Skip Navigation


Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Advance Access originally published online on September 23, 2009
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 2009 24(7):635-646; doi:10.1093/arclin/acp062
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/7/635    most recent
acp062v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morel, K. R.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Morel, K. R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Test Security in Medicolegal Cases: Proposed Guidelines for Attorneys Utilizing Neuropsychology Practice

Kenneth R. Morel*

VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, South Nashville, TN, USA

* Corresponding author at: VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, 1310 24th Avenue, South Nashville, TN 37212, USA. Tel.: +1-615-873-7408. Fax: +1-615-873-8281. E-mail address: k_morel{at}yahoo.com (K.R. Morel).


   Abstract

In the context of forensic neuropsychological assessments, the professional interaction of law and psychology is viewed primarily as one where the retaining attorney or court dictates its needs to psychologists when resolving legal disputes. While this perspective is conceptually accurate, the positive and practical collaboration of law and psychology also relies on attorneys adhering to basic protections of sensitive psychological assessment procedures and tests. Objective testing is undermined when a practitioner of law engages in actions prior to, during, or following a neuropsychological examination in a manner that threatens the test security. An appreciation among practitioners of law and psychology regarding the necessity of test security is essential. This article reviews attorney actions that can affect test security, proposes a distinction by psychology between appropriate and problematic client preparation for a neuropsychological examination, integrates the available legal precedent regarding test security, and suggests productive measures to protect test security in medicolegal settings.

Keywords Test security; Neuropsychological assessment; Medicolegal; Attorney coaching; Guidelines

Accepted: August 17, 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.