Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFogel, Michael H.
dc.contributor.authorSchiffman, Wendy
dc.contributor.authorMumley, Denise L.
dc.contributor.authorTillbrook, Chad E.
dc.contributor.authorGrisso, Thomas
dc.date2022-08-11T08:08:29.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T15:56:45Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T15:56:45Z
dc.date.issued2013-03-01
dc.date.submitted2013-10-24
dc.identifier.citationFogel, M. H., Schiffman, W., Mumley, D., Tillbrook, C. and Grisso, T. (2013), Ten Year Research Update (2001–2010): Evaluations for Competence to Stand Trial (Adjudicative Competence). Behav. Sci. Law, 31: 165–191. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2051. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2051" target="_blank">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn0735-3936 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/bsl.2051
dc.identifier.pmid23348511
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/30039
dc.description.abstractThis article reviews and evaluates publications during 2001-2010 with relevance for assessments of competence to stand trial, referred to in this article as adjudicative competence. The review focuses specifically on articles that provide new concepts or data supported by research or case analyses. The studies are reviewed under the following headings: (i) systemic issues, (ii) conceptual guidelines for AC evaluations, (iii) AC assessment methods, (iv) empirical correlates of AC judgments and psycholegal abilities, (v) quality of AC evaluations and reports, (vi) interpretive issues, (vii) special populations (defendants who are elderly, defendants with intellectual disabilities), (viii) AC evaluations of juveniles, and (ix) treatment of incompetent defendants. Suggestions are offered for further research to advance the quality of clinical evaluations of adjudicative competence.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=23348511&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2051
dc.subjectLaw and Psychology
dc.subjectMedical Jurisprudence
dc.subjectPsychiatry
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.titleTen year research update (2001-2010): evaluations for competence to stand trial (adjudicative competence)
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleBehavioral sciences and the law
dc.source.volume31
dc.source.issue2
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/faculty_pubs/272
dc.identifier.contextkey4762030
html.description.abstract<p>This article reviews and evaluates publications during 2001-2010 with relevance for assessments of competence to stand trial, referred to in this article as adjudicative competence. The review focuses specifically on articles that provide new concepts or data supported by research or case analyses. The studies are reviewed under the following headings: (i) systemic issues, (ii) conceptual guidelines for AC evaluations, (iii) AC assessment methods, (iv) empirical correlates of AC judgments and psycholegal abilities, (v) quality of AC evaluations and reports, (vi) interpretive issues, (vii) special populations (defendants who are elderly, defendants with intellectual disabilities), (viii) AC evaluations of juveniles, and (ix) treatment of incompetent defendants. Suggestions are offered for further research to advance the quality of clinical evaluations of adjudicative competence.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathfaculty_pubs/272
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Psychiatry
dc.source.pages165-91


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record