Using technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations

Michael J Vitacco, Emily D. Gottfried, Ashley B. Batastini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Criminal responsibility (or insanity) evaluations require forensic clinicians to reconstruct a defendant’s decision-making abilities, behavioral control, and emotional state at the time of the criminal act. Forensic evaluators are ultimately tasked to evaluate whether an individual had the capacity to understand right from wrong, and in some jurisdictions, determine whether the defendant lacked substantial capacity to conform his behavior to the requirements of the law as a result of a threshold condition (e.g., mental illness). Insanity evaluations are inherently complex, because they require the clinician to determine someone’s mental state at some point in the past (weeks, months, or even years). Recent research on insanity evaluations underscores significant problems with the reliability and validity of these evaluations. However, technological advances including social media (e.g., Facebook and Twitter), mandating that law enforcement videotape interrogations, and the use of body and dashboard cameras can aid clinicians in improving the precision and quality of insanity evaluations. This article discusses practical guidelines and ethics-related concerns regarding the use of technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)71-77
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
Volume46
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 1 2018

Fingerprint

Technology
Social Media
Law Enforcement
Videotape Recording
Aptitude
Reproducibility of Results
Ethics
Decision Making
Guidelines
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Using technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations. / Vitacco, Michael J; Gottfried, Emily D.; Batastini, Ashley B.

In: Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Vol. 46, No. 1, 01.03.2018, p. 71-77.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9bce4d6a8af64723b2a2b1b51653b1cb,
title = "Using technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations",
abstract = "Criminal responsibility (or insanity) evaluations require forensic clinicians to reconstruct a defendant’s decision-making abilities, behavioral control, and emotional state at the time of the criminal act. Forensic evaluators are ultimately tasked to evaluate whether an individual had the capacity to understand right from wrong, and in some jurisdictions, determine whether the defendant lacked substantial capacity to conform his behavior to the requirements of the law as a result of a threshold condition (e.g., mental illness). Insanity evaluations are inherently complex, because they require the clinician to determine someone’s mental state at some point in the past (weeks, months, or even years). Recent research on insanity evaluations underscores significant problems with the reliability and validity of these evaluations. However, technological advances including social media (e.g., Facebook and Twitter), mandating that law enforcement videotape interrogations, and the use of body and dashboard cameras can aid clinicians in improving the precision and quality of insanity evaluations. This article discusses practical guidelines and ethics-related concerns regarding the use of technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations.",
author = "Vitacco, {Michael J} and Gottfried, {Emily D.} and Batastini, {Ashley B.}",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "71--77",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law",
issn = "1093-6793",
publisher = "American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Using technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations

AU - Vitacco, Michael J

AU - Gottfried, Emily D.

AU - Batastini, Ashley B.

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - Criminal responsibility (or insanity) evaluations require forensic clinicians to reconstruct a defendant’s decision-making abilities, behavioral control, and emotional state at the time of the criminal act. Forensic evaluators are ultimately tasked to evaluate whether an individual had the capacity to understand right from wrong, and in some jurisdictions, determine whether the defendant lacked substantial capacity to conform his behavior to the requirements of the law as a result of a threshold condition (e.g., mental illness). Insanity evaluations are inherently complex, because they require the clinician to determine someone’s mental state at some point in the past (weeks, months, or even years). Recent research on insanity evaluations underscores significant problems with the reliability and validity of these evaluations. However, technological advances including social media (e.g., Facebook and Twitter), mandating that law enforcement videotape interrogations, and the use of body and dashboard cameras can aid clinicians in improving the precision and quality of insanity evaluations. This article discusses practical guidelines and ethics-related concerns regarding the use of technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations.

AB - Criminal responsibility (or insanity) evaluations require forensic clinicians to reconstruct a defendant’s decision-making abilities, behavioral control, and emotional state at the time of the criminal act. Forensic evaluators are ultimately tasked to evaluate whether an individual had the capacity to understand right from wrong, and in some jurisdictions, determine whether the defendant lacked substantial capacity to conform his behavior to the requirements of the law as a result of a threshold condition (e.g., mental illness). Insanity evaluations are inherently complex, because they require the clinician to determine someone’s mental state at some point in the past (weeks, months, or even years). Recent research on insanity evaluations underscores significant problems with the reliability and validity of these evaluations. However, technological advances including social media (e.g., Facebook and Twitter), mandating that law enforcement videotape interrogations, and the use of body and dashboard cameras can aid clinicians in improving the precision and quality of insanity evaluations. This article discusses practical guidelines and ethics-related concerns regarding the use of technology to improve the objectivity of criminal responsibility evaluations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045054226&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045054226&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 71

EP - 77

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

SN - 1093-6793

IS - 1

ER -