U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Insanity Defense: A Comparison of Verdict Schemas

NCJ Number
133273
Journal
Law and Human Behavior Volume: 15 Issue: 5 Dated: (October 1991) Pages: 533-555
Author(s)
N J Finkel
Date Published
1991
Length
23 pages
Annotation
Changing the legal test definitions of insanity remains the remedy of choice when insanity outcomes appear problematic, despite empirical studies showing no significant differences among tests. An alternative strategy suggests changing the verdict schema, although critics contend that jurors will reach compromise verdicts that are unconscionable and incoherent.
Abstract
Undergraduate subjects (N=179) rendered insanity verdicts and rating for four insanity cases using one of four different verdict schemas: a traditional two-choice schema, a three-choice schema (DR) without instructions, a three-choice schema (GBMI) with instructions, and a sequential schema proposed by Finkel (1988) that separately assesses different types of culpability. When internal consistency measures between verdicts and broad ratings and specific construct ratings of the defendant were examined, the sequential schema produced the highest internal consistency, reducing the most error variance and yielding the highest prediction criterion of any of the schemas. 5 tables, 1 figure, 16 notes, and 68 references (Author abstract)