The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Steven A Frankel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Forensic evaluation of dissociation and persons diagnosed with dissociative identity disorder searching for convergence
Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 2006Co-Authors: Steven A Frankel, Constance J DalenbergAbstract:Summary and conclusionsThe authors believe that the Forensic evaluation of DID and the dissocia-tive disorders requires expertise in the assessment and treatment of thosedisorders and that it requires an integration of data gathered from biologicpsychologic, and social domains.References [1] Goldstein A. Handbook of Psychology, vol. 11: Forensic Psychology. Hoboken (NJ): JohnWiley & Sons; 2003.[2] Greenberg SA, Schuman DW. Irreconcilable differences between therapeutic and Forensicroles. Prof Psychol Res Pr 1997;28:50–7.[3] Hess AK, Weiner IB. The handbook of Forensic Psychology. New York: John Wiley S 1999.[4] Melton GB, Petrila J, Poythress NG, et al. Psychologicevaluations for the courts. NewYork: Guilford Press; 1997.[5] Rosner R, editor. Principles and practice of Forensic psychiatry. 2nd edition. London: Ar-nold Publishers; 2003.[6] American Academy of Psychiatry& the Law. Available at: www.aapl.org. Accessed Octo-ber 15, 2005.[7] American Board of Forensic Psychology. Available at: www.abfp.org. Accessed October15, 2005.[8] National Organization of Forensic Social Work. Available at: www.nofsw.org. AccessedOctober 15, 2005.[9] Dawes R, Faust D, Meehl P. Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science 1989;243:1668–74.[10] Meehl P. Clinical versus statistical prediction: a theoretical analysis and review of the evi-dence. Northvale (NJ): Jason Aronson; 1996.[11] Coons PM. Iatrogenesis and malingering of multiple personality disorder in the Forensicevaluation of homicide defendants. Psychiatr Clin North Am 1991;14:757–68.[12] Dunn G, Paolo A, Ryan J. Belief in the existence of multiple personality disorder amongpsychologists and psychiatrists. J Clin Psychol 1994;50:454–7.[13] Cormier J, Thelen M. Professional skepticism of multiple personality disorder. Prof Psy-chol Res Pr 1998;29:163–7.[14] Dammeyer M, Nightingale N, McCoy M. Repressed memory and other controversial ori-gins of sexual abuse allegations: beliefs among psychologists and clinical social workers.Child Maltreat 1997;2:252–63.[15] Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 US 579 (1993).[16] Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael 000 US 97–1709 (1999).[17] Frye v. United States 293 F. 1013 (DC Cir. 1923).[18] Hartocollis L. The making of multiple personality disorder: the role of experts in the pro-duction of psychiatric knowledge. Dissertation Abstr Int Sect A Humanities Soc Sci 1999;60(5-A):1767.[19] James D. Multiple personality disorder in the courts: a review of the North American ex-perience. J Forensic Psychiatry 1998;9:339–61.[20] KanovitzJR,KanovitzBS,BlochJP.Witnesseswithmultiplepersonalitydisorder.23PeppL Rev 387, 1996.[21] KennetK,MatthewsS.Identity,controlandresponsibility:thecaseofdissociativeidentitydisorder. Philos Psychol 2002;15:509–26.[22] Moskowitz AK. Dissociative pathways to homicide: clinical and Forensic implications.J Trauma Dissociation 2004;5:5–32.
Constance J Dalenberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Forensic evaluation of dissociation and persons diagnosed with dissociative identity disorder searching for convergence
Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 2006Co-Authors: Steven A Frankel, Constance J DalenbergAbstract:Summary and conclusionsThe authors believe that the Forensic evaluation of DID and the dissocia-tive disorders requires expertise in the assessment and treatment of thosedisorders and that it requires an integration of data gathered from biologicpsychologic, and social domains.References [1] Goldstein A. Handbook of Psychology, vol. 11: Forensic Psychology. Hoboken (NJ): JohnWiley & Sons; 2003.[2] Greenberg SA, Schuman DW. Irreconcilable differences between therapeutic and Forensicroles. Prof Psychol Res Pr 1997;28:50–7.[3] Hess AK, Weiner IB. The handbook of Forensic Psychology. New York: John Wiley S 1999.[4] Melton GB, Petrila J, Poythress NG, et al. Psychologicevaluations for the courts. NewYork: Guilford Press; 1997.[5] Rosner R, editor. Principles and practice of Forensic psychiatry. 2nd edition. London: Ar-nold Publishers; 2003.[6] American Academy of Psychiatry& the Law. Available at: www.aapl.org. Accessed Octo-ber 15, 2005.[7] American Board of Forensic Psychology. Available at: www.abfp.org. Accessed October15, 2005.[8] National Organization of Forensic Social Work. Available at: www.nofsw.org. AccessedOctober 15, 2005.[9] Dawes R, Faust D, Meehl P. Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science 1989;243:1668–74.[10] Meehl P. Clinical versus statistical prediction: a theoretical analysis and review of the evi-dence. Northvale (NJ): Jason Aronson; 1996.[11] Coons PM. Iatrogenesis and malingering of multiple personality disorder in the Forensicevaluation of homicide defendants. Psychiatr Clin North Am 1991;14:757–68.[12] Dunn G, Paolo A, Ryan J. Belief in the existence of multiple personality disorder amongpsychologists and psychiatrists. J Clin Psychol 1994;50:454–7.[13] Cormier J, Thelen M. Professional skepticism of multiple personality disorder. Prof Psy-chol Res Pr 1998;29:163–7.[14] Dammeyer M, Nightingale N, McCoy M. Repressed memory and other controversial ori-gins of sexual abuse allegations: beliefs among psychologists and clinical social workers.Child Maltreat 1997;2:252–63.[15] Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 US 579 (1993).[16] Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael 000 US 97–1709 (1999).[17] Frye v. United States 293 F. 1013 (DC Cir. 1923).[18] Hartocollis L. The making of multiple personality disorder: the role of experts in the pro-duction of psychiatric knowledge. Dissertation Abstr Int Sect A Humanities Soc Sci 1999;60(5-A):1767.[19] James D. Multiple personality disorder in the courts: a review of the North American ex-perience. J Forensic Psychiatry 1998;9:339–61.[20] KanovitzJR,KanovitzBS,BlochJP.Witnesseswithmultiplepersonalitydisorder.23PeppL Rev 387, 1996.[21] KennetK,MatthewsS.Identity,controlandresponsibility:thecaseofdissociativeidentitydisorder. Philos Psychol 2002;15:509–26.[22] Moskowitz AK. Dissociative pathways to homicide: clinical and Forensic implications.J Trauma Dissociation 2004;5:5–32.
Stefanie R Barr - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
assessment of genuine and simulated dissociative identity disorder on the structured interview of reported symptoms
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 2006Co-Authors: Bethany L Brand, Richard J Loewenstein, Scot W Mcnary, Amie Kolos, Stefanie R BarrAbstract:ABSTRACT Little is known about how to detect malingered dissociative identity disorder (DID). This study presents preliminary data from an ongoing study about the performance of DID patients on the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS, Rogers, Bagby, & Dickens, 1992), considered to be a “gold standard” structured interview in Forensic Psychology to detect feigning of psychological symptoms. Test responses from 20 dissociative identity disorder (DID) patients are compared to those of 43 well informed and motivated DID simulators. Both the simulators and DID patients endorsed such a high number of symptoms that their average overall scores would typically be interpreted as indicative of feigning. The simulators' mean scores were significantly higher than those of the DID patients on only four out of 13 scales. These results provide preliminary evidence that well informed and motivated simulators are able to fairly successfully simulate DID patients and avoid detection on the SIRS. Furthermore, ma...
-
assessment of genuine and simulated dissociative identity disorder on the structured interview of reported symptoms
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 2006Co-Authors: Bethany L Brand, Richard J Loewenstein, Scot W Mcnary, Amie Kolos, Stefanie R BarrAbstract:Little is known about how to detect malingered dissociative identity disorder (DID). This study presents preliminary data from an ongoing study about the performance of DID patients on the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS, Rogers, Bagby, & Dickens, 1992), considered to be a "gold standard" structured interview in Forensic Psychology to detect feigning of psychological symptoms. Test responses from 20 dissociative identity disorder (DID) patients are compared to those of 43 well informed and motivated DID simulators. Both the simulators and DID patients endorsed such a high number of symptoms that their average overall scores would typically be interpreted as indicative of feigning. The simulators' mean scores were significantly higher than those of the DID patients on only four out of 13 scales. These results provide preliminary evidence that well informed and motivated simulators are able to fairly successfully simulate DID patients and avoid detection on the SIRS. Furthermore, many DID patients may be at risk for being inaccurately labeled as feigning on the SIRS.
Bethany L Brand - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
assessment of genuine and simulated dissociative identity disorder on the structured interview of reported symptoms
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 2006Co-Authors: Bethany L Brand, Richard J Loewenstein, Scot W Mcnary, Amie Kolos, Stefanie R BarrAbstract:ABSTRACT Little is known about how to detect malingered dissociative identity disorder (DID). This study presents preliminary data from an ongoing study about the performance of DID patients on the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS, Rogers, Bagby, & Dickens, 1992), considered to be a “gold standard” structured interview in Forensic Psychology to detect feigning of psychological symptoms. Test responses from 20 dissociative identity disorder (DID) patients are compared to those of 43 well informed and motivated DID simulators. Both the simulators and DID patients endorsed such a high number of symptoms that their average overall scores would typically be interpreted as indicative of feigning. The simulators' mean scores were significantly higher than those of the DID patients on only four out of 13 scales. These results provide preliminary evidence that well informed and motivated simulators are able to fairly successfully simulate DID patients and avoid detection on the SIRS. Furthermore, ma...
-
assessment of genuine and simulated dissociative identity disorder on the structured interview of reported symptoms
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 2006Co-Authors: Bethany L Brand, Richard J Loewenstein, Scot W Mcnary, Amie Kolos, Stefanie R BarrAbstract:Little is known about how to detect malingered dissociative identity disorder (DID). This study presents preliminary data from an ongoing study about the performance of DID patients on the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS, Rogers, Bagby, & Dickens, 1992), considered to be a "gold standard" structured interview in Forensic Psychology to detect feigning of psychological symptoms. Test responses from 20 dissociative identity disorder (DID) patients are compared to those of 43 well informed and motivated DID simulators. Both the simulators and DID patients endorsed such a high number of symptoms that their average overall scores would typically be interpreted as indicative of feigning. The simulators' mean scores were significantly higher than those of the DID patients on only four out of 13 scales. These results provide preliminary evidence that well informed and motivated simulators are able to fairly successfully simulate DID patients and avoid detection on the SIRS. Furthermore, many DID patients may be at risk for being inaccurately labeled as feigning on the SIRS.
Ellen Sexton - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
journal use by graduate students as indicated by master s theses bibliographies at an urban commuter college 1991 2004
Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 2006Co-Authors: Ellen SextonAbstract:Abstract Citation analyses were carried out on master's theses in three disciplines: Forensic Psychology, Forensic science, and criminal justice, completed and deposited in the John Jay College Library from 1991 to 2004. The aim was to determine the effect of availability of electronic journals on students' choice of references. The number of journal citations and the ratio of journal articles to all citations were assessed. Criminal justice theses listed more citations than either science or Psychology theses, but relatively fewer journal articles. An increase over time was seen in the number of journal articles cited and in the ratio of journal articles to all citations only for the Psychology theses. Few students identified whether the work cited was consulted in electronic or print format.