Abstract
This research is based on further analysis of questionnaire data obtained from a randomly selected national sample of 262 psychiatrists and clinical psychologists. Subjects read a synopsis of a hypothetical case and then responded to an attitude scale concerning the appropriateness of the insanity defense for that case, as well to a question about their support for the existence of the insanity defense itself. It was found that the more expert witness experiences that respondents had, for either the prosecution or the defense, the more likely they were to be in favor of the insanity defense in general. With respect to the particular case, however, the more extensive a subject's defense experience relative to prosecution experience, the more likely the respondent was to support the insanity defense for the particular case. It was concluded that a large part of the variance in expert witnesses' opinions could be explained by factors having to do with the experts themselves.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.