Cooper Virginia G, Zapf Patricia A
Law Hum Behav. 2008 Oct;32(5):390-405. doi: 10.1007/s10979-007-9099-3. Epub 2007 Aug 3.
Seventy-five psychiatric inpatients were evaluated with respect to their Miranda-related abilities using Grisso's (1998, Instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press) instruments and Goldstein's (2002, Revised instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights) revision to determine: whether different versions of Miranda warnings translate into differences in understanding; the influence of psychiatric symptoms, diagnostic categories, and IQ upon Miranda comprehension; and the relative performance of persons with psychiatric impairment on Miranda-relevant abilities. Results indicated that although the Miranda language used in Goldstein's revision generally showed lower grade reading levels and higher reading ease scores than Grisso's original instruments, this did not translate into improved understanding. In addition, psychiatric symptoms were negatively correlated with Miranda comprehension, even after controlling for IQ. Finally, results revealed that psychiatric patients' understanding and appreciation was substantially impaired compared to Grisso's adult validation samples, and was roughly comparable to Grisso's juvenile validation sample. Implications of these results for policy reform are discussed.
使用格里索(1998年,《评估对米兰达权利的理解和认知的工具》。佛罗里达州萨拉索塔:专业资源出版社)的工具以及戈尔茨坦(2002年,《评估对米兰达权利的理解和认知的修订工具》)的修订版,对75名精神病住院患者的米兰达相关能力进行了评估,以确定:不同版本的米兰达警告是否会转化为理解上的差异;精神症状、诊断类别和智商对米兰达理解的影响;以及有精神障碍者在米兰达相关能力方面的相对表现。结果表明,尽管戈尔茨坦修订版中使用的米兰达语言总体上比格里索的原始工具显示出更低的年级阅读水平和更高的阅读简易度得分,但这并没有转化为理解的提高。此外,即使在控制了智商之后,精神症状与米兰达理解呈负相关。最后,结果显示,与格里索的成人验证样本相比,精神病患者的理解和认知受到了严重损害,大致与格里索的青少年验证样本相当。讨论了这些结果对政策改革的影响。