Dr. Pierre is Chief, Hospital Psychiatry Division, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, and Health Sciences Clinical Professor, Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2019 Jun;47(2):171-179. doi: 10.29158/JAAPL.003833-19. Epub 2019 Apr 15.
In both clinical and forensic psychiatry, it can often be difficult to distinguish delusions from normal beliefs. The categorical approach of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) leaves few options to describe intermediate delusion-like beliefs (DLBs). Neurocognitive models offer an alternative view of DLBs as existing on a continuum that can be quantified based on dimensions of severity as well as underlying cognitive biases. The Internet provides broadened access to putative evidence for diverse beliefs, with filter bubbles and echo chambers that can amplify confirmation bias and strengthen conviction. It is therefore much easier now for fringe beliefs to be shared and much less clear when they should be considered delusional. To place DLBs into a forensically relevant framework, psychiatric expert witnesses should adopt a broad biopsychosocial understanding of belief formation and maintenance that integrates clinical expertise with knowledge about dimensional aspects of delusions, cognitive biases, and the processing of online misinformation. The unavoidable conclusion that normal thinking is replete with cognitive biases and misbeliefs challenges the legal concept of that forms the foundation of a retributivist American justice system.
在临床和法医精神病学中,通常很难将妄想与正常信念区分开来。《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》(DSM)的分类方法几乎没有选择余地来描述中间的妄想样信念(DLB)。神经认知模型提供了一种替代观点,认为 DLB 存在于一个连续体中,可以根据严重程度和潜在认知偏差的维度进行量化。互联网为各种信念提供了更广泛的证据,过滤气泡和回音室会放大确认偏差并增强信念。因此,现在边缘信念更容易被分享,而当它们应该被视为妄想时,就不那么清楚了。为了将 DLB 置于法医相关框架中,精神病学专家证人应该采用广泛的生物心理社会信念形成和维持理解,将临床专业知识与关于妄想、认知偏差和在线错误信息处理的维度方面的知识相结合。正常思维充满认知偏差和错误信念的不可避免的结论,挑战了构成美国报应式司法系统基础的法律概念。