Public Policy Center, University of Nebraska


Date of this Version

October 2000


Published in Behavioral Sciences and the Law 18 (2000), p. 691. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Used by permission.


Th is is the second “Current Directions” issue published in Behavioral Sciences and the Law. Our Current Directions issues are not themed issues, but rather they are a collection of current research reports, special perspectives, and other publications. In this issue of Current Directions, there are five traditional research report/special perspective articles:
• Frederick, “Mixed Group Validation: A Method to Address the Limitations of Criterion Group Validation in Research on Malingering Detection”
• Cooper & Hall, “Reaction of Mock Jurors to Testimony of a Court Appointed Expert”
• Cascardi, Poythress, & Hall, “Procedural Justice in the Context of Civil Commitment: An Analogue Study”
• Cauffinan & Steinberg, “(Im)maturity of Judgment in Adolescence: Why Adolescents May be Less Culpable than Adults”
• Mossman, “The Meaning of Malingering Data: Further Application of Hayes’s Theorem”

There also are two reviews of forensic risk assessment manuals produced by forensic clinicians from the Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute of Simon Fraser University (HCR-20: Assessing Risk for Violence, Version 2, and The Manual for the SVR- 20). Dr. Douglas Mossman, an academic forensic psychiatrist, and Dr. Phillip Witt, a practitioner forensic psychologist, examined the risk assessment tools.

Included in

Public Policy Commons