Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better: Bias Awareness in Forensic Evaluators

Zappala, Marissa; Reed, Amanda L.; Beltrani, Amanda; Zapf, Patricia A.; Otto, Randy K.

doi:10.1080/24732850.2017.1413532

Cited by 25 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result of the reliance in court on psychological evidence, the findings of FPAs can influence the outcome of the case, the individual involved, and the society at large (Zappala et al, 2018). Accurately assessing the risk of reoffending in men who have sexually offended is central to their effective management (Westwood et al, 2011).…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By outlining the personal and environmental factors of importance to concentrate on in supervision and rehabilitation (Harris & Hanson, 2010), these assessments are integral to effective treatment, reducing recidivism, and the protection of the community (Craig & Beech, 2010). Where assessments are carried out in the preliminary period to the individual's appearance in court, the outcome of the assessment is employed as a consideration in sentencing (Zappala et al, 2018). Empirically validated structured risk assessment tools are available for clinicians to employ in assessments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“You Have to Separate the Sinner From the Sin”: Clinician’s Approaches to Psychological Assessments With Men who Have Sexually Offended

Chawke

Randall²,

Duff

2020

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Men who have sexually offended are often referred for presentence psychological assessments to determine factors which contributed to offending, identify risk of recidivism, and develop treatment recommendations. The accuracy of assessments is largely reliant on the cooperation of the assessee. Despite the significant legal and emotional consequences, how clinicians approach these assessments, attempt to engage assessees, and overcome resistance have not been investigated. This research sought to develop an understanding of the clinicians’ experience of conducting the assessment. How clinicians approach interviews with men who have sexually offended and the techniques they use were explored. Six interviews were conducted with qualified psychologists, at a private practice, whose role included conducting psychological assessments across a range of forensic matters. The findings, reached using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, highlighted the relational/social nature of the interaction and the clinicians’ experience of a somewhat blurred line in practice between forensic assessments and therapeutic endeavours.

show abstract

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“You Have to Separate the Sinner From the Sin”: Clinician’s Approaches to Psychological Assessments With Men who Have Sexually Offended

Chawke

Randall²,

Duff

2020

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Though frequently stated, given the potential impact and risks associated with recommendations and decisions family justice professionals may make, the need to be mindful of unavoidable and ubiquitous cognitive biases and tendencies to use heuristics‐ mental short cuts or rules of thumb‐ cannot be overstated (Kahneman, ). Custody evaluators, mental health professionals conducting clinical assessments, and judges may succumb to, for example, cherry picking, personal biases, implicit bias, confirmatory inclinations and scholar‐advocacy bias (Croskerry, Singhal, & Mamede, ; Emery et al, ; Sandler et al, ; Zappala, Reed, Beltrani, Zapf, & Otto, ). Lawyers and therapists retained by one parent are also likely subject to retention bias.…”

Section: Cognitive Bias In Parenting Plan Evaluations Clinical Assesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Fidler¹,

Bala²

2020

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related parent-child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others. It is widely acknowledged that PCCP cases are most fruitfully understood from a multi-factorial perspective. While some cases may be totally the "fault" of one parent (a parent perpetrating violence or abuse, or a parent exhibiting alienating behavior), in many situations both parents bear some responsibility: focusing on a single cause is rarely helpful. Most professionals and researchers agree that the challenge in practice is to distinguish between false positives and false negatives for both alienation (or unjustified rejection) and realistic estrangement (justified rejection). There is continuing controversy over whether the concept of "alienation" should be used, especially in court proceedings, and a related disagreement about the extent to which family courts are now failing to respond adequately to cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) or child abuse when alienation is also raised. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active perspective-taking will contribute to effective professional involvement. Increased parent education and prevention can play an important role, although for the more severe PCCP cases the family courts system will continue to play a critical role. While more research must be done, given the complexity of issues, conclusive findings are unlikely in the near future. Legislators and family justice professionals must make decisions based on a thorough analysis of each family's circumstances in the context of our present knowledge, taking account of the limits of the law. They will often face the conundrum of making decisions in the face of uncertainty. Key Points For The Family Court Community:There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related to parent-child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others.It is widely acknowledged that PCCPs cases are best understood and addressed by relying on a multi-factorial perspective, a family-systems approach and coordinated professional services.Attention to false positives and false negatives for both alienation (unjustified rejection) and for realistic estrangement (justified rejection) is necessary. For either of these types of contact problems and for cases involving elements of both, it may be in the child's best interest to remedy the strained parent-child relationship and for the child to maintain contact with both parents.Legal and mental health professionals involved in decision making, forensic and clinical assessments, and psychoeducational and clinical interventions face challenges in fact finding and correcting for ubiquitous cognitive biases. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active dialogue with openness to different perspectives will contribute to effective profess...

show abstract

“…Effectively all humans can experience a bias “blind spot” (Ehrlinger, Gilovich, & Ross, ; Pronin, Lin, & Ross, ). Introspection often does not help in addressing this blind spot, despite the persistence of that approach in the field, and it may exacerbate bias by creating false confidence (Neal & Brodsky, ; Zappala, Reed, Beltrani, Zapf, & Otto, ). Scientific methods are systemic safeguards against our tendency to cognitive errors (Kahneman et al, ), making rigor more important than ever, even if family justice professionals also know how unlikely people are to spot their own cognitive bias.…”

Section: Cognitive Bias and Human Belief Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological Challenges in Social Science: Making Sense of Polarized and Competing Research Claims

Robb¹

2020

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legal and mental health professionals face significant challenges when addressing situations in which children resist contact with a parent. There remains only limited empirical research on the differentiation of types and severity of contact problems, the resulting impacts on children and adolescents, and the outcomes of interventions. Often, family justice professionals encounter conflicting information that presents wildly diverging views on the scientific knowledge base used to guide understandings of human interaction. In cases involving resist-refuse dynamics ("RRD"), the polarized claims, characterized by dichotomous thinking, often assert abuse by the rejected parent, on the one hand, or alienating behavior by the favored parent, on the other hand. When presented with conflicting social science research, understanding basic experimental design methodology is critical to resolving questions of the reliability and utility of the information presented. Equally important, is an understanding of cognitive bias and the human tendency to experience difficulty in modifying belief systems when presented with updated information; this understanding includes changing conceptual frameworks for decision making in family law cases. While polarized and often acrimonious debate in the field may be reflective of larger societal strife, recognizing strengths and weaknesses in the ideas presented in research literature allows for an integrative approach to bring more light, and less heat, to the larger conceptualization of human interactions we have to address in the family court setting. Key Points for the Family Court Community:Human beings have a tendency toward too easily accepting findings that fit into their established thinking, and toward dismissing information which does not.Academic debate exists within a larger societal framework and is not exempt from the influences of socio-political strife.Inquiry errors, misunderstanding of statistics, overreliance on flawed secondary analysis, and other methodological challenges present barriers to the unwary in using social science research.

show abstract

Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better: Bias Awareness in Forensic Evaluators

Cited by 25 publications

References 23 publications

“You Have to Separate the Sinner From the Sin”: Clinician’s Approaches to Psychological Assessments With Men who Have Sexually Offended

“You Have to Separate the Sinner From the Sin”: Clinician’s Approaches to Psychological Assessments With Men who Have Sexually Offended

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Methodological Challenges in Social Science: Making Sense of Polarized and Competing Research Claims

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About