A proposed psychological assessment protocol for applicants to religious life in the Roman Catholic Church

This paper proposes a psychological assessment protocol for applicants to religious life in the Roman Catholic church. While most Catholic religious orders, seminaries, and dioceses require applicants to complete some type of psychological evaluation prior to entrance into seminary, there is no established standard or protocol suggested for conducting these evaluations. The current proposed assessment protocol provides those conducting or receiving these evaluations with a comprehensive foundation from which they can add or delete components to meet their specific needs. Furthermore, the utilization of a standard clergy assessment protocol creates the opportunity for the establishment of a national database useful for conducting research concerning clergy applicants

Personality expectations and perceptions of Roman Catholic clergy members

This study examined the expectations of Roman Catholic priests\u27 personality characteristics. Personality measures (i.e., Symptom Check List-90-Revised, Weinberger Adjustment Inventory, Belief in Personal Control Scale, and several authordesigned measures) were administered to 102 undergraduate students. The subjects\u27 perceptions of Roman Catholic priests\u27 personality traits were examined by having the subjects complete the Personality Adjective Checklist (PACL) describing a typical Roman Catholic priest. These scores were compared to PACL scores from 12 successful applicants to the priesthood. Findings suggest that subjects tend to view Roman Catholic priests stereotypically as authority figures and that Catholic subjects view priests more positively than do non-Catholic subjects

The Impact of Forensic vs. Social-Science Evidence on Judicial Decisions to Grant a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Wrongful conviction is a serious dilemma for the criminal-justice system. A joint investigation by the Better Government Association and the Center on Wrongful Convictions tracked exonerations from 1989 through 2010 and identified 85 people who were wrongfully incarcerated.1 Not only were those 85 lives unfairly affected in serious ways due to the incarceration, but the actual perpetrators continued on crime sprees that went on to include 14 murders, 11 sexual assaults, 10 kidnappings, and at least 62 other felonies.2 The reversal of false convictions is becoming more frequent.3 However, scholars have asserted that the exonerations that do occur are probably a small fraction of actual wrongful convictions. Gross and colleagues pointed out that “[o]ur legal system places great weight on the finality of criminal convictions. Courts and prosecutors are exceedingly reluctant to reverse judgments or reconsider closed cases; when they do—and it’s rare—it’s usually because of a compelling showing of error.”4 Therefore, in order for a wrongful conviction to be overturned, these cases must undergo a lengthy appeals process

Reliability and validity of the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire

This study investigates the reliability and validity of the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire (SCSORF). The SCSORF and religiosity measures (i.e., Age Universal Religious Orientation Survey, Religious Life Inventory, and the God Control measure from the Belief in Personal Control Scale) were administered to three samples. Results suggest that the SCSORF is both reliable and valid

The Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire

This article introduces the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire (SCSORF) and provides preliminary information on the instrument. The SCSORF is a quick, easy to administer and score, 10-item scale assessing strength of religious faith. The SCSORF and personality and mood measures (i.e., Symptom Check List-90-Revised, Weinberger Adjustment Inventory, Belief in Personal Control Scale, and several author-designed questions) were administered to 102 undergraduate students. Preliminary findings suggest that the SCSORF is both reliable and valid. Furthermore, significant correlations between strength of religious faith, self-esteem, interpersonal sensitivity, adaptive coping, and hope correspond with previous research, suggesting that mental health benefits are associated with strong religious faith. Implications for future research are also discussed

Is There an Allegiance Effect for Assessment Instruments? Actuarial Risk Assessment as an Exemplar

The Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1993), the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1998), and the Static-99 (Hanson & Thornton, 1999) are three well-researched risk measures. All three instruments were good predictors of recidivism (r = .31). However, these effect sizes were significantly larger in studies conducted by the instruments\u27 authors (r = .37) than in studies conducted by independent researchers (r = .28). This allegiance effect remained significant even when the initial validation studies were excluded. No other design or sample characteristics were significant moderators of the relation between scores and recidivism. These findings raise questions about whether such an allegiance effect may be found for other measures

Rediversion in Two Postbooking Jail Diversion Programs in Florida

OBJECTIVE: Patterns of rediversion in two postbooking jail diversion programs in Florida were examined to better understand the extent to which diversion programs served repeating clients. Rediversion occurs when a former or current diversion program participant is booked into jail on a new charge and diverted once again through the same diversion program. METHODS: Data from 18 months of consecutive entries into the Hillsborough County jail diversion program (N=336) and Broward County mental health court (N=800) were examined. RESULTS: Similar rediversion patterns were observed for the two diversion programs. About one-fifth of those who were diverted during the 18-month study period were rediverted at least once. Nearly half of those who experienced rediversion did so within 90 days of their initial diversion. Although fewer than 6 percent were rediverted two or more times, these individuals accounted for a disproportionately large number of overall diversions and were rediverted more quickly than those with only one rediversion. CONCLUSIONS: The diversion programs examined here appear to be experiencing a level of repeating clients similar to that observed in other pathways for accessing mental health treatment

The Impact of Forensic vs. Social-Science Evidence on Judicial Decisions to Grant a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Wrongful conviction is a serious dilemma for the criminal-justice system. A joint investigation by the Better Government Association and the Center on Wrongful Convictions tracked exonerations from 1989 through 2010 and identified 85 people who were wrongfully incarcerated.1 Not only were those 85 lives unfairly affected in serious ways due to the incarceration, but the actual perpetrators continued on crime sprees that went on to include 14 murders, 11 sexual assaults, 10 kidnappings, and at least 62 other felonies.2 The reversal of false convictions is becoming more frequent.3 However, scholars have asserted that the exonerations that do occur are probably a small fraction of actual wrongful convictions. Gross and colleagues pointed out that “[o]ur legal system places great weight on the finality of criminal convictions. Courts and prosecutors are exceedingly reluctant to reverse judgments or reconsider closed cases; when they do—and it’s rare—it’s usually because of a compelling showing of error.”4 Therefore, in order for a wrongful conviction to be overturned, these cases must undergo a lengthy appeals process

Does interrater (dis)agreement on psychopathy checklist scores in sexually violent predator trials suggest partisan allegiance in forensic evaluation

Abstract Many studies reveal strong interrater agreement for Hare's Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) when used by trained raters in research contexts. However, no systematic research has examined agreement between PCL-R scores from independent clinicians who are retained by opposing sides in adversarial legal proceedings. We reviewed all 43 sexual-offender civil-commitment trials in one state and identified 23 cases in which opposing evaluators reported PCL-R total scores for the same individual. Differences between scores from opposing evaluators were usually in a direction that supported the party who retained their services. These score differences were greater in size than would be expected based on the instrument's standard error of measurement or the rater agreement values reported in previous PCL-R research. The intraclass correlation for absolute agreement for the PCL-R Total score from a single rater (ICC 1,A = .39) was well below levels of agreement observed for the PCL-R in research contexts, and below published test-retest values for the PCL-R. Results raise concerns about the potential for a forensic evaluator's ''partisan allegiance'' to influence PCL-R scores in adversarial proceedings