2000
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-0798(200001/02)18:1<111::aid-bsl382>3.0.co;2-p
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sexual predator evaluations and phrenology: considering issues of evidentiary reliability

Abstract: This article reviews six assessment procedures used for assessing the recidivism risk of previously convicted sexual offenders. The review of these procedures examines whether they comply with generally accepted ethical and practice standards. With few exceptions, most risk assessment instruments fail to comply with these standards. Currently used instruments for risk assessment continue to rely excessively on clinical judgment; and, as a result, they remain at a preliminary stage of development. Consequently,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Whether partisan allegiance is a matter of mistaken public perception (Mossman, 1999), group socialization processes (Saks, 1990), or purposeful fact‐filtering for monetary gain, the reputation of the psychological discipline is tainted by examples of large discrepancies between experts' diagnoses and interpretation of diagnostic criteria. Psychologists are poised to assist the courts by providing relevant information about legal issues, but expert witnesses should still provide testimony in an unbiased way that allows the judges or jury to make the final decision (Campbell, 2000; Mercado & Ogloff, 2007; Shuman & Greenberg, 2003). Like all professionals in the field, expert witnesses have a professional responsibility to promote the well‐being of their clients; arguably, this is best accomplished by confining testimony to an impartial description of the facts, focusing especially upon an offender's risk factors and needs (Ewing, 1983; Shuman & Greenberg, 2003).…”
Section: Disproportionate Influence Of Partisan Allegiance On Structumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whether partisan allegiance is a matter of mistaken public perception (Mossman, 1999), group socialization processes (Saks, 1990), or purposeful fact‐filtering for monetary gain, the reputation of the psychological discipline is tainted by examples of large discrepancies between experts' diagnoses and interpretation of diagnostic criteria. Psychologists are poised to assist the courts by providing relevant information about legal issues, but expert witnesses should still provide testimony in an unbiased way that allows the judges or jury to make the final decision (Campbell, 2000; Mercado & Ogloff, 2007; Shuman & Greenberg, 2003). Like all professionals in the field, expert witnesses have a professional responsibility to promote the well‐being of their clients; arguably, this is best accomplished by confining testimony to an impartial description of the facts, focusing especially upon an offender's risk factors and needs (Ewing, 1983; Shuman & Greenberg, 2003).…”
Section: Disproportionate Influence Of Partisan Allegiance On Structumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, confidentiality and boundary issues may be challenged when working with victims of violence and abuse, 56,110 consideration of boundary issues is sometimes problematic when working with patients with learning disabilities, 111 and abuse of power happens when therapists form sexual relationships with their patients. 71 …”
Section: Confidentiality and Boundariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These conclusions are not surprising. Reviews of research have described the abysmal performance of violence risk assessments relying on unaided clinical judgment (Bonta, Law, & Hanson, 1998;Campbell, 2000;Grove & Meehl, 1996).…”
Section: Are Clinical Interview Offense Analysis Psychological Testmentioning
confidence: 99%