MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391757167 · doi:10.1080/13803395.2024.2314731

Development of a measure for assessing malingered incompetency in criminal proceedings: Denney competency related test (D-CRT)

2024· article· en· W4391757167 on OpenAlexaff
Robert L. Denney, Sundeep Thinda, Patrick M. Finn, Rachel L. Fazio, Michelle J. Chen, Michael R. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsSurrey Memorial Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyTest (biology)CognitionMeasure (data warehouse)PsychometricsCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Experts frequently assess competency in criminal settings where the rate of feigning cognitive deficit is demonstrably elevated. We describe the construction and validation of the Denney Competency Related Test (D-CRT) to assess feigned incompetency of defendants in the criminal adjudicative setting. It was expected the D-CRT would prove effective at identifying feigned incompetence based on its two alternative, forced-choice and performance curve characteristics. METHOD: Development and validation of the D-CRT occurred in described phases. Items were developed to measure competency based upon expert review. Item analysis and adjustments were completed with 304 young teenage volunteers to obtain a proper spread of item difficulty in preparation for eventual performance curve analysis (PCA). Test-retest reliability was assessed with 44 adult community volunteers. Validation included an analog simulation design with 101 jail detainees using MacArthur Competency Assessment Test-Criminal Adjudication and Word Memory Test as criterion measures. Effects of racial/ethnic demographic differences were examined in a separate study of 208 undergraduate volunteers. D-CRT specificity was identified with 46 elderly clinic referrals diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. RESULTS: Item development, adjustment, and repeat analysis resulted in item probabilities evenly spread from .28 to 1.0. Test-retest correlation was good (.83). Internal consistency of items was excellent (KR-20 > .91). D-CRT demonstrated convergent validity in regard to measuring competency related information and as well as malingering. The test successfully differentiated between jail inmates asked to perforfm their best and inmates asked to simulate incompetency (AUC = .945). There were no statistically significant differences found in performance across racial/ethnic backgrounds. D-CRT specificity remained excellent among elderly clinic referrals with significant cognitive compromise at the recommended total score cutoff. CONCLUSIONS: D-CRT is an effective measure of feigned criminal incompetency in the context of potential cognitive deficiency, and PCA is assistive in the determination. Additional validation using knowns groups designs with various mental health-related conditions are needed.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical and Experimental NeuropsychologySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207