Personality measurement and intuitive personality judgments from an idiothetic point of view

Lamiell, James T.

doi:10.1016/0272-7358(86)90032-2

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been argued (Lamiell & Trierweiler, 1986) that assessment requires subjects to contextualize the problem and data upon which they must make a judgment. In our study, we frame and contextualize the cases for the subjects, through the instructions they receive and through the format of the cases.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How jurors construe "insanity."

Finkel

Handel

1989

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historically and currently, jurors who have rendered verdicts in insanity cases have themselves been criticized and maligned--accused of being simplistic and biased, of lacking understanding, and of disregarding or nullifying the judge's instructions. Are the critics right? In this study, 263 mock jurors (141 adults and 122 students) were asked to decide four insanity cases without instructions, using their own best judgment, and to identify the determinative facts for them, and the meaning of those facts. Those determinative factors were then categorized, using a seven construct schema for NGRI and guilty verdicts. The results show that jurors do make discriminations among cases in terms of constructs, and that these constructs are relevant, complex, and flexible; furthermore, the jurors' lay constructs of insanity are more complex than the legal constructs of insanity. The "simplism," it seems, lies not with the jurors but with the insanity tests.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How jurors construe "insanity."

Finkel

Handel

1989

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As long as raw frequencies of events are used, there is no way of determining what the observed frequency means relative to the patient’s life circumstances (cf. Meehl, 1954; Lamiell & Trierweiler, 1986). The problem is that violence does not have a stable a priori probability of occurring across all patients.…”

Section: General Criteria For Assessing Measurement Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring patient violence in dangerousness research.

Mulvey¹,

Lidz²

1993

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the dangerousness of mental patients has paid only limited attention to the issues surronnding the measurement of violent events. This arliclc reviews the possible methods for measuring patient violence and comments on the benefits and drawbacks associated wilh different strategies. It is argued that there are usable approaches beyond official records and that development of these alternatives is a necessary step for advancing theory in this area.

show abstract

Let’s Be Careful Out There: Reply to Commentaries

Lamiell

1990

Annals of Theoretical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personality measurement and intuitive personality judgments from an idiothetic point of view

Cited by 9 publications

References 36 publications

How jurors construe "insanity."

How jurors construe "insanity."

Measuring patient violence in dangerousness research.

Let’s Be Careful Out There: Reply to Commentaries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About