Show Summary Details
Page of

(p. 169) A Survey of Competency to Stand Trial Examiners 

(p. 169) A Survey of Competency to Stand Trial Examiners
(p. 169) A Survey of Competency to Stand Trial Examiners

Steve Rubenzer

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY ONLINE ( © Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Clinical Psychology Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 14 April 2021

This chapter reports the results from a nationwide survey of experienced CST examiners regarding their practices, preferences for instruments, and use of collateral data. These examiners also provided estimates of different types of invalid responding (feigned cognitive impairment, amnesia, psychopathology, ignorance of court system, physical infirmity, poor effort) seen in CST defendants. Desirable attributes of CST instruments were assessed, as was the standing of major instruments on each of these attributes. Moderators such as ABPP status, inpatient or outpatient setting, and defense versus prosecution orientation were assessed for their effects on other variables such as instrument choice, use of tests or collateral sources, and estimated rates of invalid responding.

Access to the complete content on Oxford Clinical Psychology requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.