Speaker
Description
Forensic psychiatric evaluations are mandatory for the insanity assessment but face significant challenges related to their accuracy, accountability, and transparency. The lack of standardised methods makes it extremely difficult for experts to agree on insanity evaluations. A comprehensive understanding of the assessment processes and the biases influencing forensic psychologists and psychiatrists is essential for improving their reliability and standardising the methodology.
This systematic review aims to identify the factors that influence assessments of insanity. The investigation focuses on the pieces of information (e.g., personal information and psychiatric information about the defendant, information about the defendant's criminal record and the committed offence) which tend to guide the decision-making process of psychologists and psychiatrists appointed by the Court to assess the defendant's insanity.
This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The search will be conducted on the following electronic databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus. It will include studies searched through reference lists of relevant review papers and references of included/excluded studies with no limitations on the year of publication. Two reviewers will independently make a screening of titles and abstracts for eligibility, followed by a detailed review of full papers. Discrepancies will be resolved through discussion or consultation with a third reviewer.
This systematic review seeks to enhance comprehension regarding the limitations and strengths inherent in the decision-making processes of expert psychologists and psychiatrists in charge of evaluating the defendant's insanity, a fundamental initial step towards standardising forensic evaluations.
Keywords: Decision-making; insanity assessment; forensic setting; cognitive bias
| If you're submitting a poster, would you be interested in giving a blitz talk? | Yes |
|---|
