The Competency Assessment Instrument (CAI) is a widely used testing device whose reliability and validity have not been firmly established. Performing well on the CAI is thought to depend heavily on the cognitive/conceptual abilities of the criminal defendants being assessed. / Correspondingly, tests of concept formation are presumed to inform clinicians about the kinds of cognitive processes available to examinees (e.g., abstract concrete thinking, symbolic thinking, and step-shifting), as well as the upper levels of conceptualization achievable by examinees. Information about these cognitive processes is of central interest to legal authorities attempting to determine competency to stand trial, especially in light of modern legal doctrine, which, following the so-called "Dusky" standard, requires that a person charged with a crime be able to understand, i.e. conceptualize, the proceedings and assist counsel rationally if he or she is to be considered competent to stand trial. / In this study, the validity of the CAI and the role of understanding and concept formation as they relate to competency to stand trail were examined. Fifty judicially determined incompetent inpatients at a state forensic hospital were evaluated using the CAI at their treatment wards. The patients then participated in a mock trial procedure during which they were rated globally, pass of fail, on their competency by three mock trial officials and were simultaneously evaluated by two independent raters using the CAI. Further, following initial assessment with the CAI at the treatment units, subjects were evaluated for their ability to form concepts by means of five commonly administered tests of concept formation and were assessed with behavioral ratings of their concept attainment during mock trial. / Comparisons were made between the CAI scores, the test scores and behavioral measures of concept attainment at mock trial. The degree of influence of conceptual ability and the other non-conceptual factors on whether patients passed or failed mock trail was calculated. The relationship of conceptual vs. non-conceptual factors and the role of the CAI in making competency decisions are discussed. Recommendations for future research are offered. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 50-08, Section: B, page: 3675. / Major Professor: Richard L. Hagen. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1989.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_78058 |
| Contributors | Gannon, John L., Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text |
| Format | 134 p. |
| Rights | On campus use only. |
| Relation | Dissertation Abstracts International |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds