An accurate assessment of a defendant's intellectual functioning is oftentimes needed to help in the assessment of a variety of psycholegal issues. Psychologists' evaluations and testimony are sometimes based upon misinterpretation of data. A host of factors may not be considered that could influence how the psychologist, and ultimately the court, view a defendant's intellectual capabilities. This article will discuss definitions of intelligence and mental retardation, tests of adaptive functioning, the Flynn and practice effects, abbreviated scales of intelligence, crosscultural issues in intellectual assessment, and malingering of cognitive abilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Text Revision, Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
2.
Atkins v. Virginia, 260 Va. 375, 534 S.E. 2d 312, reversed and remanded (U.S. Supreme Court, No. 00-8452, decided July 21, 2002).
3.
AxelrodB. (2002). Validity of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence and other very short forms estimating intellectual functioning, Assessment, 9, 17–23.
4.
BoringE. (1923). Intelligence as the tests test it, The New Republic, June 6, 1923, 35–37.
5.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993).
6.
FlynnJ. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure, Psychological Bulletin, 101, 171–191.
7.
FrumkinI.B. (2003). Mental retardation and the law: Common misconceptions, Cornerstone, 25, #2, Washington, DC: National Legal Aid and Defender Association.
8.
FrumkinI.B.FriedlandJ. (1995). Forensic evaluations in immigration cases: Evolving issues, Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13, 477–489.
9.
Frye v. United States, 54 App. D.C., 46, 47, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923).
10.
KaufmanA.LichtenbergerE. (1999). Essentials of WAIS-III Assessment. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
11.
LaCalleJ. (1987). Forensic psychological evaluations through an interpreter: Legal and ethical issues, American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 5, 29–43.
12.
LopezS.RomeroA. (1988). Assessing the intellectual functioning of Spanish-speaking adults: Comparison of the EIWA and the WAIS, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 263–270.
13.
MelendezF. (1994). The Spanish version of the WAIS: Some ethical considerations. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 8, 388–393.
14.
Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989).
15.
Psychological Corporation, (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) Manual, San Antonio, TX.
16.
RogersR. (Ed.), (1997). Clinical Assessment of Malingering and Deception, 2d ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
17.
RogersR.BenderS. (2003). Evaluation of malingering and deception, Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 11-Forensic Psychology)GoldsteinA. (ed.), New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
18.
WechslerD. (1944). The Measurement of Adult Intelligence, 3d ed., Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkens.
