用户名: 密码: 验证码:
A motion to exclude and the ‘fixed’ versus ‘flexible’ battery in ‘forensic’ neuropsychology: Challenges to the practice of clinical neuropsychology
详细信息查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
摘要
Two recent publications in Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology (ACN) have been used by defense attorneys as the centerpiece for an argument that only a ‘fixed’ battery approach, exemplified by the Halstead–Reitan battery (HRB), satisfies the Daubert criteria for admissibility; and therefore, the HRB represents the only method of forensic neuropsychological assessment that should be admitted into evidence. Since this case has important implications for the practice of clinical neuropsychology in the United States, this ‘Motion to Exclude’ and its rationale are presented, which demonstrates how the legal profession uses neuropsychological literature. The critical issues of this argument for clinical neuropsychological practice are reviewed.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700