Forensic Briefs

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Elizabeth Jeglic, a leading expert on sexual violence prevention, breaks down the complex process of sexual grooming. She discusses her research on identifying red flags, the five stages of grooming, and how we can take proactive steps to prevent child sexual abuse. 

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Dan Murrie discusses the growing competency crisis in the U.S. legal system. He explores the rising number of competency evaluations, delays in restoration services, and the systemic factors driving this issue, including mental health care gaps, homelessness, and evolving legal practices. 

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Gerald Young and Luciano Giromini discuss the complexities of assessing malingering and symptom validity in forensic settings. They examine current research on testing methods, challenges in diagnosis, and the role of psychological assessments in legal contexts, highlighting ongoing debates in the field. 

Dr. Sebastien Rilen explores gender diversity in forensic evaluation, highlighting limited forensic-specific guidance. He offers advice on addressing gender identity in interviews and reports, discusses psychological testing with gender-diverse individuals, and provides considerations for test selection and interpretation.

Professor Aliza Kaplan explores clemency's history, process, and its role in commuting or pardoning sentences. She highlights factors considered by decision-makers, including mental health components, addressing later stages of criminal cases less familiar to forensic professionals and attorneys.

Dr. Daniel Murrie explains adversarial allegiance in forensic evaluations, reviewing studies and measures showing these effects. He addresses field reliability's link to adversarial allegiance and discusses strategies forensic clinicians can use to mitigate bias.

Devon LaBat examines jurors' understanding of forensic science, highlighting areas of confusion and misleading expert language. She discusses the Department of Justice Uniform Guidelines for Language in Reports, their purpose, and key recommendations for clarity in forensic communication.

Dr. Hunter defines traumatic brain injury (TBI) and provides key questions for assessing past head injury severity. She discusses factors affecting prognosis and her meta-analysis, highlighting challenges in measuring head injury prevalence due to varied research methods and definitions.

Dr. Sokolski explores methamphetamine intoxication, its effects, withdrawal symptoms, and psychosis, debunking myths about “new” meth. She examines addiction, free will, and settled insanity, discusses meth’s link to fentanyl, and advocates for state-level treatment. She highlights contingency management and predictors of long-term psychosis among methamphetamine users.

Dr. Neal examines bias, its sources, and the impact of “fast” and “slow” thinking on cognition. She reviews bias in forensic experts, offers reduction strategies, and discusses psychological testing in court, providing guidance on distinguishing reliable methods from “junk” in forensic contexts.

Dr. Giromini discusses the IOP-29, its unique approach to symptom validity testing, and the development of the False Disorder Probability scale. He highlights its cross-cultural performance, multilingual translations, and introduces the IOP-29 Memory Module.

This discussion examines how forensic clinicians can address personal identities in interviews, including when and how to inquire, relevancy for reports, and key considerations for evaluators before approaching these topics.

Dr. Jude Bergkamp explores the tension between culturally responsive practice and forensic psychology, highlighting its slower adoption of sociocultural frameworks. He discusses applying APA Multicultural Guidelines to evaluations, addressing disparities from global to individual levels, and incorporating this knowledge into forensic work.

Dr. Brodsky offers expert witness tips, emphasizing demeanor, avoiding humor, and being one’s best self on the stand. He advises on handling aggressive cross-examination, examinee questions, “surprise” inquiries, managing anxiety, and viewing multi-part questions as opportunities. The discussion concludes with insights on courtroom attire.

Dr. Allison Redlich examines guilty pleas in the U.S. legal system, exploring factors behind their prevalence. She distinguishes between guilty, no contest, and Alford pleas, and discusses the theory and practice of ensuring pleas are knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.

Darin Challacombe discusses cults and terror groups, defining key terms and distinguishing them from other organizations. He explains recruitment tactics, factors influencing vulnerability, and applies these frameworks to groups like sovereign citizens to evaluate if they qualify as cults.

Dr. Smith explores the history of eyewitness identification research, highlighting memory's susceptibility to various influences. He defines key terms like estimator/system variables, lineups, and suspects, and discusses law enforcement's role in improving accuracy and promoting fair procedures. The discussion concludes with witness confidence and accuracy factors.

Dr. Shura overviews validity assessment in the VA and general practice, covering malingering definitions, Slick (1999) and Sherman (2020) criteria, and psychometric approaches like symptom and performance validity tests. He discusses base rates, response style nomenclature, and the adaptive model of malingering.

Drs. Griffiths and Jalava explain psychopathy, its assessment, and common misconceptions, including flawed research. They discuss challenges of working in systems requiring psychopathy assessments and address the ethical difficulties involved in these evaluations.