The Necessity of Multiple Test Methods in Conducting Assessments: The Role of the Rorschach and Self-Report

This article presents a logical and empirical argument for the necessity of a multi-method approach to psychological assessment. Both in clinical and forensic psychology, self-report methods such as questionnaires and interviews are popular. The Rorschach is presented in this article as an additional test method. The article describes recent meta-analyses that evaluate the construct validity of individual Rorschach scales and that serve as major guideposts in the development of a new Rorschach system (Rorschach Performance Assessment System). The combination of self-report and Rorschach methods is used to discuss the importance of multi-method assessment in the context of incremental validity and dissimulation. Practically speaking, the assessor should consider the test method as an indispensable part of the formula when choosing tests, writing reports, and generally understanding the client.     

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE SUITABILITY AND LIMITATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS IN FAMILY COURT

Psychologists are frequently consulted by the courts to provide forensic evaluations in a variety of family court proceedings. As part of their evaluations, psychologists often use psychological tests to assess parents, guardians, and children. These tests can have profound effects on how psychologists arrive at their opinions and are often cited in their reports to the court. However, psychological tests vary substantially in their suitability for these purposes. Most projective tests in particular appear to possess little scientific merit for evaluations within family court proceedings. Despite these serious limitations, expert testimony derived from evaluations using both projective and objective tests is often admitted uncontested. This article reviews the psychometric properties of psychological tests that are widely used in family court proceedings, cautions against their unfettered use, and calls upon attorneys to inform themselves of the limitations of evaluations that incorporate these tests.     

Expert Testimony Using the Rorschach Performance Assessment System in Psychological Injury Cases

The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer et al. 2011) is a new system for administering, scoring, and interpreting the Rorschach Inkblot Test that is designed to make the best possible use of currently available scientific and clinical evidence. Many features of R-PAS are well-suited to forensic evaluation generally and to psychological evaluations in psychological injury cases in particular. Among them, R-PAS: (a) offers an alternative to self-report methods that adds incremental validity, (b) provides a useful check against exaggerated or minimized symptom presentation, (d) generates evidence concerning implicit traits and behavioral tendencies, (e) offers techniques for adjusting for abnormal response sets, (f) uses internationally applicable reference data that do not exaggerate or minimize pathology, (g) organizes results according to the strength of the evidence, and (h) presents results on which are interpretations are based in a manner easy for the intelligent layperson to grasp. Despite its recent formal introduction to the professional assessment community, R-PAS takes advantage of decades of research in peer-reviewed publications (including the insights of Rorschach critics) and builds on established validity and general acceptance for most of its procedures and features. The article describes the standards and criteria applying to expert psychological testimony in U.S. federal and state courts and applies them to Rorschach-based testimony in general and R-PAS-based testimony specifically. It is argued that when the system is properly used and applied and when such testimony is appropriately formulated, it should be found admissible in both state and federal courtrooms     

Deterrence and the base rate fallacy: An examination of perceived certainty

This research tests the assumption of deterrence theory that a strong positive relationship exists between the objective properties of punishment certainty and individuals' perceptions of these properties. This is accomplished through the experimental manipulation of information about objective certainty provided to a sample of university students. Results indicate that individuals use such information moderately in making their own estimates of certainty. Little evidence in support of a “base rate fallacy” is found; subjects generally did not ignore objective information in favor of subjective information when estimating personal certainty. Tests of the interactions between individual characteristics and information provided on objective certainty produced few significant results. The implications of the results, particularly that individuals adhered moderately to known objective probabilities in estimating personal certainty, are discussed.     

THE USE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

Evaluation of families for purposes of assisting the court in making decisions about custody is perhaps the most complicated forensic evaluation. Mental health professionals conducting such evaluations must ensure that their evaluations validly assess areas of concern deemed relevant by the judiciary and legislature. Evaluators sometimes use psychological measures in the evaluation process, and in recent years, a number of tests designed specifically for use in child custody evaluation contexts have been developed. Because some published tests do not meet basic professional standards, child custody evaluators should carefully review any test and its supporting documentation before including it in their examination procedures. In this article, the authors discuss the rationale for using psychological tests in child custody evaluations, describe current testing practices, review and critique contemporary custody evaluation instruments, and offer a template for mental health professionals to use when considering use of a particular test.     

Blind trials of an onsite saliva drug test for marijuana and opiates

The objective of these clinical trials was to calculate the performance, limit of detection, specificity and sensitivity of a novel, semi-quantitative immunoassay for drugs of abuse in saliva and to determine operator bias when measured blind by four different operators. The test is based on lateral flow gold particle technology coupled with digital photography to provide a semi-quantitative end point. The performance of the test was compared with that of enzyme immunoassays and GC/MS methods. Volunteers consumed marijuana or codeine and their saliva was collected 0.25 to 24 h later with the Cozart RapiScan collection device. The sensitivity and specificity of the opiate test were both 100%+/-10.4% for codeine for 9 h after dosing. The cutoff of the marijuana test at 10 ng/mL THCA was too high to detect marijuana use for more than a few hours after smoking. There was no operator bias because the results were presented in written form either as "positive" or "negative" for each of the five drug classes on the screen of the hand-held reader.     

The role of psychological testing in forensic assessment

Despite the apparent widespread use of psychological tests in evaluations performed by psychologists to assist legal decision makers, there has been little critical but balanced examination of the appropriate parameters for the forensic use of such tests. The following discussion examines the nature of legal decision making, and concludes that the primary legal criterion for the adminissibility of psychological testing isrelevance to the immediate legal issue or to some underlying psychological construct. Assuming thataccuracy is a more consistent concern for psychologists performing such evaluations, the criticisms of various commentators are discussed. Some criticisms appear appropriate and are incorporated into a set of proposed guidelines for the use of psychological tests in forensic contexts. Other criticisms appear misplaced, however, and the call for a whole sale ban on psychological testing in the forensic context is rejected.     

PREDICTING THE VIOLENT OFFENDER:THE DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY OF THE SUBCULTURE OF VIOLENCE*

This study tests the extent to which an adherence to the subculture of violence uniquely predicts a tendency to favor violence or instead predicts a more generalized offending repertoire, of which violence is part. Specifically, we use a unique analytic technique that provides the opportunity to distinguish empirically between the “violent offender” and/or the “frequent offender.” The results suggest that holding values favorable toward violence consistently predicts general offending but do not identify youth who systematically favor violence over nonviolence. This discussion considers the impact of these findings for the continued utility of the subculture of violence perspective.     

The effects of biased technological changes on total factor productivity: a rejoinder and new empirical evidence

The paper by Ji and Wang (J Technol Transf, 2013) calls new attention on the analysis of the effects of the direction of technological change. The aim of this paper is to better articulate and test the theoretical arguments that the direction of technological changes has specific effects on the efficiency of the production process and to study the incentives and the processes that lead to its introduction. The decomposition of total factor productivity growth into the bias and the shift effects enables to articulate the hypothesis that the types of technological change whether more neutral or more biased reflect the variety of the innovation processes at work. The evidence of a large sample of European regions tests the hypothesis that regional innovations systems with a strong science base are better able to introduce neutral technological changes while regional innovation systems that rely more upon learning processes and tacit knowledge favor the introduction of directed technologies a form of meta-substitution that aims at exploiting the opportunities provided by the most intensive use of locally abundant factors.     

Understanding and Using the Rorschach Inkblot Test to Assess Post-Traumatic Conditions

Partially, in response to recent and current military conflicts, many forensic and clinical researchers and practitioners have devoted increasing interest to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the individual variations in response to trauma. Such efforts have produced a considerable amount of research and opinion supporting the assessment of post-traumatic conditions with the Rorschach Inkblot Test. Based on PTSD and Rorschach research and an appreciation as the Rorschach as a performance test, five interpretive considerations are presented (1) cognitive constriction, (2) trauma-related imagery, (3) trauma-related cognitive disturbances, (4) stress response, and (5) dissociation. These five provide a conceptual starting point for the understanding and application of the test to post-traumatic conditions. Implications for the clinical and forensic evaluation of post-traumatic conditions and for research are presented.     

Litigating life and death.

In cases involving the "right to die," courts are faced with the agonizing task of developing legal standards governing termination of an incompetent patient's medical treatment. In this Article, Professor Rhoden criticizes the two dominant approaches courts have developed--the "subjective" and "objective" tests--and proposes that these standards be abandoned for a legal presumption in favor of family decisionmaking. She maintains that the "subjective" test, which requires the family to provide clear proof that termination of treatment is what the incompetent would have chosen, is often unworkable because a patient's character traits, and even her prior statements about medical treatment, seldom rise to the evidentiary level that courts purport to require. Similarly, she argues that the "objective" test, which requires the family to prove that the burdens of the patient's life, measured in terms of pain and suffering, clearly and markedly outweight its benefits, dehumanizes patients by suggesting that only their present, physical sensations count. Professor Rhoden suggests that the subjective and objective tests are not nearly as distinct as courts have made them. She argues that the rigidity of these legal standards reflects courts' acceptance of the medical profession's presumption in favor of continued treatment, a presumption that places a heavy burden on families seeking to terminate treatment. Drawing on the special qualifications of families as decisionmakers in such cases, Professor Rhoden proposes that courts recognize a presumptive right of families to exercise discretion over treatment decisions. Such a standard would recognize that, although doctors and others can readily prove that terminating the treatment of a patient who can still enjoy life is wrong, it is very hard for families to meet the current standards, which essentially require them to prove that termination is right.     

Cherry-Picking Records in Independent Medical Examinations: Strategies for Intervention to Mitigate a Legal and Ethical Imbroglio

Independent medical examinations (IMEs) theoretically construe a means of “independently” assessing a claimant’s physical and psychological status, as well as to determine whether treatment that has been and will potentially be provided is reasonable and necessary. IMEs may be undertaken both for the plaintiff and defense or related adversaries. In the present case, we focus on IMEs that are requested by insurers. One can query the degree to which IMEs are actually “independent.” It has been posited that one of the ways in which claims managers contribute to potential bias against claimants is through a process of selectively providing examiners with medical records, which has been described as “cherry-picking.” Despite the existence of rules and laws that are designed to prevent cherry-picking, the practice still occurs. This analysis discusses the legal as well as ethical implications of cherry-picking and its potential to cause or exacerbate psychological injury that a claimant may experience. The authors propose that psychologists as well as attorneys can advocate for their vulnerable patients/clients in cases of cherry-picking. A recent case study from the clinical practice of the first author in which he so acted is provided. We conclude with a discussion of the ethical implications of the psychologist’s intervention.     

Criminal defense counsels,district attorneys,and the insanity plea: A modest difference of opinion

This research examines differences between samples of 166 city and county prosecutors and 118 defense attorneys from Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky concerning their views toward the insanity plea in felony cases. Currently, tests for insanity used by the states are the M’Naghten rule, the ALI Model Penal Code test, and the Smith “irresistible impulse” test or combinations thereof. Defense counsels greatly favor the prosecution bearing the burden of proving a defendant’s sanity, while a majority of prosecutors believe that this is the defense counsel’s responsibility. Twenty-five percent of the prosecutors surveyed believed that it is the prosecutor’s responsibility to show by clear and convincing evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendants are sane and capable of bearing the responsibility for their crimes alleged. Philosophical and practical arguments about the burden of proof issue are examined. Preferences of defense counsels and prosecutors for different insanity tests are explored, finding that a majority of attorneys favor the more recent ALI test.     

Theoretical and methodological issues in studying children's capacities in legal contexts

Understanding children's capacities in legal contexts is an urgent priority for psychology and the law. The distinction between capacity and performance is discussed in light of two research goals: (a) identifying children's capacities relevant to law; and (b) identifying the circumstances under which their performance varies. This discussion leads to three fundamental research issues that are explored. First, in addition to general capacity, the effect of specific legal contexts on performance requires investigation. Second, capacities research must take a developmental approach using appropriate, ecologically valid target and comparison samples. Third, legal standards and their inherent developmental assumptions about children's capacities must be operationalized and investigated from both legal and psychological perspectives.     

Administrative,legal, and ethical practices in the psychological testing of law enforcement officers

Recently, more law enforcement agencies have chosen to use psychological testing as an important component of their preemployment screening programs. Important legal and ethical issues have been raised by the increased use of psychological testing for this purpose. These issues include the applicant's right to privacy, the validity of the psychological instrument(s) used, the definition of what constitutes an “unsuitable” candidate, and the existence of racial and/or sexual bias. This article presents ten suggestions that address some of these issues and that may aid law enforcement agencies in adopting the spirit of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures and other psychological-testing standards.     

Symptom Validity Testing in Somatoform and Dissociative Disorders: A Critical Review

When patients present with unusual, atypical, and difficult-to-understand complaints known as dissociative and somatoform disorders or medically unexplained symptoms, clinicians may administer symptom validity tests (SVTs) to determine whether or not the patient exhibits negative response bias. Such tests are especially informative in a context where incentives play a substantial role (e.g., the legal arena). If patients fail SVTs and exhibit negative response bias, how should that bias be interpreted? Some authors have argued that psychological problems (e.g., unconscious conflicts and depression) and circumstances (e.g., a cry for help) may explain such bias. In the current article, we critically review this “psychopathology = superordinate” position. We argue that (1) there is no empirical evidence to suggest that psychological problems may foster SVT failure per se and (2) that the “psychopathology = superordinate” position invites circular argumentation: to clarify the nature of the atypical symptoms, SVTs are administered and a negative response bias is found, which is explained away by the atypical symptoms. Negative response bias allows for only one conclusion: the patient’s self-report of symptoms and life history can no longer be taken at face value.     

Models of university technology transfer: analyses and policies

Recent data on European countries show that innovation leaders perform better than economies with low levels of innovation investment and institutions that do not favor knowledge and technology transfer activities. This result confirms that to achieve a high level of performance, countries need a balanced innovation system performing well across all dimensions. More interestingly, the two most important indicators that have been driving increases in performance include new doctoral graduates and international scientific co-publications, that is, two channels of knowledge transfer from universities to firms. This special issue of the Journal of Technology Transfer is dedicated to the discussion of models of university technology transfer, mostly from a European perspective.     

Perverse Effects of Unfulfilled Norms: A Look at the Roots of Favoritism

In four experiments, 120 subjects had to judge and reward the performance of players in a game. When no player fulfilled the norm of the game, subjects gave rewards arbitrarily or favored their friends among the players; when some players fulfilled the norm of the game, subjects made fair judgments, rewarding the players who fulfilled the norm, and they did not favor their friends. These findings suggest that research on in-group favoritism should include a serious discussion of the formal norms that regulate people's decisions when they have to allocate rewards.     

Are Judicial Performance Evaluations Fair to Women and Minorities? A Cautionary Tale from Clark County,Nevada

Because voters rely on judicial performance evaluations when casting their ballots, policymakers should work diligently to compile valid, reliable, and unbiased information about our sitting judges. Although some claim that judicial performance evaluations are fair, the systematic research needed to establish such a proposition has not been done. By the use of attorney judicial performance survey data from Clark County, Nevada, this analysis shows that objective measures of judicial performance cannot explain away differences in scores based on race and sex. Minority judges and female judges score consistently and significantly lower than do their white and male counterparts, all other things being equal. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that judicial performance evaluation surveys may carry with them unexamined and unconscious gender/race biases. Future research must compare judicial performance evaluation structure, content, and execution across states in order to identify those evaluation mechanisms least susceptible to unconscious gender and race bias.