A Case Law Survey of the Personality Assessment Inventory: Examining Its Role in Civil and Criminal Trials
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although professional surveys suggest that the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) is a popular instrument among forensic and correctional psychologists, relatively little is known about the specific types of legal cases in which it is applied, the particular types of questions it is used to address, or the extent to which its admissibility has been at issue in court cases. Using a comprehensive legal database, we surveyed all published U.S., Canadian, European, and Australian criminal and civil cases in which the PAI was administered. The PAI appears to be introduced by examiners in a wide variety of civil (e.g., child custody, personal injury) and criminal (e.g., insanity, competence) cases to aid in the assessment of a broad range of psychopathology. Additionally, the PAI seems to be used frequently to assess questions concerning potential dissimulation and response styles. Surprisingly, the admissibility of the PAI into evidence was never at issue in any of the cases reviewed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it