Factors related to bias in forensic psychiatric assessments in criminal matters: A systematic review

Child and adolescent forensic evaluations: Challenges amid scientific and technological advancements.

“…There is abundant evidence of this type of bias in forensic reports, including the poor rate of agreement specific to cases of criminal insanity, with one study finding agreement of criminal responsibility only 53% of the time (Kacperska et al, 2016). More broadly, a recent systematic review identified multiple types of bias and lack of reliability in child and adult forensic psychiatric assessments (Meyer & Valença, 2021).…”

Structured instruments for insanity defense evaluations: Opportunities and limitations

“…Legal insanity is a legal matter, and therefore, in some jurisdictions, experts are not allowed to make explicit statements about the defendant's sanity; they should restrict themselves to describing the presence, nature and (behavioral) impact of a mental condition. However, in others, such as The Netherlands and Italy, psychiatrists and psychologists are allowed—and even asked—to make statements about the defendant's sanity. Research shows that forensic experts often disagree about the final judgement on criminal responsibility regarding the same case (Gowensmith et al., 2013; Guarnera & Murrie, 2017); Standardized procedures on how to perform an insanity defense evaluation, as well as biological markers, are lacking (Beckham et al., 1989; Meyer & Valença, 2021). The forensic evaluators' decisional processes may be influenced by the presence of unintentional or cognitive biases, money, prestige, and the amount of public attention attracted by the case (Beckham et al., 1989; Commons et al., 2004; Dattilio et al., 2006; Homant & Kennedy, 1986; Murrie et al., 2013).…”

“…• Standardized procedures on how to perform an insanity defense evaluation, as well as biological markers, are lacking (Beckham et al, 1989;Meyer & Valença, 2021).…”