法医精神病学中的精神病评估:加拿大执业医师使用和认知的试点研究

IF 0.5 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
R. R. Larsen, J. Burns, Reba Khoshabe, N. Raposo, Jarkko Jalava, S. Griffiths
{"title":"法医精神病学中的精神病评估:加拿大执业医师使用和认知的试点研究","authors":"R. R. Larsen, J. Burns, Reba Khoshabe, N. Raposo, Jarkko Jalava, S. Griffiths","doi":"10.1108/jcrpp-02-2022-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this study was to survey practitioners’ use and perceptions of psychopathy assessments in Canadian forensic psychiatric settings. Psychopathy assessments are widely used in forensic settings to inform decisions about sentencing, placement, rehabilitation and parole. Recent empirical evidence suggests that the utility of psychopathy assessments might be overestimated, leading to a debate about their legal and ethical justification. However, one shortcoming of these discussions is that they rely heavily on anecdotal evidence about how exactly psychopathy assessments influence forensic decisions, due to a general lack of survey data on field uses. Some data are available in European and American contexts, but little is known about Canadian clinical practice.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nTo address this shortcoming in the literature, the authors conducted a pilot study of practitioners in forensic psychiatric units in Ontario (N = 18), evaluating their use of psychopathy assessments, reporting habits and their perceptions of psychopathic offenders.\n\n\nFindings\nPractitioners reported that they primarily used the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) as a risk assessment tool, often in combination with other tools. Most clinicians reported using psychopathy assessments infrequently, that there was a low base rate of psychopathic offenders and their attitudes and beliefs about psychopathy were generally consistent with the empirical literature.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis pilot study provides novel insights into the use of psychopathy assessments in Canadian forensic psychiatry with the potential to inform current debates.\n","PeriodicalId":43553,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychopathy assessments in forensic psychiatry: a pilot study of Canadian practitioners’ use and perceptions\",\"authors\":\"R. R. Larsen, J. Burns, Reba Khoshabe, N. Raposo, Jarkko Jalava, S. Griffiths\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jcrpp-02-2022-0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this study was to survey practitioners’ use and perceptions of psychopathy assessments in Canadian forensic psychiatric settings. Psychopathy assessments are widely used in forensic settings to inform decisions about sentencing, placement, rehabilitation and parole. Recent empirical evidence suggests that the utility of psychopathy assessments might be overestimated, leading to a debate about their legal and ethical justification. However, one shortcoming of these discussions is that they rely heavily on anecdotal evidence about how exactly psychopathy assessments influence forensic decisions, due to a general lack of survey data on field uses. Some data are available in European and American contexts, but little is known about Canadian clinical practice.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nTo address this shortcoming in the literature, the authors conducted a pilot study of practitioners in forensic psychiatric units in Ontario (N = 18), evaluating their use of psychopathy assessments, reporting habits and their perceptions of psychopathic offenders.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nPractitioners reported that they primarily used the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) as a risk assessment tool, often in combination with other tools. Most clinicians reported using psychopathy assessments infrequently, that there was a low base rate of psychopathic offenders and their attitudes and beliefs about psychopathy were generally consistent with the empirical literature.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis pilot study provides novel insights into the use of psychopathy assessments in Canadian forensic psychiatry with the potential to inform current debates.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":43553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcrpp-02-2022-0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcrpp-02-2022-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究的目的是调查从业者在加拿大法医精神病学环境中对精神病评估的使用和看法。精神病评估广泛用于法医环境,为判决、安置、康复和假释提供信息。最近的经验证据表明,精神病评估的效用可能被高估了,这引发了关于其法律和伦理合理性的争论。然而,这些讨论的一个缺点是,由于普遍缺乏实地使用的调查数据,它们严重依赖于关于精神病评估究竟如何影响法医决策的轶事证据。欧洲和美国有一些数据,但对加拿大的临床实践知之甚少。设计/方法/方法为了解决文献中的这一缺陷,作者对安大略省法医精神科的从业者(N=18)进行了一项试点研究,评估他们对精神病评估的使用、报告习惯和对精神病罪犯的看法。FindingsPractices报告称,他们主要使用Hare精神病检查表修订版(PCL-R)作为风险评估工具,通常与其他工具结合使用。大多数临床医生报告说,很少使用精神病评估,精神病罪犯的基本比率很低,他们对精神病的态度和信念通常与实证文献一致。原创性/价值这项试点研究为加拿大法医精神病学中精神病评估的使用提供了新的见解,有可能为当前的辩论提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychopathy assessments in forensic psychiatry: a pilot study of Canadian practitioners’ use and perceptions
Purpose The purpose of this study was to survey practitioners’ use and perceptions of psychopathy assessments in Canadian forensic psychiatric settings. Psychopathy assessments are widely used in forensic settings to inform decisions about sentencing, placement, rehabilitation and parole. Recent empirical evidence suggests that the utility of psychopathy assessments might be overestimated, leading to a debate about their legal and ethical justification. However, one shortcoming of these discussions is that they rely heavily on anecdotal evidence about how exactly psychopathy assessments influence forensic decisions, due to a general lack of survey data on field uses. Some data are available in European and American contexts, but little is known about Canadian clinical practice. Design/methodology/approach To address this shortcoming in the literature, the authors conducted a pilot study of practitioners in forensic psychiatric units in Ontario (N = 18), evaluating their use of psychopathy assessments, reporting habits and their perceptions of psychopathic offenders. Findings Practitioners reported that they primarily used the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) as a risk assessment tool, often in combination with other tools. Most clinicians reported using psychopathy assessments infrequently, that there was a low base rate of psychopathic offenders and their attitudes and beliefs about psychopathy were generally consistent with the empirical literature. Originality/value This pilot study provides novel insights into the use of psychopathy assessments in Canadian forensic psychiatry with the potential to inform current debates.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
20.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信