MA Psych Juris key terms

A judicial test for admitting expert testimony that asks whether the method is testable, has been peer reviewed, has a known error rate, is generally accepted, and was applied reliably to the facts.

An older admissibility rule holding that expert scientific evidence is admissible only if the technique is generally accepted within its relevant scientific community, without weighing validity directly.

The stance of a psychologist who serves the court rather than either party, gathering data to answer a legally defined question and disclosing limits, rather than advocating for a preferred outcome.

An ethical problem arising when one psychologist acts as both treating clinician and forensic evaluator for the same person, because therapeutic rapport and objectivity obligations pull in opposite directions.

Disclosure given before a forensic examination explaining its purpose, who will receive the report, that it is not confidential therapy, and that the examinee may decline or consult counsel.

The proportion of people in a given population who actually have the condition or outcome of interest, which strongly affects how many positive test results are true positives.

The share of individuals who test positive who truly have the condition; it rises with higher prevalence and falls when the condition is rare, regardless of test accuracy.

Sensitivity is the proportion of truly affected people a test correctly flags; specificity is the proportion of unaffected people it correctly clears. Both are properties of the test, not of prevalence.

A statistic correcting observed agreement between two raters for agreement expected by chance, commonly used to quantify reliability of diagnostic or coding judgments in forensic research.

The degree to which different examiners assign the same scores or classifications to the same case, an essential property when forensic opinions influence liberty or parental rights.

A structured tool designed or validated for legal questions, such as competence or risk, whose norms and error rates must be checked against the population being evaluated.

An actuarial tool scoring fixed historical factors, such as prior offenses and age at first offense, to estimate the probability of a defined outcome over a stated period.

A risk assessment approach in which the evaluator rates a defined set of empirically supported risk factors and then forms a reasoned, transparent overall judgment rather than a purely mechanical score.

Conditions such as stable employment, social support, or treatment engagement that reduce the likelihood of a negative outcome and belong in a balanced risk formulation.

The intentional production or exaggeration of symptoms for an identifiable external gain, such as avoiding prosecution or obtaining compensation, distinguished from factitious disorder and genuine illness.

A test with embedded validity scales or forced-choice formats that estimates whether an examinee is exaggerating or underreporting symptoms, interpreted alongside collateral data rather than alone.

A systematic tendency in answering that distorts scores, such as overreporting distress, minimizing problems, or agreeing with statements regardless of content.

A defendant's present ability to understand the proceedings and to assist counsel in a defense, a functional legal standard distinct from diagnosis and from criminal responsibility at the time of the offense.

The constitutional minimum for trial competence: whether the defendant has sufficient present ability to consult with a lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and a factual and rational understanding of the proceedings.

Treatment, usually including medication and education about the legal process, intended to bring an incompetent defendant to trial competence, with periodic review and limits on prolonged detention.

The legal test allowing involuntary antipsychotic treatment of a defendant solely to restore trial competence when important governmental interests are at stake and treatment is medically appropriate and unlikely to have side effects undermining a fair trial.

A criminal responsibility test excusing a defendant who, because of a mental disease, did not know the nature and quality of the act or did not know it was wrong.

The part of some insanity tests excusing a defendant who could appreciate wrongfulness but lacked the capacity to conform conduct to the law, dropped by federal law after a notorious acquittal.

A suspect's ability to understand the rights warning and the consequences of giving it up, assessed with attention to age, intellectual functioning, and the conditions of interrogation.

An admission to a crime the person did not commit, arising from compliance under pressure, internalized belief in guilt, or a mix of both, often in vulnerable or fatigued suspects.

A widely taught interrogation method using behavioral analysis and a confrontational, minimization-based approach, criticized for its weak link between cues and deception and its contribution to false admissions.

A witness's selection of a suspect from a lineup or photo array, highly persuasive at trial yet vulnerable to cross-race effects, weapon focus, and suggestive procedures.

An identification procedure in which the administrator does not know which lineup member is the suspect, preventing inadvertent cues that steer witnesses toward a chosen person.

A correctional framework matching supervision intensity to risk level, targeting criminogenic needs, and delivering services in ways that fit the person's learning style and motivation.

Changeable offender characteristics, such as antisocial attitudes or substance misuse, that predict reoffending and are therefore appropriate targets for correctional treatment.

A perspective examining how legal rules and procedures affect participants' psychological well-being, used to design problem-solving courts that support treatment rather than punish relapse.

Involuntary psychiatric detention authorized by a court on grounds such as mental disorder plus danger to self or others or grave disability, requiring periodic review and a right to counsel.

The best-interests-of-the-child analysis courts use in custody disputes, weighing each parent's caregiving capacity, the child's needs, stability, and the child's own wishes where appropriate.

A claim that one parent has turned a child against the other, which evaluators must assess cautiously because the construct lacks agreed definition and can mask genuine abuse or estrangement.

A structured, developmentally sensitive conversation with a child about alleged maltreatment, using open prompts and non-suggestive techniques to obtain accurate accounts while minimizing trauma.

Transfer of a minor's case to criminal court based on criteria such as age, offense severity, and prior record, raising developmental concerns about culpability and capacity to participate.

Age-related limits in judgment, impulse control, and resistance to peer influence that can reduce culpability and affect a youth's ability to navigate legal proceedings.

The collaborative bond and agreement on goals and tasks between clinician and client, a consistent predictor of treatment outcome and of engagement in mandated forensic treatment.