Journal
PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages 370-376Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12207-018-9328-8
Keywords
Dissociative symptoms; Symptom validity; Biases; Expert witness testimony
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Forensic psychologists are sometimes faced with the task of educating triers of fact about the evidential weight of dissociative experiences reported by claimants in litigation procedures. In their two-part essay, Brand et al. (Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 283-297, 2017a; Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 298-312, 2017b) provide advice to experts who find themselves in such situation. We argue that the Brand et al. approach is problematic and might induce confirmation bias in experts. Their approach is not well connected to the extant literature on recovered memories, dissociative amnesia, memory distortions, and symptom validity testing. In some instances, Brand et al. (Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 283-297, 2017a; Psychological Injury and Law, 10, 298-312, 2017b) simplify the current body of knowledge about dissociation; in other instances, they ignore relevant empirical studies to an extent that is worrisome.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available