Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Clin Neuropsychol. 2009 Feb;23(2):286-96. doi: 10.1080/13854040802104873.

Clinical myths of forensic neuropsychology.

Author information

  • 1Psychological Systems, Inc., Royal Oak, MI 48073, USA. mfgreiff@comcast.net

Abstract

Clinical myths and lore are unfounded beliefs that still influence practice decisions. I examine the validity of six beliefs commonly encountered in forensic neuropsychology practice: the admissibility of test batteries; avoidance of practice effects; forewarning insures good effort; average deficits in bright persons; 15% chronic impairment in mild brain injury; and examiner bias causing malingering. I show these beliefs are invalid because of material misunderstandings of case law and literature, falsification by empirical findings, and lack of authoritative sources. The benefits, costs, and persistence of clinical myths are discussed.

PMID:
18609338
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Atypon
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk