Because some defendants undergoing evaluation of their competence to stand trial may feign limitations in their ability to understand and participate in the legal process, assessment of their response style is critical. Preliminary research indicates that the Inventory of Legal Knowledge (ILK) has some potential to identify persons feigning competence related impairments. This study examined the convergent validity of the ILK using a sample of criminal defendants who, while undergoing competency evaluations, were administered the ILK and other response style measures. Moderate correlations between the ILK and these other tools provided some support for the ILK as a measure of response style.
Frederick, R.I., & Speed, F.M. ( 2007). On the interpretation of below-chance responding in forced-choice tests. Assessment, 14, 3-11.
2.
Greiffenstein, M.F., Baker, W.J., & Gola, T. ( 1994). Validation of malingered amnesia measures with a large clinical sample. Psychological Assessment, 6, 218-224.
3.
Grisso, T. ( 1988). Competency to stand trial evaluations. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
4.
Grisso, T. ( 2005). Evaluating juveniles’ adjudicative competence: A guide for clinical practice. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
5.
Grosz, H., & Zimmerman, J. ( 1965). Experimental analysis of hysterical blindness. Archives of General Psychiatry, 13, 225-260.
6.
Guenther, C., & Otto, R.K. (in press). Identifying persons feigning limitations in their competence to proceed in the legal process. Behavioral Sciences and the Law.
7.
Laboratory of Community Psychiatry. (1974). Competency to stand trial and mental illness. New York, NY: Jason Aronson.
Otto, R.K. ( 2008). Challenges and advancements in the assessment of response styles in forensic examination contexts. In R. Rogers (ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed. pp. 365-375). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
10.
Pankratz, L., Fausti, S.A., & Peed, S. ( 1975). A forced-choice technique to evaluated deafness in the hysterical or malingered patient. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 421-422.
11.
Poythress, N., Nicholson, R., Otto, R.K., Edens, J.F., Monahan, J., Bonnie, R., & Hoge, K. ( 1999). Manual for the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal adjudication. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
12.
Rey, A. ( 1964). L’examen clinique en psychologie [Clinical psychological testing]. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
13.
Roesch, R., Zapf, P., & Eaves, D. ( 2006). Fitness Interview Test- Revised: A structured interview for assessing competency to stand trial. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
14.
Rogers, R. ( 2008). Detection strategies for malingering and defensiveness . In R. Rogers (ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 14-35). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
15.
Rogers, R., & Bender, S.D. ( 2003). Evaluation of malingering and deception. In A. Goldstein (Ed.), Forensic psychology (pp. 109-129). New York, NY: Wiley.
16.
Rogers, R., Sewell, K., & Gillard, N. ( 2010). Professional manual for the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms, 2nd edition. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
17.
Rogers, R., Tillbrook, C., E., & Sewell, K.W. (2004). Professional manual for the Evaluation of Competency to Strand Trial-Revised. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
18.
Slick, D., Hopp, G., Strauss, E., & Thompson, G.B. (1997). Professional manual for the Victoria Symptom Validity Test. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
19.
Tombaugh, T. ( 1996). Professional manual for the Test of Memory Malingering. Tonowanda, NYMulti-Health Systems.
