An investigation of the ECST-R in male pretrial patients: Evaluating the effects of feigning on competency evaluations

Michael J Vitacco, Richard Rogers, Jason Gabel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Forensic clinicians have the option of employing well-validated structured interviews when conducting competency to stand trial (CST) evaluations to ensure adequate coverage of the three prongs delineated in Dusky v. United States. This study evaluates the effects of feigning on the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R) in a sample of 100 male defendants undergoing CST evaluations. The ECST-R competency scales are reliable, with good alpha coefficients and interrater reliabilities, and differentiate patients found competent from those found not competent. The current study suggests that feigning may bridge both psychopathology and cognitive abilities and that clinicians should consider each when conducting CST evaluations. These results are discussed in the context of conducting comprehensive evaluations integrating response style assessments in CST evaluations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)249-257
Number of pages9
JournalAssessment
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aptitude
Psychopathology
Interviews

Keywords

  • Competency to stand trial
  • ECST-R
  • Malingering

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

An investigation of the ECST-R in male pretrial patients : Evaluating the effects of feigning on competency evaluations. / Vitacco, Michael J; Rogers, Richard; Gabel, Jason.

In: Assessment, Vol. 16, No. 3, 01.09.2009, p. 249-257.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c1666d1267bc47cea9a8fcb15c69328b,
title = "An investigation of the ECST-R in male pretrial patients: Evaluating the effects of feigning on competency evaluations",
abstract = "Forensic clinicians have the option of employing well-validated structured interviews when conducting competency to stand trial (CST) evaluations to ensure adequate coverage of the three prongs delineated in Dusky v. United States. This study evaluates the effects of feigning on the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R) in a sample of 100 male defendants undergoing CST evaluations. The ECST-R competency scales are reliable, with good alpha coefficients and interrater reliabilities, and differentiate patients found competent from those found not competent. The current study suggests that feigning may bridge both psychopathology and cognitive abilities and that clinicians should consider each when conducting CST evaluations. These results are discussed in the context of conducting comprehensive evaluations integrating response style assessments in CST evaluations.",
keywords = "Competency to stand trial, ECST-R, Malingering",
author = "Vitacco, {Michael J} and Richard Rogers and Jason Gabel",
year = "2009",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1073191108325057",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "249--257",
journal = "Assessment",
issn = "1073-1911",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An investigation of the ECST-R in male pretrial patients

T2 - Evaluating the effects of feigning on competency evaluations

AU - Vitacco, Michael J

AU - Rogers, Richard

AU - Gabel, Jason

PY - 2009/9/1

Y1 - 2009/9/1

N2 - Forensic clinicians have the option of employing well-validated structured interviews when conducting competency to stand trial (CST) evaluations to ensure adequate coverage of the three prongs delineated in Dusky v. United States. This study evaluates the effects of feigning on the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R) in a sample of 100 male defendants undergoing CST evaluations. The ECST-R competency scales are reliable, with good alpha coefficients and interrater reliabilities, and differentiate patients found competent from those found not competent. The current study suggests that feigning may bridge both psychopathology and cognitive abilities and that clinicians should consider each when conducting CST evaluations. These results are discussed in the context of conducting comprehensive evaluations integrating response style assessments in CST evaluations.

AB - Forensic clinicians have the option of employing well-validated structured interviews when conducting competency to stand trial (CST) evaluations to ensure adequate coverage of the three prongs delineated in Dusky v. United States. This study evaluates the effects of feigning on the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R) in a sample of 100 male defendants undergoing CST evaluations. The ECST-R competency scales are reliable, with good alpha coefficients and interrater reliabilities, and differentiate patients found competent from those found not competent. The current study suggests that feigning may bridge both psychopathology and cognitive abilities and that clinicians should consider each when conducting CST evaluations. These results are discussed in the context of conducting comprehensive evaluations integrating response style assessments in CST evaluations.

KW - Competency to stand trial

KW - ECST-R

KW - Malingering

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350055173&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350055173&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1073191108325057

DO - 10.1177/1073191108325057

M3 - Article

C2 - 19779096

AN - SCOPUS:70350055173

VL - 16

SP - 249

EP - 257

JO - Assessment

JF - Assessment

SN - 1073-1911

IS - 3

ER -