References
- Allan, A., & Grisso, T. (2014). Ethical principles and the communication of forensic mental health assessments. Ethics & Behavior, 24(6), 467–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2014.880346
- American Law Institute. (1962). Model penal code.
- American Psychological Association. (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. American Psychologist, 68(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029889
- American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, Amended June 1, 2010 and January 1, 2017). http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx
- Anderten, P., Staulcup, V., & Grisso, T. (1980). On being ethical in legal places. Professional Psychology, 11(5), 764–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.11.5.764
- Archer, R. P., Buffington-Vollum, J. K., Stredny, R. V., & Handel, R. W. (2006). A survey of psychological test use patterns among forensic psychologists. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_07
- Borum, R., & Grisso, T. (1996). Establishing standards for criminal forensic reports: An empirical analysis. The Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 24(3), 297–317. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-02542-002
- Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
- Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
- DeMatteo, D., Edens, J. F., Galloway, M., Cox, J., Smith, S. T., & Formon, D. (2014). The role and reliability of the psychopathy checklist—Revised in U.S. sexually violent predator evaluations: A case law survey. Law & Human Behavior, 38(3), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000059
- Douglas, K. S., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Belfrage, H. (2013). HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence (version 3). Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
- Durham v. U.S., 214 F.2d 862 (1954).
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
- FindLaw. (2019, January 23). The insanity defense among the states. https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/the-insanity-defense-among-the-states.html
- Fingarette, H. (1972). The meaning of criminal responsibility. University of California Press.
- Gardner, B. O., Murrie, D. C., & Torres, A. N. (2018). Insanity findings and evaluation practices: A state-wide review of court-ordered reports. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 36(3), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2344
- Gorman, W. F. (1983). Are there impartial expert psychiatric witnesses? Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry & Law, 11(4), 379–382. https://web.archive.org/web/20170813135931id_/http://jaapl.org/content/jaapl/11/4/379.full.pdf
- Gowensmith, N. W., Murrie, D. C., & Boccaccini, M. T. (2013). How reliable are forensic evaluations of legal sanity? Law and Human Behavior, 37(2), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000001
- Guarnera, L. A., Murrie, D. C., & Boccaccini, M. T. (2017). Why do forensic experts disagree? Sources of unreliability and bias in forensic psychology evaluations. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3(2), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000114
- Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Validity and reliability (credibility and dependability) in qualitative research and data analysis. In G. Guest, K. M. MacQueen, & E. E. Namey (Eds.), Applied thematic analysis (pp. 85–101). Sage Publications.
- Hare, R. D. (2003). Hare psychopathy checklist—Revised, technical manual (2nd ed.). Multi-Health Systems.
- Heilbrun, K., Warren, J., Rosenfeld, B., & Collin, S. (1994). The use of third party information in forensic assessments: A two-state comparison. The Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 22(3), 399–406. https://web.archive.org/web/20200319014924id_/http://jaapl.org/content/jaapl/22/3/399.full.pdf
- Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316665344
- Knoll, J. L., & Resnick, P. J. (2008). Insanity defense evaluations: Toward a model for evidence-based practice. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 8(1), 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1093/brief-treatment/mhm024
- Lally, S. J. (2003). What tests are acceptable for use in forensic evaluations? A survey of experts. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34(5), 491–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.34.5.491
- Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), 1–18 https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-11.3.1428
- M’Naghten case, 8 English Reporter 718 (1843).
- McLaughlin, J. L., & Kan, L. Y. (2014). Test usage in four common types of forensic mental health assessment. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 45(2), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036318
- Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., Slobogin, C., Otto, R. K., Mossman, D., & Condie, L. O. (2018). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
- Murrie, D. C., Boccaccini, M. T., Guarnera, L. A., & Rufino, K. A. (2013). Are forensic experts biased by the side that retained them? Psychological Sciences, 24(10), 1889–1897. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613481812
- Murrie, J. I., & Warren, D. C. (2005). Clinician variation in rates of legal insanity opinions: Implications for self-monitoring. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 36(5), 519–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36.5.519
- Neal, T. M. (2018). Discerning bias in forensic psychological reports in insanity cases. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 36(3), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2346
- Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Sage Publications.
- Packer, I. K. (2009). Best practices in forensic mental health assessment: Evaluation of criminal responsibility. Oxford University Press, Inc.
- Petrella, R. C., & Poythress, N. G. (1983). The quality of forensic evaluations: An interdisciplinary study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(1), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.51.1.76
- Queen v. M’Naghten, 10 Clark & F.200, 2 Eng. Rep. 718 ( H. K. 1843).
- Rogers, R. (1984). Rogers criminal responsibility assessment scales (R-CRAS) and test manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
- Rogers, R., & Shuman, D. W. (2000). Conducting insanity evaluations (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
- Sandelowski, M., Barroso, J., & Voils, C. I. (2007). Using qualitative metasummary to synthesize qualitative and quantitative descriptive findings. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20176
- Schetky, D. H., & Colbach, E. M. (1982). Countertransference on the witness stand: A flight from self? Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 10(2), 115–121. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1983-21024-001
- Stephen, J. F. (2014). A history of the criminal law of England (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
- Warren, J. I., Murrie, D. C., Chauhan, P., Dietz, P. E., & Morris, J. (2004). Opinion formation in evaluating sanity at the time of offense: An examination of 5175 pre-trial evaluations. Behavioral Science & the Law, 22(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.559
- Zapf, P. A., & Dror, I. E. (2017). Understanding and mitigating bias in forensic evaluation: Lessons from forensic science. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 16(3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2017.1317302
- Zilboorg, G. (1943). Mind, medicine, & man. Harcourt, Brace & Co.