Barry Rosenfeld

Violence risk assessment has serious implications for legal decision making. Thus, it is critical to identify potential sources of bias that may disadvantage evaluees. The present study examined whether the strength of the relationship between violence risk factors and judgments of violence risk was moderated by patient sex when employing the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20, Version 3, a widely used instrument for assessing violence risk. We hypothesized that seven static risk factors-Violence (H1), Other Antisocial Behaviors (H2), Problems With Relationships (H3), Substance Use (H5), Personality Disorder (H7), Traumatic Experiences (H8), and Violent Attitudes (H9)-would differ by patient sex in average presence ratings, and the strength of associations between risk factor presence and severity and violence risk judgments would be moderated by sex. Civil psychiatric patients (N = 151) were rated using the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20, Version 3, by graduate students through interviews and records review. Risk factor presence and relevance and summary risk ratings were converted to a 3-point ordinal scale; a severity rating was calculated by multiplying Presence × Relevance. Men scored higher on the presence of Violence (d = .43), Antisocial Behaviors (d = .52), Substance Use (d = .35), and Violent Attitudes (d = .67), whereas women scored higher on Traumatic Experiences (d = .62). Moderation analyses showed generally stronger associations between risk factors (both presence and severity) and violence risk judgments for men compared to women in models predicting Case Prioritization and Imminent Violence. No significant interaction effects emerged in models predicting Serious Physical Harm. Both the presence and severity of several hypothesized risk factors had less influence on violence risk judgments for women. One interpretation of these findings is that clinicians place less emphasis on these risk factors in making overall risk judgments (i.e., a potential sex bias), although other possible explanations exist. The implications of these results are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

This chapter provides an overview of the strengths and limitations of multiscale inventories when used with culturally or linguistically diverse individuals. The primary focus of this chapter is on the MMPI and PAI instruments, as these are the most widely used multiscale inventories in routine clinical practice and in forensic mental health assessment in particular. Other, less frequently used instruments are also reviewed. The chapter includes a discussion of the availability of translated versions of these instruments, including both commercially available translations as well as those developed by (and sometimes available from) independent researchers. Concerns that arise when considering the normative data upon which test interpretations are based are addressed, along with recommendations for negotiating the potential gaps in culturally specific normative data. Finally, issues related to test selection, remote administration, and the applicability of computerized interpretive reports are addressed.

This chapter reviews cultural issues that relate to three main areas of family law: child custody, evaluations of potential child abuse, and termination of parental rights. We emphasize the importance of understanding family structure, cultural norms, and sociopolitical factors in conducting culturally sensitive evaluations as they pertain to each of these evaluation contexts. Specifically, the chapter highlights research that impacts the evaluation and decision-making processes and underscores the importance of considering culturally appropriate interventions when working with children, adolescents, and families. Psychological test use in the context of family-based evaluations, along with ethical considerations in conducting culturally sensitive evaluations or research in this area are also discussed.

4.1Comparison of Chinese and US MMPI-2 T-scores for a 43-year-old man 967.1Parenting styles 1667.2Bioecological systems model for forensic assessment 170

This chapter highlights the clinical and research literature on the assessment of risk for future violence and non-violent criminal behaviors in culturally diverse individuals. This chapter summarizes the existing research on the cross-cultural use of assessment instruments, highlighting potential sources of bias that might impact these tools. The extent of empirical support for both actuarial and structured professional judgment tools in cross-cultural settings is reviewed, along with the role of culturally specific risk factors. In addition, we review widely used tools for gauging both general (violence, non-violent criminal behavior) and specific forms of offending (e.g., sexual reoffending, intimate partner violence) in both adults and adolescents. Finally, given its central role in assessing risk of both violent and non-violent recidivism, we discuss the cross-cultural applicability of the construct of psychopathy, along with recommendations for practice.

This chapter addresses cultural influences on cognitive, intellectual, and neuropsychological assessments. Neurocognitive evaluations play a role in multiple forensic settings, including personal injury and vocational disability evaluations, criminal law issues (e.g., competency to proceed, applicability of the death penalty), and access to specialized services such as educational opportunities and resources designated for individuals with developmental disabilities. This chapter will address a range of factors that impact neurocognitive test performance, along with the importance of appropriate normative data on test administration and interpretation. Specific attention is paid to the conceptualization and measurement of intellectual functioning and the role of cognitive screening tools, followed by a review of research examining the cross-cultural use and equivalence of cognitive and neuropsychological tests. We also highlight the impact of bilingualism on test performance and the benefits and challenges when using verbal and non-verbal tests with linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse individuals.

Few topics are as central to forensic mental health evaluations as the assessment of response style, and more specifically, malingering. However, there is a growing recognition of the potential impact of culture and language on the assessment process, and the potential for elevated error rates when well-established tests are studied in culturally and linguistically diverse samples. The chapter will outline potential influences on the assessment of response style, as well as a review of the available research on the impact of these influences on test accuracy, focusing on both psychiatric symptom validity measures and cognitive effort tests. Although less frequently researched, issues relating to defensive responding are also addressed. We conclude with a number of recommendations for navigating these challenges in clinical practice.