Suppr超能文献

“法医”神经心理学中的排除动议以及“固定”与“灵活”测验组:对临床神经心理学实践的挑战

A motion to exclude and the 'fixed' versus 'flexible' battery in 'forensic' neuropsychology: challenges to the practice of clinical neuropsychology.

作者信息

Bigler Erin D

机构信息

Department of Psychology, 1001 SWKT, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, United States.

出版信息

Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2007 Jan;22(1):45-51. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2006.06.019. Epub 2006 Dec 27.

Abstract

Two recent publications in Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology (ACN) have been used by defense attorneys as the centerpiece for an argument that only a 'fixed' battery approach, exemplified by the Halstead-Reitan battery (HRB), satisfies the Daubert criteria for admissibility; and therefore, the HRB represents the only method of forensic neuropsychological assessment that should be admitted into evidence. Since this case has important implications for the practice of clinical neuropsychology in the United States, this 'Motion to Exclude' and its rationale are presented, which demonstrates how the legal profession uses neuropsychological literature. The critical issues of this argument for clinical neuropsychological practice are reviewed.

摘要

辩护律师将《临床神经心理学档案》(ACN)最近发表的两篇文章作为核心论据,称只有以哈尔斯特德-雷坦成套测验(HRB)为代表的“固定”成套测验方法符合达伯特证据可采性标准;因此,HRB是唯一应被采纳为证据的法医神经心理学评估方法。鉴于此案例对美国临床神经心理学实践具有重要意义,现展示这份“排除动议”及其基本原理,以说明法律界如何运用神经心理学文献。本文还对这一针对临床神经心理学实践的论据中的关键问题进行了审视。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验