~STATEMENT OF RESEARCH INTERESTS~

I have established a programmatic line of clinical research that examines mental health issues, personality characteristics, and decision-making capabilities of delinquent youths. I am especially interested in psychological constructs relevant to juvenile forensic assessment in general, and juvenile transfers to adult court in particular. My research has focused on empirically examining constructs from the domains of risk/dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, treatment amenability, psychopathy, and decision-making. I have also been integrally involved in research projects examining the etiology and treatment of serious behavioral disorders in children. Throughout my training at the University of Alabama I have been continuously involved in data collection, statistical analysis, and manuscript and presentation preparation. Details of my primary research projects are delineated below.

~Juvenile Transfers to Adult Court: A Need for Well Defined Psychological Constructs~

In response to historically higher rates of juvenile delinquency and keen pessimism regarding the effectiveness of the rehabilitative nature of the juvenile system, legal provisions for juvenile transfer to adult court have significantly changed. These changes have provided more avenues for youths to be charged and retained in the adult criminal system. Criteria from the landmark case Kent v. U. S. (1966) research have been distilled to three major domains: dangerousness/risk, sophistication-maturity, and treatment amenability. Forensic professionals are frequently called upon to provide expert opinions in transfer cases. Therefore, the empirical refinement of the psychological constructs that may guide transfer decisions is vital.  

I conducted a study that examined the construct validity of the Risk, Sophistication, and Treatment Inventory (RST-I) as it relates to clinical constructs. This study also investigated group differences between transferred and non-transferred youths based on their RST-I, psychopathy, and reactive/proactive aggression scores. Finally, we assessed the criterion validity of these construct in predicting transfers to adult court.

The RST-I was significantly related to psychopathy, reactive/proactive aggression, treatment compliance, and transfer to adult court. These results provide preliminary empirical support of the RST-I in relation to theoretically related clinical constructs and transfer decisions. The major clinical and legal implications of this research project indicate the need for comprehensive, case-by-case examinations of youths considered for transfer to adult court. There is also a need for continued research on empirically-rooted assessment tools for juveniles being considered for transfer to adult court, to assist clinical and legal professionals in making prudent legal decisions and facilitates treatment planning. This paper published in the International Journal of Forensic Mental Health.

~Relations Among Age, Decision-Making, and Context Processing~

Influential legal decisions have provided more ways for youth to be sentenced in criminal court, diminishing historical rationales behind the preservation of a separate juvenile court (i.e., that youth lack criminal intent). Steinberg has outlined a paradigm proposing that adult criminal culpability should be mitigated  by the developmental immaturity evident in adolescence (Scott & Steinberg, 2003; Steinberg & Cauffman, 2001). One of these mitigating factors is poor decision-making.             The decision-making abilities of adolescents and adults have been compared in a variety of contexts (Beyth-Marom et al., 1993; Cauffman & Steinberg, 2003). Some studies found that adults and adolescents are equally able to identify consequences of behaviors while other research has found that adolescents are less able decision-makers. To clarify these mixed results, researchers have begun to use computer tasks that target processing in the prefrontal cortex. Diamond and Goldman-Rakic (1989) suggest that the prefrontal cortex is linked with tasks requiring individuals to override previously automatic, reinforced responses by using context information in determining the appropriate, less dominant response. Based on this research, Cohen & Servan-Schreiber (1992) developed a context processing paradigm. Context processing occurs when an individual is able to maintain a mental representation of task relevant information, which in turn acts to mediate the correct response. In other words, context information is similar to mental representations of goal related information that individuals use when deciding whether to engage in or inhibit behaviors. The context processing paradigm is a useful way to study the degree to which individuals consider context information associated with decision-making. Context processing is also theoretically linked to three important decision-making constructs: (a) self-reflection and self-regulation (i.e., sophistication-maturity), (b) identification of consequences (i.e., risk perception) and, (c) consideration of long-term consequences (i.e., future orientation).

For my dissertation, I am conducting a study that examines the mediating influence of context processing on the relation between age and decision-making. Participants will be community and detained youths, and adult offenders. It is expected that context processing will mediate the relation between age and decision-making abilities (i.e., risk perception, future orientation, and sophistication-maturity). This study will also examine the relation between context processing abilities and short-term memory. Previous research has found that these abilities are distinct (Cohen et al., 1999). It is expected that context processing will be differentiated from short-term memory for all participant groups.

It is likely that research on context processing will be essential to understanding the multiple cognitive deficits apparent in adolescence and how cognitive deficits may relate to adolescent culpability. Juvenile crime and culpability is a research area that has received significant media and public policy attention in recent years. The proposed study is unique in that experimental methods are being incorporated into an area that has primarily used self-report measures. It is expected that this methodology will clarify some of the previously inconsistent findings in this field. My dissertation is funded by an F31 National Research Service Award from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Mental Health. This training grant has allowed me to collaborate with nationally recognized researchers in the areas of cognitive, neuropsychology, and child forensic psychology as part of this project. 

~Psychopathy and Antisocial Conduct~

Over the past twenty years, questions about the relation between psychopathy and risk for future antisocial conduct have sparked a great deal of empirical research, theoretical controversies, and animated debates. The breadth and diversity of this literature makes it difficult to resolve these issues either with single empirical studies or with narrative reviews. I therefore conducted a meta-analysis to synthesize research that relates psychopathy to recidivism and institutional infractions. This meta-analysis also tested the moderating influence of contextual variables related to sample generalizability and assessment methodology on the relation between psychopathy and antisocial conduct.

One hundred studies were included in the current analysis with a resulting sample of 95 non-overlapping samples that assessed a total of 15,826 participants. Psychopathy scores were moderately associated with increased recidivism or institutional infractions, and the magnitudes of these effect sizes were qualified by several moderator variables. Psychopathy was less predictive of antisocial conduct at shorter follow-up periods and in samples with increasing proportions of male, Non-White, and detained participants. These results may be explained by the role of stereotypes in the documentation of antisocial conduct. Research on stereotypes has repeatedly found that expectations about a social group influence the way that others interpret the behaviors of people in that group (e.g., Darley & Gross, 1983). Therefore, expectations about which groups may be more likely to engage in criminal behaviors can bias the interpretation of behaviors performed by members of those groups. People have commonly perceived men as more likely to commit crimes than women, Blacks as more likely to commit crimes than Whites, and those already incarcerated as more likely to commit crimes than those who are not. The determination of whether an individual has committed an offense may therefore be influenced by both their actions and these stereotypes. Stereotypes would therefore act as an additional source of variability in the measurement of recidivism and institutional infractions for groups expected to be criminal, reducing the predictive ability of psychopathy for these groups. Predicting recidivism or institutional maladjustment has significant implications for balancing personal freedoms with community safety. This study highlights that evaluators should consider the totality of individual and contextual variables when making predictions about antisocial conduct.

~Additional Research Skills~

To enhance my research skills, I am learning unique statistical techniques including meta-analysis, longitudinal analysis, and advanced regression analysis. By coordinating an online statistical consulting service (www.stat-help.com), I have sharpened my statistical savvy while simultaneously helping others refine their own skills. I have also learned to program in Eprime, a software tool for designing psychological experiments.

~Future Research~

I am fascinated by the mutually shaping implications of adolescent development, assessment, and treatment. My future areas of interest include (a) applying cognitive paradigms to assess and to influence treatment receptivity and (b) examining how psychopathy, risk, and maturity affect treatment compliance and outcomes in youths. I am eager to continue my line of research as I pursue an academic research position.