Recent interview-based measures of competency to stand trial: A critical review augmented with research data

Richard Rogers, B. S. Nicole Grandjean, Chad E. Tillbrook, Michael J Vitacco, Kenneth W. Sewell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Forensic experts are frequently asked to conduct competency-to-stand trial evaluations and address the substantive prongs propounded in Dusky v. United States (1960). In understanding its application to competency evaluations, alternative conceptualizations of Dusky are critically examined. With Dusky providing the conceptual framework, three interview-based competency measures are reviewed: the Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (Mac-CAT-CA), and the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R). This review has a twin focus on reliability of each measure and its correspondence to Dusky prongs. The current review is augmented by new factor analytic data on the MacCAT-CA and ECST-R. The article concludes with specific recommendations for competency evaluations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)503-518
Number of pages16
JournalBehavioral Sciences and the Law
Volume19
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2001

Fingerprint

Interviews
interview
evaluation
Research
competence assessment
Mental Competency
expert

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Law

Cite this

Recent interview-based measures of competency to stand trial : A critical review augmented with research data. / Rogers, Richard; Nicole Grandjean, B. S.; Tillbrook, Chad E.; Vitacco, Michael J; Sewell, Kenneth W.

In: Behavioral Sciences and the Law, Vol. 19, No. 4, 01.01.2001, p. 503-518.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rogers, Richard ; Nicole Grandjean, B. S. ; Tillbrook, Chad E. ; Vitacco, Michael J ; Sewell, Kenneth W. / Recent interview-based measures of competency to stand trial : A critical review augmented with research data. In: Behavioral Sciences and the Law. 2001 ; Vol. 19, No. 4. pp. 503-518.
@article{d1a74d240ee5411099334ceb6bb69c2e,
title = "Recent interview-based measures of competency to stand trial: A critical review augmented with research data",
abstract = "Forensic experts are frequently asked to conduct competency-to-stand trial evaluations and address the substantive prongs propounded in Dusky v. United States (1960). In understanding its application to competency evaluations, alternative conceptualizations of Dusky are critically examined. With Dusky providing the conceptual framework, three interview-based competency measures are reviewed: the Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (Mac-CAT-CA), and the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R). This review has a twin focus on reliability of each measure and its correspondence to Dusky prongs. The current review is augmented by new factor analytic data on the MacCAT-CA and ECST-R. The article concludes with specific recommendations for competency evaluations.",
author = "Richard Rogers and {Nicole Grandjean}, {B. S.} and Tillbrook, {Chad E.} and Vitacco, {Michael J} and Sewell, {Kenneth W.}",
year = "2001",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/bsl.458",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "503--518",
journal = "Behavioral Sciences and the Law",
issn = "0735-3936",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recent interview-based measures of competency to stand trial

T2 - A critical review augmented with research data

AU - Rogers, Richard

AU - Nicole Grandjean, B. S.

AU - Tillbrook, Chad E.

AU - Vitacco, Michael J

AU - Sewell, Kenneth W.

PY - 2001/1/1

Y1 - 2001/1/1

N2 - Forensic experts are frequently asked to conduct competency-to-stand trial evaluations and address the substantive prongs propounded in Dusky v. United States (1960). In understanding its application to competency evaluations, alternative conceptualizations of Dusky are critically examined. With Dusky providing the conceptual framework, three interview-based competency measures are reviewed: the Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (Mac-CAT-CA), and the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R). This review has a twin focus on reliability of each measure and its correspondence to Dusky prongs. The current review is augmented by new factor analytic data on the MacCAT-CA and ECST-R. The article concludes with specific recommendations for competency evaluations.

AB - Forensic experts are frequently asked to conduct competency-to-stand trial evaluations and address the substantive prongs propounded in Dusky v. United States (1960). In understanding its application to competency evaluations, alternative conceptualizations of Dusky are critically examined. With Dusky providing the conceptual framework, three interview-based competency measures are reviewed: the Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (Mac-CAT-CA), and the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R). This review has a twin focus on reliability of each measure and its correspondence to Dusky prongs. The current review is augmented by new factor analytic data on the MacCAT-CA and ECST-R. The article concludes with specific recommendations for competency evaluations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034806412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034806412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/bsl.458

DO - 10.1002/bsl.458

M3 - Article

C2 - 11568958

AN - SCOPUS:0034806412

VL - 19

SP - 503

EP - 518

JO - Behavioral Sciences and the Law

JF - Behavioral Sciences and the Law

SN - 0735-3936

IS - 4

ER -