NCJ Number
109840
Journal
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry Volume: 9 Dated: (1986) Pages: 67-75
Date Published
1986
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This study tested a sample of 125 defendants (116 males and 9 females) referred to one of three forensic centers for an evaluation of criminal responsibility, for the purpose of determining whether the Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scales (R-CRAS) may be useful for measuring criminal responsibility in accordance with M'Naghten and guilty-but-mentally-ill (GBMI) criteria.
Abstract
In addition to completing the usual comprehensive evaluation of criminal responsibility, each subject completed the R-CRAS, including the additional decision models for the M'Naghten and GBMI insanity standards. Comparisons of the R-CRAS summary scales for the criterion groups were examined through t-tests for the M'Naghten standard and ANOVAS with Duncan Multiple Range Tests for the GBMI standard. To test the extent that these criterion groups formed differentiating patterns of psychological impairment, a two-stage discriminant analysis was performed. Differentiating symptom patterns were consistently found for the relevant criterion groups (M'Naghten clinically evaluated sane and insane and for GBMI clinically evaluated sane, GBMI, and insane). Suggestions are offered for additional validation research on this issue. 5 tables and 12 references.