Abstract

This special issue addresses a major gap in the literature by providing comprehensive, credible reviews of the psychometric evidence for and legal status of some of the most commonly-used psychological and personality assessment measures used in forensic evaluations. It responds to Neal and colleagues’ (2019) call for research to improve the state of and access to knowledge about psychological assessments in legal contexts, and encourages critical thinking about forensic assessment in the spirit of improvement. These articles offer clarity about the strengths and weaknesses of a number of assessment instruments to inform psychologists’ preparation for expert testimony, lawyers’ preparation for direct and cross-examination, judges’ evidence admissibility determinations, and scholars’ future research. We assembled teams of authors with different perspectives and areas of expertise to review each tool fairly, including several adversarial collaborations. Articles on the Rorschach and R-PAS, MMPI-3, PCL-R, MCMI-IV and MACI-II, PAI and PAI-A, SIRS-2, HCR-20^V3, TSI and TSI-2, and the MacCAT-CA, ECST-R, and CAST*MR are included. To increase visibility, accessibility, and impact, this issue is published as free access, meaning the articles are available to download without charge. We anticipate these articles will be widely read and useful to scholars and practitioners in both psychology and law.

摘要

本期特刊通过对法医评估中使用的一些最常用的心理和人格评估措施的心理测量证据和法律地位提供全面、可信的评论，解决了文献中的一个重大空白。它响应了 Neal 及其同事（2019 年）呼吁进行研究以改善法律背景下心理评估的状态和知识的获取，并鼓励本着改进的精神对法医评估进行批判性思考。这些文章阐明了许多评估工具的优缺点，为心理学家准备专家证词、律师准备直接和交叉询问、法官的证据可采性决定以及学者未来的研究提供信息。我们组建了具有不同观点和专业领域的作者团队，以公平地审查每个工具，包括几个对抗性合作。关于罗夏和 R-PAS、MMPI-3、PCL-R、MCMI-IV 和 MACI-II、PAI 和 PAI-A、SIRS-2、HCR-20 的文章^包括V3、TSI 和 TSI-2，以及 MacCAT-CA、ECST-R 和 CAST*MR。为了提高知名度、可访问性和影响力，本期以免费访问的形式发布，这意味着可以免费下载文章。我们预计这些文章将被广泛阅读并对心理学和法律领域的学者和从业者有用。