You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The Clinical Assessment in the Legal Field: An Empirical Study of Bias and Limitations in Forensic Expertise
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01831 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonio Iudici, Alessandro Salvini, Elena Faccio, Gianluca Castelnuovo |
| Abstract |
According to the literature, psychological assessment in forensic contexts is one of the most controversial application areas for clinical psychology. This paper presents a review of systematic judgment errors in the forensic field. Forty-six psychological reports written by psychologists, court consultants, have been analyzed with content analysis to identify typical judgment errors related to the following areas: (a) distortions in the attribution of causality, (b) inferential errors, and (c) epistemological inconsistencies. Results indicated that systematic errors of judgment, usually referred also as "the man in the street," are widely present in the forensic evaluations of specialist consultants. Clinical and practical implications are taken into account. This article could lead to significant benefits for clinical psychologists who want to deal with this sensitive issue and are interested in improving the quality of their contribution to the justice system. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 3 | 33% |
| Philippines | 1 | 11% |
| Spain | 1 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 44% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 53 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 19 | 35% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2020.
All research outputs
#5,899,787
of 23,785,843 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,472
of 31,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,602
of 391,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#151
of 460 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,785,843 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,715 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 391,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 460 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.