The present investigation was designed to systematically examine the insanity defense typology proposed by Brown (2018) using a large sample of cases wherein there was support for the insanity defense. A total of 187 court-ordered cases in which an insanity defense was supported were categorized based on the typology. The sample comprised of mostly single, middle-aged males who had been charged with a felony and diagnosed with a psychotic disorder. About half the sample was ultimately adjudicated not guilty by reason of insanity by the court. About two-thirds of the cases were categorized into one of the seven insanity defense subtypes using a coding scheme developed by the author of the typology. Inter-rater agreement occurred 82% of the time. The most frequent subtype was Paranoid Self-Defense, followed by “But It's Mine” and Paranoid Protection of Others. There were few differences among these subtypes based on demographic, clinical, offense, and outcome variables, except for presence of a primary psychotic disorder and offense type. Implications and ideas for future research are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

精神错乱防御类型学的初步检查：流行率和相关性

本调查旨在系统地检查 Brown (2018) 提出的疯狂辩护类型学，使用大量支持疯狂辩护的案例。共有 187 起支持精神错乱辩护的法院下令案件根据类型进行了分类。样本主要由被指控犯有重罪并被诊断患有精神病的单身中年男性组成。由于精神错乱，大约一半的样本最终被法院裁定无罪。使用类型学作者开发的编码方案，大约三分之二的案例被归类为七种精神错乱防御亚型之一。82% 的时间发生了评估者间的一致性。最常见的亚型是偏执自卫型，其次是“但是它” s 我的”和对他人的偏执保护。除了存在原发性精神障碍和犯罪类型外，这些亚型在人口统计学、临床、犯罪和结果变量方面几乎没有差异。讨论了对未来研究的影响和想法。