Assessing Negative Response Bias in Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations

Evaluations of a defendant's competence to stand trial (CST) are probably the most frequently performed forensic evaluations, with estimates in the United States ranging from 60,000 to 70,000 annually. In order for CST evaluations to be considered thorough and accurate, examiners must assess
for possible lack of cooperation, feigning, or malingering - the intentional production or gross exaggeration of false or grossly exaggerated physical or psychiatric symptoms, motivated by external incentives. Yet, there are accounts that CST examiners often do not assess for negative response bias,
and even if they do nevertheless fail to identify a considerable number of examinees that do feign.

Assessing Negative Response Bias in Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations provides readers with a comprehensive guide to assessing whether a defendant has feigned mental impairment during a competency to stand trial evaluation, or simply did not put forth his/her best effort. This book reviews the
literature on assessing feigning and negative response bias, with particular focus on issues, tests, and data relevant to CST evaluations, and examines proposed criteria and statistical methods of determining and classifying assessment results. It introduces readers to aspects of the vibrant
neuropsychological response style literature, an area many forensic psychologists appear to have overlooked. Additionally, it offers recommendations for research and policy regarding the parameters of CST assessment.


Author: Steven J. Rubenzer
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
Published: 04/19/2018
Pages: 288
Binding Type: Paperback
Weight: 0.90lbs
Size: 9.10h x 6.10w x 0.70d
ISBN: 9780190653163

About the Author

Steve Rubenzer, PhD, ABPP, received his doctorate in Clinical Psychology at the University of Houston. He has worked in the field of forensic psychology since 1995, earned his board certification in forensic psychology in 2004 after completing work samples in competency and sanity assessment, and
has authored multiple peer-reviewed papers on response style assessment in competency to stand trial and disability evaluations. He has performed approximately four thousand competency exams in Texas, New Hampshire, and Alabama, on cases ranging from trespassing to the highest profile capital
murder.

This title is not returnable