Monthly Archives: April 2012

Disclosure, denial, delay, recantation, and confirmation in CSA

Despite sev­eral years of high qual­ity research in CSA, courts con­tinue to hear that pat­terns of dis­clo­sure, denial, delay, and recan­ta­tion are (or are not) dis­pos­i­tive of CSA. In their review of these issues in a recent spe­cial issue of Memory, London, Ceci, Wright, and Ceci (2008) draw the fol­low­ing con­clu­sions: “We have argued that, in

Psychological Experts in CSA Trials

Back in September 2011, I mused about how help­ful psy­cho­log­i­cal experts are in CSA tri­als. Testimony will inevitably have to address devel­op­ments in sev­eral areas, includ­ing pat­terns of dis­clo­sure, mem­ory, sug­gestibil­ity, qual­ity of foren­sic inter­views, and error rates of CSA decision-making, highly tech­ni­cal stuff. The work of Bruck and Ceci has remained author­i­ta­tive for almost

The new Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (APA, 2011)

The new SGFP have been final­ized by APLS (Div. 41 of APA). The Guidelines are avail­able at the fol­low­ing link http://goo.gl/usU0 The SGFP pro­vide guid­ance and stan­dards of prac­tice for foren­sic psy­chol­o­gists. They are worth care­ful study for the prac­ti­tioner wish­ing to do sound and eth­i­cal, i.e., high qual­ity, foren­sic work. The SGFP define the scope of

Forensic Clinician’s Toolbox I — CST Instruments published in Journal of Personality Assessment

My recent review in JPA got a nice boost from Ken Pope and Karen Franklin. Many thanks. A PDF copy of the arti­cle is avail­able online.