Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGrisso, Thomas
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:27.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:09:11Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:09:11Z
dc.date.issued2010-01-01
dc.date.submitted2010-09-21
dc.identifier.citation<p>Grisso, T. (2010). Guidance for improving forensic reports: A review of common errors. Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 2, 102-115. <a href="https://www.oajfp.com/" target="_blank" title="https://www.oajfp.com/">Link to publisher's website</a></p>
dc.identifier.issn1948-5115
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/45754
dc.description.abstractThis study employed a national sample of forensic reports that had been critiqued by a panel of advanced forensic mental-health practitioners serving as reviewers for the American Board of Forensic Psychology. The study describes all of the discrete types of faults that reviewers encountered in the reports, and then converts them to prescriptive statements to guide forensic report writing. The study also identifies the most frequent report-writing problems in this sample. The results were not intended to describe the quality of forensic reports in the U.S., but rather to offer guidance for improving the quality of forensic reports.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.rightsCopyright 2010 Grisso. As an open access outlet, authors retain and own copyright and publishing rights to their work, without restriction.
dc.subjectForensic Psychiatry
dc.subjectforensic psychology
dc.subjectforensic reports
dc.subjectreport writing
dc.subjectLaw and Psychology
dc.subjectPsychiatry
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.subjectPsychology
dc.titleGuidance for Improving Forensic Reports: A Review of Common Errors
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleOpen Access Journal of Forensic Psychology
dc.source.volume2
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1281&amp;context=psych_pp&amp;unstamped=1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/psych_pp/282
dc.identifier.contextkey1569407
refterms.dateFOA2022-08-23T17:09:11Z
html.description.abstract<p>This study employed a national sample of forensic reports that had been critiqued by a panel of advanced forensic mental-health practitioners serving as reviewers for the American Board of Forensic Psychology. The study describes all of the discrete types of faults that reviewers encountered in the reports, and then converts them to prescriptive statements to guide forensic report writing. The study also identifies the most frequent report-writing problems in this sample. The results were not intended to describe the quality of forensic reports in the U.S., but rather to offer guidance for improving the quality of forensic reports.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathpsych_pp/282
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Psychiatry
dc.source.pages102-115


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Open_Access_Journal_of_Forensi ...
Size:
168.3Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record