Citation accuracy in American Psychological Association amicus curiae briefs.

Abstract

For over 60 years, the American Psychological Association (APA) has submitted amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs with the aim of informing the courts about relevant scientific findings that may otherwise be absent from, or misrepresented in, the trial records of court cases. To achieve this aim, it is important that the summarized information accurately reflects the relevant scientific literature. The present study investigated the accuracy of the citations to empirical research in the 16 most recent APA amicus briefs by comparing the accuracy of the citing claims within these briefs to the original claims made in the cited articles. Case topics included false confessions, affirmative action, eyewitness testimony, child welfare, child custody, abortion, gender-affirming care, and sexual orientation change efforts. These briefs yielded 507 citations to empirical studies that were coded by pairs of independent coders. Results indicated that 72.8% of citations were accurate, 20.3% were somewhat accurate, and 6.9% were inaccurate. APA amicus briefs have been cited in a number of landmark rulings and have the potential to enhance the public welfare and the reputation of psychological science. It is, however, imperative that APA works to minimize miscitations in these briefs. We offer a set of recommendations for ways to reduce the number of miscitations in APA amicus briefs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).