Forensic Evaluations Said to Need Better Science, Less Bias
Publication: Psychiatric News
Forensic psychiatry must keep expanding and deepening its evidence base, and its practitioners must recognize and reduce bias in their work, said Charles Scott, M.D., the outgoing president of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, in an address at the organization’s annual meeting in Montreal in October.
“We need science to go along with clinical judgment,” says Charles Scott, M.D., outgoing president of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.
Aaron Levin
In 2005, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued a report criticizing the status of forensic science in the United States. The report called for improved reliability, enforceable standards, and use of best practices. The NAS’s overall conclusion: “Research is desperately needed.”
However, the report barely mentioned forensic psychiatry, said Scott, a professor of clinical psychiatry and director of the forensic psychiatry residency program in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the University of California, Davis.
“We were in the book, but we were not well defined,” he said. To better define itself as a science, therefore, forensic psychiatry must continue its balance of clinical and actuarial methods of evaluating patients.
The two guiding principles of forensic psychiatry should be a commitment to subjective and objective truth telling, with the latter consistent with the standards of science, he said. That commitment must also be balanced with a regard for the rights and dignity of the person being evaluated.
“We want and need our voices to be heard, so we need science to go along with clinical judgment,” said Scott. “Reliable scientific methodology allows accurate analysis of evidence.”
Risk-assessment instruments are an important component of research because they provide a structured way to gather and evaluate information, he noted. However, more research on the instruments used to assess risk is essential, especially now that statutes and regulations are beginning to require structured evaluations of psychopathology in assessing criminal defendants.
Many tests were devised as research tools and work well with populations, but are less predictive when used with individuals, said Scott. Further research could sift out and define a more limited number of instruments that are appropriate, practical, and meet ethical standards.
Understanding these tools and their interpretation would also improve the forensic psychiatrist’s ability to review evidence and evaluate other experts’ analyses.
As questions about the validity and utility of these tools are refined, psychiatrists will need more training to keep up their skills. If they have not already done so, forensic psychiatrists should take on the task of learning how to administer and evaluate these tools, to determine both initial risk assessment and readiness for release after treatment, he said.
But improved methodology alone is not enough, Scott stated. “We also have to train forensic psychiatrists to check their own biases.”
He cited four ways in which an evaluator’s judgment could be unconsciously influenced.
Anchoring bias can add extra weight to the earliest evidence gathered in a forensic examination, he said. Confirmation bias can let an a priori conclusion about the subject cloud the evidence-gathering process. Attribution bias can be any factor irrelevant to the examination (such as race or physical attractiveness) that can influence the evaluator’s judgment. Finally, observer bias is a condition, like fatigue or the time of day, that affects decisions.
“However, just being aware of biases doesn’t prevent bias,” Scott emphasized. Additional training in recognizing and dealing with bias is essential for both fellows and experienced practitioners. 
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Published online: 7 December 2012
Published in print: November 17, 2012 – December 7, 2012
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
There are no citations for this item
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login options
Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.
Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens loginNot a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).