • (2)ability to testify
    • (3)can others reconstruct crime
    • (4)prosecutions assistance in reconstruction
    • (5)strength of prosecutions case
    • (6)anything else that indicates the fairness of the trial
  70. Godinez v. Moran (1993)
    a landmark decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that if a defendant was competent to stand trial, they were automatically competent to plead guilty or waive the right to legal counsel.
  71. Colin Ferguson
    refused the right to counsel, lost
  72. Irresistible Impulse Test
    Inability to exercise rational control over one’s behavior
  73. Hinckley
    got off
Card Set
Forensic psychology.txt
Forensic Psychology - mental insanity as defense