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 journalArticlepeer-review

34 Scopus citations

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
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Law

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Recent interview-based measures of competency to stand trial: A critical review augmented with research data'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this