Neurobiological evidence and criminal competencies

Neuroimaging and other neurobiological evidences are increasingly introduced in criminal litigation, especially when a neuropsychiatric disorder is suspected. Evaluations of criminal competencies are the most common type of criminal forensic assessment in forensic psychiatry and psychology. Given this, it is critical for forensic evaluators to understand how neuropsychiatric disorders may affect a defendant's criminal competencies and how neurobiological data may be used in competency determinations. This paper reviews the use of neurobiological data, particularly neuroimaging, while considering the limitations and potential misuse of such data in criminal competency evaluations.

Selected Wechsler Memory Scale norms and aging: Implications for assessment

The Wechsler Memory Scale-I was published in 1945, although it had been used clinically since 1940. Since the original publication, there have been three major revisions. The Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised was published in 1987, the Wechsler Memory Scale-III in 1997, and the Wechsler Memory Scale-IV in 2009. It is significant to note that all official versions of the memory scale have remained in clinical and research use well into the second decade of the 20th century. Each version of the scale was designed to assess memory and attention dysfunction in various clinical populations by comparing the discrepancy between intelligence and memory test performance using age-corrected standard scores. It has long been known that intellectual and memory performance declines with age. Most psychologists, however, are likely unaware of the extent of the decline with age or how this decline is manifested in the various versions of the Wechsler Memory Scale. The purpose of this paper is to investigate what selected norms accompanying each official version of the Wechsler Memory Scale reveal about aging and memory performance and discuss the possible clinical implications of such.

Data on Evaluations as a Foundation for States Rethinking Competency to Stand Trial

Competency to stand trial policies and processes vary significantly across jurisdictions, and, increasingly, state policymakers are looking for ways to improve their efficiency, equity, and effectiveness. This commentary describes the importance of certain data, including the number of evaluations ordered, to inform state policymaking, drawing on the strategies highlighted in a recently released guide for policymakers, Just and Well: Rethinking How States Approach Competency to Stand Trial.