Seventy-five psychiatric inpatients were evaluated with respect to their Miranda-related abilities using Grisso's (1998, Instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press) instruments and Goldstein's (2002, Revised instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights) revision to determine: whether different versions of Miranda warnings translate into differences in understanding; the influence of psychiatric symptoms, diagnostic categories, and IQ upon Miranda comprehension; and the relative performance of persons with psychiatric impairment on Miranda-relevant abilities. Results indicated that although the Miranda language used in Goldstein's revision generally showed lower grade reading levels and higher reading ease scores than Grisso's original instruments, this did not translate into improved understanding.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFClinicians possess significant discretion in competency to stand trial assessment. Therefore, it is paramount to explore the contribution of individual variables to ensure that the decision-making process is devoid of bias and solely relates to the legal criterion. To test for the possibility of bias in clinical decision-making, we examined the predictive efficiency of clinical, criminological, and sociodemographic variables in a sample of 468 criminal defendants referred for competency evaluations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF