Interpretation of psychological tests in clinical and forensic evaluations.

Gray-Little, Bernadette; Kaplan, Danielle A.

doi:10.1037/10279-006

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Viglione (1999), "In the United States, the Rorschach has demonstrated its usefulness with a variety of ethnic and subcultural groups" (p. 252). However, numerous investigators have described shortcomings of the Rorschach for the assessment of American minority groups and for non-Americans (Constantino, Flanagan, & Malgady, 1995;Cuellar, 1998;Dana, 1986Dana, , 1993Dana, , 1996Dana, , 1998Frank, 1992Frank, , 1993Gray-Little, 1995;Gray-Little & Kaplan, 1998;Howes & DeBlassie, 1989;Okazaki & Sue, 1995;Velasquez, 1995;Velasquez & Callahan, 1992; but also see Butcher, Nezami, & Exner, 1998;Ritzier, 1996). An important shortcoming is the lack of appropriate normative data for many ethnic groups, for example, Black adults, Hispanic American adults and children, and Native American adults and children.…”

Section: Cultural Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a resolution of the Rorschach controversy.

Garb¹,

Wood²,

Nezworski³

et al. 2001

Psychological Assessment

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Cultural Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a resolution of the Rorschach controversy.

Garb¹,

Wood²,

Nezworski³

et al. 2001

Psychological Assessment

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…What research there is has focused predominantly on psychiatric assessment and testimonies of experts before the court (Wettstein, 2010). Written reports have been seen as documentation of what was done and of the quality of psychiatric assessment (Gray-Little & Kaplan, 1998;Grisso, 2006). Analyses of forensic reports' text has been limited to formal aspects such as composition or correctness (e.g., Greenfield & Gottschalk, 2008;Pyrcak, 2010;Silva et al, 2003).…”

Section: Communication In Forensic Psychiatric Reportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing the communication channel. Discursive representations of clinical communication in forensic psychiatric reports

Galasiński

Ziółkowska

2022

QHC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Forensic reports require clinicians’ presence as an agent in court-ordered forensic assessment.Aim: We focus on discursive representations of clinical communication in forensic psychiatric reports.Methods: We perform a critical discourse analysis of 142 forensic assessment reports for 33 patients detained and hospitalized on forensic wards in three hospitals in the southwest of Poland. Results: Clinical communication is constructed as controlled by the clinician. All references to patients’ communication are anchored in interpretation by the clinician. While the speaking patient is explicitly constructed as a communicator, the clinician her/himself is only very rarely represented as personally communicating, invoking an impersonal voice of institutional medicine. Discussion: Our study offers insight into the role of communication is forensic psychiatry as serving the clinician to construct an institutionally useful account of the patient. In contrast to psychiatry’s pronouncements, communication is not a means for a clinical dialogue, but for an institutional monologue. Conclusion: The results of our qualitative study are useful as do not only examine how things are done in forensic psychiatry, but also what it means in its context.

show abstract

“…1Publications on ethnic minority assessment that may be of interest to practitioners include the following: Dana (1998); Gray-Little and Kaplan (1998); Harris and Llorente (2005); and Leong, Levy, Gee, and Johnson (2007). Three ethnic-specific resources that list testing instruments also deserve citing: One is a Web site for various Asian groups (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ssw/projects/pmap/about.htm), one is a book for African American clients (Jones, 1996), and one is a chapter on Latino/a MMPI-2 profiles (Garrido & Velasquez, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%