Sunday, January 18, 2015

Article: Shorter, better, faster, free: Blogging changes the nature of academic research, not just how it is communicated

Many of the reasons I blog are summarized in this excellent piece.

Shorter, better, faster, free: Blogging changes the nature of academic research, not just how it is communicated
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/12/28/shorter-better-faster-free/

Sent via Flipboard, your personal magazine.
Get it for free to keep up with the news you care about.



Sunday, January 11, 2015

AAIDD "The Death Penalty and Intellectual Disability: A Guide" Press release

The staff from AAIDD gave me permission to post a copy of the official AAIDD press release about the new publication on ID and the death penalty (Atkins cases).  A PDF copy of the release can be found here.


Friday, January 9, 2015

New and redesigned ISIR (International Society for Intelligence Research) web page!


It had been a while since I visited the ISIR web page.  I checked today and see that it has been completely redesigned.  It is AWESOME.  For those serious about human intelligence research, ISIR is THE professional organization one needs to join.  I have attended a couple of their conferences and they are top notch.  I hope to attend the 2015 conference in Sept.

New challenge awaits Georgia’s death-sentence standard

http://shar.es/1HRTv7

When Robert Wayne Holsey was put to death in Georgia recently, it marked yet the latest occasion when top appellate courts declined to consider the state's strict burden of proof for capital defendants seeking to be spared execution based on "intellectual disability.

This message was sent using ShareThis (http://wblogww.sharethis.com)

Thursday, January 8, 2015

AAIDD's "Intellectual Disability and the Death Penalty: A Guide" now available!



The AAIDD ID and death penalty guide is now available at the AAIDD webpage!  Although the title is focused on the death penalty and ID (Atkins cases), having written two of the chapters (Flynn effect; Intellectual functioning), I believe all professionals in the field of psychological, assessment and ID should have this reference book--it presents recommendations for ID practice that go well beyond the official AAIDD classification book (the Green book) and are relevant to ID assessment practices in general.

Description of the guide at the AAIDD webpage.

  • In the 2002 landmark decision Atkins v. Virginia 536 U.S. 304, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that executing a person with intellectual disability is a violation of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment,” but left states to determine their own criteria for intellectual disability. AAIDD has always advocated against the death penalty for people with intellectual disability and has long provided amicus curiae briefs in Supreme Court cases. Thus, in this comprehensive new book published by AAIDD, notable authors in the field of intellectual disability discuss all aspects of the issues, with a particular focus on foundational considerations, assessment factors and issues, and professional concerns in Atkins assessments.

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Dr. Kevin McGrew 2015 presentations/workshops as of 1-7-15

FYI.  The blogmaster (Dr. Kevin "IQ" McGrew; aka the Time Doc) has a number of scheduled conference/workshop presentations scheduled for the first part of 2015.  This list is up-to-date as of 1-7-15.  This document, which can be downloaded by clicking here, will be updated when necessary.  These different presentations deal with developments in the CHC model of intelligence or the new WJ IV battery.  Additional information can be found at the MindHub.




Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Happy new year from the blogmaster



*************************************
Kevin McGrew, PhD.
Educational Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics
www.themindhub.com
**************************************


Sunday, December 21, 2014

"Applications of Neuroscience in Criminal Law: Legal and Methodological Issues" [feedly]



----
"Applications of Neuroscience in Criminal Law: Legal and Methodological Issues"
// Neuroethics & Law Blog

Recently published in SSRN (and forthcoming in Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, Vol. 15, Pg. 513 (2015)): "Applications of Neuroscience in Criminal Law: Legal and Methodological Issues" JOHN B. MEIXNER, Northwestern University The use of neuroscience in criminal law applications...
----

Shared via my feedly reader



Sharing Borderline Intellectual Functioning: A Systematic Literature Review via BrowZine

Borderline Intellectual Functioning: A Systematic Literature Review
Peltopuro, Minna; Ahonen, Timo; Kaartinen, Jukka; Seppälä, Heikki; Närhi, Vesa
Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Vol. 52 Issue 6 – 2014: 419 - 443

10.1352/1934-9556-52.6.419

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.aaiddjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1352/1934-9556-52.6.419

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.aaiddjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1352/1934-9556-52.6.419

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Saturday, December 6, 2014

Supreme Court Takes Case on Evidence of Intellectual Disability [feedly]



----
Supreme Court Takes Case on Evidence of Intellectual Disability
// Crime and Consequences Blog

Kevan Brumfield murdered Police Corporal Betty Smothers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana in 1993.  He went on trial in 1995.  Six years earlier the Supreme Court decided in Penry v. Lynaugh that mental retardation (now called intellectual disability) is a mitigating factor that the jury must be allowed to consider but not a categorical exclusion.  Brumfield's lawyers put on no evidence of retardation, instead arguing other factors as mitigation, and he was sentenced to death.

Seven years after the trial, the Supreme Court decided in Atkins v. Virginia that retardation would be a categorical exclusion after all.  The high court did not apologize for its flip-flop.  On state collateral review, the trial judge denied the petition on the basis of the trial record.

What to do on federal habeas?  The deference standard of 28 U.S.C. §2254(d) allows a federal court to grant relief despite a state court's denial on the merits if the state court's "adjudication of the claim ... (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding." 

But what if the argument is that the state court's unreasonableness was in not allowing evidence, rather than assessment of evidence?  Can a rule to deal with that issue be crafted without opening the door to federal micromanagement of state collateral review or the wholesale relitigation that the AEDPA reforms were enacted to prevent?
And was the state court unreasonable in this case?  Brumfield's attorneys tell the Supreme Court, "defense counsel had no reason to argue mental retardation, particularly given that the trial took place before Atkins ...."  Nonsense.  Penry was the law at the time of trial, they had the right to put on mental retardation evidence as a mitigating circumstance, and retardation is a powerful mitigator.  (If it isn't, then Atkins was wrongly decided.)  There is language in some Supreme Court cases to the effect that retardation evidence can sometimes be a "two-edged sword," but it's hard to see that in this case.  Retardation is surely a more powerful mitigator than the stuff he was arguing.  From the certiorari petition for Brumfield:

Dr. Bolter concluded that, as a child, Petitioner appeared to have a conduct disorder, educational problems, and attention deficit disorder, and, as an adult, had more of an antisocial or sociopathic personality, continued attention difficulty, and a rapid rate of forgetting. See Pet. App. 122a-23a. Dr. Guin concluded that Brumfield's childhood was "very chaotic, [and] very complicated" and he had a non-supportive environment at home. See Pet. App. 124a.
Trial counsel passed on the powerful mitigator of retardation to avoid undercutting his "mitigating" evidence of "antisocial or sociopathic personality"?  Come off it.  Sociopathy is aggravating!

Even so, Atkins is different from Penry, and state collateral review courts should allow evidence of retardation in pre-Atkins cases when a sufficient preliminary showing of a substantial Atkins claim has been made, regardless of whether any retardation evidence was introduced at trial.  What to do when they do not?

Congress wasn't thinking about this situation when it enacted AEDPA.  It will take some doing to craft an acceptable answer and fit it into the statutory language.

The Supreme Court took up the case today in Brumfield v. Cain, No. 13-1433.

----

Shared via my feedly reader



Friday, December 5, 2014

SCOTUS grants cert for another Atkins case: Brumfield v Cain




Today SCOTUS  granted cert. for Brumfield v. Cain, an Atkins related death penalty case.  More information can be found at this link
                                                    
Issue: (1) Whether a state court that considers the evidence presented at a petitioner’s penalty phase proceeding as determinative of the petitioner’s claim of mental retardation under Atkins v. Virginia has based its decision on an unreasonable determination of facts under 28 U.S.C. § 2254( (2); and (2) whether a state court that denies funding to an indigent petitioner who has no other means of obtaining evidence of his mental retardation has denied petitioner his “opportunity to be heard,” contrary to Atkins and Ford v. Wainwright and his constitutional right to be provided with the
“basic tools” for an adequate defense, contrary to Ake v. Oklahoma.

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Sharing The magical numbers 7 and 4 are resistant to the Flynn effect: No evidence for increases in forward or backward recall across 85 years of data via BrowZine

The magical numbers 7 and 4 are resistant to the Flynn effect: No evidence for increases in forward or backward recall across 85 years of data
Gignac, Gilles E.
Intelligence, Vol. 48 – 2015: 85 - 95

10.1016/j.intell.2014.11.001

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001512

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001512

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Monday, November 10, 2014

The Death Penalty in the U.S. Military [feedly]



----
The Death Penalty in the U.S. Military
// Death Penalty Information Center

The U.S. military has its own laws and court system separate from those of the states and the federal government. Although the military justice system allows the death penalty, no executions have been carried out in over 50 years. The last execution was the hanging on April 13, 1961 of U.S. Army Private John Bennett for rape and attempted murder. The military death penalty law was struck down in 1983 but was reinstated in 1984 with new rules detailing the aggravating circumstances that make a case death-eligible. Only about one-third of the capital cases tried under this law resulted in a death sentence. As of 1997, military law allows for an alternative sentence of life without parole. Six men are currently on the military death row, which is housed in the disciplinary barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. The President has the power to commute any military death sentence. A 2012 study indicated that defendants of color in the military were twice as likely to be sentenced to death as white defendants.

(DPIC, November 10, 2014). See U.S. Military and Race.

  • 196 reads

----

Shared via my feedly reader



Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Neurolaw Conference at Swansea University, December 11-12 [feedly]


Neurolaw Conference at Swansea University, December 11-12
// Neuroethics & Law Blog

Via this link: Minds Brains and Law A Multidisciplinary Conference on Law and Neuroscience The Abbey, Swansea University 11-12th December 2014 Developments in neuroscience, and in particular the ability of neuroscientific technologies to probe the depths of mind and brain,...
----

Shared via my feedly reader



Friday, October 3, 2014

Sharing Using a prison sample to assess the association between the general factor of personality and general intelligence via BrowZine

Using a prison sample to assess the association between the general factor of personality and general intelligence
Dunkel, Curtis S.; van der Linden, Dimitri; Beaver, Kevin M.; Woodley, Michael A.
Intelligence, Vol. 47 – 2014: 72 - 82

10.1016/j.intell.2014.09.003

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001317

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001317

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.


******************************************************
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist
Director, Institute for Applied Psychometrics
IAP
www.themindhub.com
******************************************************

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Georgia Judge Would Allow Execution of Intellectually Disabled Man, But Calls for Higher Court Review [feedly]



----
Georgia Judge Would Allow Execution of Intellectually Disabled Man, But Calls for Higher Court Review
// Death Penalty Information Center

A county judge in Georgia denied relief for Warren Hill, a death row inmate whose diagnosed intellectual disabilities have failed to meet the state's narrow standard for exemption from the death penalty. However, the judge encouraged the state Supreme Court to consider whether a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Hall v. Florida, should require Georgia to modify its standard. Chief Judge Thomas Wilson of Butts County said, "In light of the severity of the penalty in this case, this Court hopes that, in reviewing [Mr. Hill's] application to appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court will fully consider any potential application of Hall v. Florida to [his] case." In Hall v. Florida, the Supreme Court directed Florida to broaden its interpretation of intellectual disability. Florida refused to spare an inmate whose IQ was just one point above their cutoff. Similarly, Georgia has the narrowest standard of proof for intellectual disability in the entire country, requiring defendants to prove their disability beyond a reasonable doubt. Brian Kammer, an attorney for Hill, said,"Mr. Hill should not be eligible for execution in a nation which does not execute persons with intellectual disability, and he would not be eligible for execution in any other jurisdiction in the nation."

The victim's family in Hill's case has also said that they do not support his execution. Several jurors from his trial have said that they would have recommended a sentence of life without parole if it had been an option at the time. National and state organizations focusing on intellectual disabilities have supported Hill's claim. President Jimmy Carter and Rosalyn Carter have called for a commutation of Mr. Hill's death sentence to life without parole. Additionally, the American Bar Association, the ACLU, and the Council of Europe have all called for sparing Hill's life.

(Hill v. Chatman, Order, September 29, 2014; E. Jacobson (Executive Director of the Georgia Council on Developmental Disabilities), "The Supreme Court Must Stop the Execution of Warren Hill," Huffington Post, February 11, 2013). See Intellectual Disability and Supreme Court.

  • 56 reads

----

Shared via my feedly reader



Monday, September 8, 2014

Sharing The Legitimacy of the US Supreme Court: Conventional Wisdoms and Recent Challenges Thereto via BrowZine

The Legitimacy of the US Supreme Court: Conventional Wisdoms and Recent Challenges Thereto
Gibson, James L.; Nelson, Michael J.
Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Vol. 10 Issue 1 – 2014: 140906191720007

10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110413-030546

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110413-030546

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110413-030546

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

FYI. The MindHub web portal has been updated

I finally got around to updating the MindHub web portal. There is new information under most major categories. Enjoy.

http://themindhub.com/

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Sharing Comparisons of Five Performance Validity Indices in Bona Fide and Simulated Traumatic Brain Injury via BrowZine

More malingering measurement research.

Comparisons of Five Performance Validity Indices in Bona Fide and Simulated Traumatic Brain Injury
Bashem, Jesse R.; Rapport, Lisa J.; Miller, Justin B.; Hanks, Robin A.; Axelrod, Bradley N.; Millis, Scott R.
The Clinical Neuropsychologist, Vol. 28 Issue 5 – 2014: 851 - 875

10.1080/13854046.2014.927927

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2014.927927

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2014.927927

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Sharing Are Verbal Intelligence Subtests and Reading Measures Immune to Non-Credible Effort? via BrowZine

File under malingering.

Are Verbal Intelligence Subtests and Reading Measures Immune to Non-Credible Effort?
Sawyer, R. John; Young, J. Christopher; Roper, Brad L.; Rach, Amanda
The Clinical Neuropsychologist, Vol. 28 Issue 5 – 2014: 756 - 770

10.1080/13854046.2014.920922

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2014.920922

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2014.920922

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Sharing One-Week Practice Effects in Older Adults: Tools for Assessing Cognitive Change via BrowZine

One-Week Practice Effects in Older Adults: Tools for Assessing Cognitive Change
Duff, Kevin
The Clinical Neuropsychologist, Vol. 28 Issue 5 – 2014: 714 - 725

10.1080/13854046.2014.920923

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2014.920923

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13854046.2014.920923

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.