Professional Psychology: Research and Practice © 2012 American Psychological Association

2012, Vol. 43, No. 5, 410 – 421 0735-7028/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0026776

Professional Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Jorge G. Varela and Mary Alice Conroy

Sam Houston State University

The field of forensic psychology has grown immensely over the past three decades, with psychologists
involved in both the civil and criminal forensic arenas as well as other fields affiliated with the justice system,
including law enforcement and correctional agencies. This growth has necessitated the development of a
taxonomy of competencies required to practice in the forensic arena. Despite increasing specialization, there
are generalized competencies common to all practitioners and researchers in psychology that are necessary for
work in forensic psychology. In addition, there are specialty competencies that cut across the various forensic
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

psychology subspecialties and are necessary for all forensic work. In this article we briefly review the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

emergence of forensic psychology into a unique specialty within psychology as well as published literature
related to professional competencies in psychology. We present the generalized and specialty competencies of
forensic psychology as knowledge, skills, and attitudes across the six functional domains of assessment,
intervention, consultation, research, supervision-training, and management-administration.

Keywords: forensic psychology, professional competencies, generalized competencies, specialty com-

petencies

The specialty of forensic psychology exists at the convergence of field. The work of these psychologists ranges from basic science
the law and justice system with professional scientific psychology. It research to the application of psychology to specific cases in both the
has been variously defined in the literature. However, for the purposes civil and criminal arenas. Recognized subspecialties in these two
of submission to APA for specialty recognition, it was defined as: domains include child custody, civil commitment, deprivation of
parental rights, divorce, employment litigation, guardianship, personal
. . . the professional practice by psychologists within the areas of injury, testamentary capacity, workers’ compensation, juvenile court
clinical psychology, counseling psychology, neuropsychology, or
evaluations, criminal competencies, insanity, diminished capacity,
school psychology, when they are engaged regularly as experts and
represent themselves as such, in an activity primarily intended to
and criminal sentencing (Packer, 2008).
provide professional psychological expertise to the judicial system In the era of managed care and shrinking markets, general practi-
(Petition for the Recognition of a Specialty in Professional Psychol- tioners often consider forensic work as a path to expanding opportu-
ogy: Forensic Psychology, 2000, p. 1). nities. However, rightful concern has been expressed regarding clini-
cians who inadvertently stray into the realm of forensic practice but
The past two decades have witnessed a great expansion of forensic lack knowledge of the requisite competencies (Otto & Heilbrun,
psychology such that the field is beginning to develop subspecialties, 2002). A lack of specialty competencies can quickly lead to violations
with psychologists— experimental to clinical—represented in the of civil rights and unjust court actions, as well as serious embarrass-
ment to the clinician and the profession.
In the context of forensic work, the goals of the Ethical Principles
Editor’s Note. This article is one of five in this special section on of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (EPPCC; American Psycho-
Professional Competencies in Specialty Practice and Research.—MCR logical Association, 2002) and the newly approved Specialty Guide-
lines for Forensic Psychologists (SGFP; Committee on the Revision
of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology, 2011) have new
JORGE G. VARELA received his PhD in Clinical Psychology from the meanings, especially beneficence and nonmaleficence, justice, and
University of Alabama. He is currently an Assistant Professor and member
respect for people’s rights and dignity. The EPPCC addresses the
of the Doctoral Program faculty in the Department of Psychology and
Philosophy at Sam Houston State University. His research interests include
issue of competence specifically in requiring psychologists to work
multicultural diversity issues in forensic psychology as well as law en- within the bounds of their competence and seek appropriate training
forcement and military psychology. before expanding their work into new areas (see standards 2.01a &
MARY ALICE CONROY received her PhD in Clinical Psychology from the 2.01c) as well as familiarity with pertinent judicial or administrative
University of Houston and is board certified (ABPP) in Forensic Psychol- rules that govern their work (standard 2.01f). The SGFP echo these
ogy. Currently she is a professor and Director of Clinical Training for the concerns (guidelines 2.01–2.09).
Clinical Psychology Doctoral Program (forensic emphasis) in the Depart-
ment of Psychology and Philosophy at Sam Houston State University. Her
current position includes conducting forensic evaluations for the courts, as Emergence of Forensic Psychology as a Specialty in
well as teaching and publishing in the area of criminal forensic assessment. Psychology
CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING THIS ARTICLE should be addressed to Dr.
Varela, Box 2447, Department of Psychology and Philosophy, Sam Hous- The emergence of forensic psychology began in 1908 with
ton State University, Huntsville, TX 77341. E-mail: [email protected] Hugo Munsterberg’s efforts to have experimental psychology rec-

410
 COMPETENCIES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY 411

ognized as a force in the court room. Others in the first half of the the Foundational Competency Domain, (b) the Functional Com-
20th century advocated for psychology’s role in the justice system petency Domain, and (c) the Stages of Professional Development.
(e.g., Terman, 1931) and by the end of World War II psychology The Foundational Competency Domain represents the building
services were becoming common within prison environments. A blocks of professional competencies (Rodolfa et al., 2005). It
major step forward took place in 1954, when for the first time the comprises six areas: (a) reflective practice–self-assessment, (b)
U.S. Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education relied on scientific knowledge–methods, (c) relationships, (d) ethical-legal
social science evidence in a precedent setting case, demonstrating standards-policy, (e) individual-cultural diversity, and (f) interdis-
the important role behavioral science evidence can play in court- ciplinary systems. The Functional Competency Domain encom-
room proceedings. Similarly, eight years later Jenkins v. U.S. passes the various work activities of professional psychologists.
(1962) was the first case to establish that psychologists could be These include (a) assessment/diagnosis/conceptualization, (b) in-
qualified as independent witnesses with expertise on mental dis- tervention, (c) consultation, (d) research/evaluation, (e) supervi-
order. sion/training, and (f) management/administration. Lastly, the
In 1969, the American Psychology-Law Society (AP-LS) was Stages of Professional Development outline the various educa-
chartered, and in 1980, it became Division 41 of the American tional experiences and professional training activities associated
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Psychological Association. The American Board of Forensic Psy- with professional psychology and the acquisition of the competen-
chology (ABFP) was initially formed in 1976 and joined the cies associated with the first two domains, including (a) doctoral
American Board of Professional Psychology in 1985, thus creating education, (b) doctoral internship/residency, (c) postdoctoral su-
a mechanism for certifying professional forensic psychologists as pervision, (d) residency/fellowship, and (e) continuing compe-
diplomates. A separate but related organization, the American tency.
Academy of Forensic Psychology (AAFP), became the educative
arm of the organization of forensic diplomates. Training-Oriented Competency Models
A major step in establishing forensic psychology as a special-
ized discipline came with the 1995 National Invitational Confer- The National Council of Schools and Programs in Professional
ence on Education and Training in Law and Psychology. This Psychology (NCSPP) has identified seven core areas essential for
invitational gathering of 48 recognized experts in the field of law entry-level practice in psychology—relationship, assessment, in-
and psychology, sponsored by APA, AP-LS, AAFP, the Florida tervention, diversity, research/evaluation, management/supervi-
Mental Health Institute, and Villanova Law School, proved to be sion, and consultation/education— each with its own subset of
a benchmark for training and education in forensic psychology, domains (NCSPP, 2007). Further, NCSPP has identified knowl-
akin to the role the Boulder Conference played for clinical psy- edge, skills, and attitudes associated with each of these compe-
chology (Bersoff et al., 1997). tency areas across three developmental achievement levels
In 2001, forensic psychology was recognized as a specialty (DALs): begin practicum, begin internship, and complete doctoral
within the field of psychology by the Commission for the Recog- degree.
nition of Specialties and Proficiencies in Professional Psychology. The Competency Benchmarks delineated by Fouad et al. (2009)
Over the past two decades forensic psychology has mushroomed in have provided an organization of competence in clinical psychol-
terms of scholarly literature, scientific research, and professional ogy that informs graduate training. The Competency Benchmarks
practice—particularly within the courtroom. A plethora of top tier draw upon the Rodolfa et al. (2005) Cube model by incorporating
journals, including Law and Human Behavior, Behavioral Sci- the foundational and functional domains, but add professionalism
ences and the Law, Criminal Justice and Behavior, and Psychol- and advocacy (and separate teaching and supervision) as areas for
ogy, Public Policy and Law, are dedicated to the dissemination of training. Within each of the areas of competencies are multiple
this research and are widely circulated in the mental health and subareas of skills. Beyond describing these 15 domains, Fouad et
legal communities. al. also provide essential components for each area as well as
behavioral anchors for demonstrating competency. Similar to the
Existing Taxonomies of Professional Competence Competency DALs (NCSPP, 2007), the Competency Benchmarks
recommend skills and competencies in all areas at the readiness for
Multiple professional organizations and scholars have published practicum, readiness for internship, and readiness for entry-level
taxonomies of professional competence related to various aspects practice stages of development.
of professional practice. These models are similar in that they
present interrelated dimensions of competency and share a com- A Taxonomy of Forensic Competencies
mon theme of identifying core competencies necessary for the
delivery of professional psychological services across specializa- The current taxonomy of competencies represents a synthesis of
tions. We have drawn upon these basic models in identifying and the approaches used in previous models. We have built our tax-
organizing competencies associated with forensic psychology. onomy of competencies in forensic psychology around the func-
tional domain of the Cube model, but include both generalized
The Competency Cube competencies as well as specialty competencies. Generalized com-
petency refers to skills and knowledge that are applicable across
Rodolfa et al. (2005) proposed the Competency Cube model as various specialties within the larger field of psychology and are
an organizational framework for a taxonomy of professional com- connected to the competencies associated with forensic psychol-
petencies in psychology. According to this model, competencies in ogy. Specialty competency refers to those specific and largely
professional psychology are framed around three dimensions: (a) unique skills associated with forensic research and practice, the
 412 VARELA AND CONROY

development of which begins with mastery of the generalized Grisso, 2000) and probably safe to assume that the total number of
competencies. forensic mental health evaluations is in the hundred thousands
The purpose of this article is to build upon the foundational each year (Otto & Heilbrun, 2002). While assessment training is a
clinical competencies identified as Benchmarks (Fouad et al., component of all doctoral programs in clinical and counseling
2009) and develop core competencies unique to forensic psychol- psychology, this provides necessary, but not sufficient, compe-
ogy. This will be done by dividing the specialty into the six areas tency for assessment in forensic contexts. Competent forensic
outlined in the Cube: assessment, intervention, consultation, re- assessment involves specialized training and recognition of a mul-
search, supervision/training, and management/administration. titude of additional issues— clinical, legal, and ethical—not pres-
Within each of these functional domains, we have adopted the ent in common clinical/therapeutic practice. We list these gener-
Competency DAL approach of identifying the knowledge, skills, alized and specialized competencies in Table 1.
and attitudes necessary for competent practice. Lastly and consis-
The competencies associated with psychological assessment as
tent with the aforementioned models of professional competency,
outlined by Fouad et al. (2009) as well as by the Society for
we address the acquisition and maintenance of these competencies
Personality Assessment (Board of Trustees for the Society for
in forensic psychology.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Personality Assessment, 2006) and Krishnamurthy et al. (2004) are

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

necessary for all forensic assessment practitioners and have been

Generalized and Specialty Assessment Competencies in integrated into our list of generalized assessment competencies.
Forensic Psychology Forensic assessments are often conducted under circumstances that
One of the most common activities for psychologists working in diverge greatly from clinical practice, but knowledge of psycho-
the justice arena is psychological assessment (Melton, Petrila, metrics and the ability to effectively interview and formulate
Poythress, & Slobogin, 2007). It is estimated over 60,000 compe- diagnostic impressions, to include consideration of physiological
tency to stand trial evaluations are conducted each year (Bonnie & and psychological functioning, and to incorporate multicultural

Table 1
Generalized and Specialty Assessment Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Generalized
Knowledge
A. Science, theory, and contexts related to psychological constructs being assessed
B. Interaction between physical and psychological functioning
C. Psychometric theory and test construction
D. Strengths and weaknesses of assessment methods
E. Ethical and legal issues in psychological assessment
F. Influence of diversity on assessment process and outcome
Skills
A. Clinical and diagnostic interviewing
B. Appropriate test selection, administration, scoring, and interpretation
C. Data integration from multisource-multimethod assessment
D. Effective written and oral communication of assessment findings
Attitudes
A. Recognition of personal biases that influence assessment process and outcome
B. Understanding of the limitations of psychological assessment methods
C. Readiness to seek consultation as needed
Specialty
Knowledge
A. Statutes, case law, governmental rules, and other jurisprudence that may impact assessment
B. Unique assessment techniques used to address psycholegal issues
C. Unique rights of examinees in forensic contexts (e.g., avoidance of self-incrimination, refusal rights, prisoner rights)
D. Unique ethical issues associated with forensic evaluations (e.g., appropriate disclosure to court representatives, defining the client, attorney-
client privilege, consent for evaluation)
E. Diverse cultural groups in justice system (e.g., criminal subculture, gang affiliation)
Skills
A. Use/integration of collateral data, including data sources unique to forensic contexts (e.g., police reports, crime witness statements, correctional
records)
B. Incorporation of psycholegal issues and pertinent jurisprudence when selecting assessment methods
C. Administration, scoring, and interpretation of specialized forensic assessment instruments
D. Explanation of assessment methods and limitations of methods to non-psychologists representatives of the justice system
E. Communication of clinical and psycholegal opinions to non-psychologist stakeholders in the justice system
Attitudes
A. Awareness of attitudes toward justice issues that may influence assessment process, outcome, and formulation of psycholegal opinions
B. Acceptance of scrutiny and challenges to assessment methods and outcome
C. Acceptance of psychology’s limited role relative to the overall goals of the justice system
D. Resistance to treating probabilistic conclusions as facts, despite the pressure from representatives of the justice system
E. Understanding of the limitations of forensic assessment techniques
F. Understanding of the limitations and potential biases of collateral data
 COMPETENCIES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY 413

considerations are necessary skills across all contexts and the it is the court, attorney, or administrative body. Nonetheless it is
ethics of psychological assessment are relevant to psychologists critical that the individual’s civil rights be understood and not
across all settings. All psychologists who engage in assessment inadvertently violated. To practice competently, forensic psychol-
practices must approach their work with an appreciation of the ogists must also monitor their own biases related to justice system
limits of their methods, must recognize the role their own biases issues (e.g., capital punishment) and be willing to accept the
may play, and be willing to seek consultation as needed. additional scrutiny applied to their work. Further, psychologists
Beyond these generalized skills, psychologists conducting as- conducting forensic assessments must accept the limited role of
sessments in forensic contexts must understand the psycholegal psychology relative to the overarching goals of the justice system.
concepts that underlie the assessment referral question. For exam- To further illustrate the competencies involved in forensic as-
ple, a psychologist conducting assessments of competency to stand sessment, consider the evaluation of a severely mentally ill man at
trial must know how such competency is defined in the jurisdiction the request of his family. The psychologist may conduct clinical
where a defendant is facing trial and what specific functional interviews, administer testing, render a diagnosis, and recommend
capacities are to be assessed. To answer the referral questions appropriate treatment. In contrast, if the issue is a court order for
posed in forensic contexts, it is often the case that specialized evaluation of his competency to stand trial, the aforementioned eval-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

assessment techniques must be used and additional issues must be uation provides, at best, only a partial assessment of the referral
considered. For example, instruments that have been developed question, despite meeting clinical standards of care. The evaluation
specifically for the assessment of adjudicative competency (e.g., procedures described above might be used to formulate a necessary
the MacArthur Competency Assessment Test-Criminal Adjudica- diagnostic opinion, but have little bearing on the psycholegal question
tion; Poythress et al., 1999; the Evaluation of Competency to Stand of whether he has the ability to consult with his attorney and possesses
Trial-Revised; Rogers, Tillbrook, & Sewell, 2004) and for the a factual and rational understanding of the legal proceedings he faces
assessment of violence risk (Violence Risk Appraisal Guide; Quin- (the common standard for trial competency, see Dusky v. United
sey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 2006). For a more complete discus- States, 1960).
sion of forensic assessment instruments, see Grisso (2003). Sur-
veys have found that many forensic examiners found these Generalized and Specialty Intervention Competencies
specialized instruments helpful for forensic assessments (Archer, in Forensic Psychology
2006; Lally, 2003).
Just as general practitioners, forensic psychologists must also As is the case with assessment, competencies associated with
recognize the limitations of these specialized instruments as well treatment considered to be forensic comprise both generalized and
as the limitations of collateral data. Additionally, evaluees in specialty skills. We list both sets of competencies associated with
forensic contexts may be motivated to distort their clinical presen- treatment in forensic contexts in Table 2.
tation in an effort to obtain a more favorable case disposition. In The effective delivery of forensic intervention services begins
such cases, specialized instruments developed to detect malinger- with basic competencies common to all practitioners and taught in
ing and response distortion can be brought to bear on the referral clinical and counseling graduate programs. In forensic settings,
question (e.g., the Validity Indicator Profile; Frederick, 1997; the treatment recipients may have identified goals, but these are com-
Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms, Rogers, Bagby, & monly secondary to those goals mandated by external governing
Dickens, 1992). While all psychologists are aware evaluees may bodies. Nonetheless, general and forensic practitioners must ap-
distort, the implications of an erroneous conclusion are fundamen- proach their work with compassion and commitment to ethical
tally larger in forensic settings and not all clinicians are trained in practice to be competent and effective. Similarly, sensitivity to
the use of these specific measures. Forensic clinicians must be multicultural issues and readiness to seek consultation or refer
aware of and clearly report the limitations of their assessment clients whose needs are outside their scope are necessary attitudes
methods. When providing expert opinion, the error associated with for all clinicians.
assessment methods may become a specific and crucial point of Beyond the generalized clinical skills, however, there is a mul-
trial testimony that may determine admissibility of expert evidence tiplicity of specialty competencies that pertain to this type of
(see Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 1993). They must, treatment. This was acknowledged by the International Associa-
however, avoid treating probabilistic conclusions as absolute facts, tion for Correctional and Forensic Psychology, 2010 Standards for
despite pressure from representatives of the justice system (Melton Psychological Services in Jails, Prisons, Correctional Facilities,
et al., 2007). and Agencies in the statement, “Providing correctional mental
In addition to the multicultural considerations inherent in all health services is a uniquely specialized task that often requires
assessments, psychologists working in the criminal justice system specialized education and experience” (p. 769). However, forensic
must understand unique subcultures and subcultural standards of intervention services are not simply those services provided in
behavior, such as those associated with gang members, law en- correctional facilities. The recently revised SGFP (Committee on
forcement personnel, and prison inmates. Lastly, the unique ethical the Revision of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology,
and legal issues involved in forensic assessment must be thor- 2011) define forensic psychology as any practice applying psy-
oughly understood by the clinician in this arena, and these vary chology to assist in a legal matter. Intervention services may be
with jurisdiction. For example, some forensic evaluations require judged to be the practice of forensic psychology due to the impact
fully informed consent from the examinee; others (court ordered or the interventions have on a legal matter or the impact of psycho-
statutorily mandated) may be done over the examinee’s objection. legal issues on the nature of the services (e.g., mandatory parenting
Unlike in general clinical work, the person being examined is skills training, domestic violence counseling). The forensic inter-
almost never the client or patient of the forensic examiner; rather vention service provider must therefore be aware of the psycho-
 414 VARELA AND CONROY

Table 2
Generalized and Specialty Intervention Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Generalized
Knowledge
A. Evidence-based interventions (e.g., empirical support for effectiveness, interventions for specific disorders)
B. Limitations of research related to specific interventions and specific populations
C. Standards of practice regarding risk management and clinical documentation
D. Jurisprudence relevant to treatment services in local jurisdiction
Skills
A. Alliance-building and therapeutic intervention skills (i.e., clinician self-awareness, active listening, appropriate use of questions)
B. Ability to incorporate social, biological, cognitive, and affective bases of behavior across the lifespan in formulating treatment plans
C. Incorporation of multicultural considerations in planning and implementing treatments
D. Working collaboratively with clients in developing treatment plans/goals and implementing treatment techniques
E. Adherence to empirically-supported techniques and adjustment of interventions if needed to client context and changing client needs
F. Monitoring ongoing risk and intervention during clinical crises
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

G. Management of the emotional demands of psychotherapy

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

H. Identification and e resolution ethical dilemmas

Attitudes
A. Compassion and commitment to client welfare
B. Sensitivity to multicultural issues and multiple client identities
C. Professional values and ethics in behaving toward clients
D. Readiness to seek consultation and/or supervision to address client needs
Specialty
Knowledge
A. Knowledge of empirically-supported techniques for intervention with unique behavioral problems in forensic contexts
B. Applied experience with relevant forensic populations
C. Understanding of psycholegal issues impacting or impacted by intervention (e.g., restoration to competency, parenting capacity)
D. Awareness of unique ethical issues in forensic settings (e.g., defining client, avoidance of dual roles such as therapist/evaluator)
E. Awareness of rights of treatment recipients (e.g., treatment refusal, least restrictive environment, avoidance of self-incrimination)
Skills
A. Treatment planning to address legally relevant goals that may not be patient-centered (e.g., criminogenic needs, risk reduction)
B. Specialized expertise in specific practice areas (e.g., specialized treatments, prevention of violence, violence risk management)
C. Consideration of unique clinical issues and obstacles (e.g., client motivation, unique treatment goals, limitation on service delivery)
D. Incorporation of forensic-specific considerations in clinical documentation (e.g., limited confidentiality, use of records for justice decision-
making)
E. Identification and resolution of ethical dilemmas unique to many forensic settings
Attitudes
A. Maintenance of a professional identity and commitment to ethical principles as a professional psychologist in nonclinical settings (e.g., prison,
court clinic)
B. Recognition of mental health treatment as secondary to other organizational goals in many forensic contexts
C. Sensitivity to unique multicultural issues in forensic settings (gang affiliation, victims of violence, criminal subculture)

legal issues impacting the service-recipients and these typically third parties present). Awareness of cultural diversity in forensic
vary across legal jurisdictions. For example, the clinician working treatment settings must also include more than an understanding of
in a facility for the restoration of incompetent defendants must be the impact of diversity issues typically addressed in clinical train-
well-aware of the pertinent competency standards. In a related ing (e.g., race, gender, ethnicity, etc.). The practitioner will also
fashion, clinicians involved in the treatment of forensic clients need a familiarity with prison culture and standards of behavior as
must be able to formulate and implement treatment plans to well as other aspects of criminal subcultures. The forensic inter-
address legally relevant goals and address criminogenic needs. vention provider must also be aware of unique ethical issues, such
This is further complicated when the recipient of these services as the role of consent and therapeutic alliance in mandated treat-
does not perceive the importance of treatment or is otherwise ment, limits to confidentiality, and the delivery of services in the
unmotivated to achieve the same goal. For instance, a client on least restrictive environment, and be competent in resolving these
parole may be mandated to attend substance abuse treatment as a dilemmas. Psychologists providing forensic intervention services
condition of release but may lack intrinsic motivation to do so. must recognize mental health treatment is often a secondary goal
Often, these treatment goals may require interventions that depart relative to the organizational mission where they work.
from the typical treatment modalities learned in graduate pro- To illustrate the competencies involved in forensic treatment,
grams. For example, a risk management plan ordered as part of a consider in a typical clinical setting a diagnosis would be made and
juvenile diversion program may require multisystemic or wrap- treatment plan developed in consultation with the client. At any
around treatment services; typical counseling to improve the ju- time, this client could decline treatment regardless of whether or
venile’s self-esteem may, in fact, be contraindicated under such not goals have been met. However, if this same client is committed
circumstances. Further, the forensic clinician must be able to to a hospital following a finding of Not Guilty by Reason of
recognize how working in a forensic environment may place Insanity, a host of additional issues must be considered. Now the
limitations on treatment and require a departure from standard goal of treatment becomes reducing risk to others to the point at
methods (e.g., counseling in a prison yard, service delivery with which the individual can be released to a less restrictive environ-
 COMPETENCIES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY 415

ment. Treatments, including medications, may be mandated by the psychologist is consulting. For example, the mission of a prison is
court and any treatment provider must know the laws and proce- primarily to deliver correctional services in a manner determined
dures involved. The recipient of services may well see the clinician by legislated rules, and issues related to mental health and well-
as an agent of the court rather than an ally. Interventions often being are subservient to this overarching goal.
clinically appropriate (i.e., gradual release to the community) may Consulting to attorneys and judges within the courtroom context
be prohibited. The court, and not the practitioner, will determine is fundamentally unique. It is first critical that the forensic prac-
when treatment begins and ends. Criteria for discharge from hos- titioner understand that all opinions and recommendations pro-
pitalization will be set by the court or by statute. The individual’s vided are, in fact, consultation. It is the attorney or trier of fact, and
sole motivation for treatment may be release from confinement so not the psychologist, who will make the final decisions. A key
that he can discontinue treatment all together. Thus, while disor- competency for the forensic consultant is understanding how psy-
ders seen in nonforensic settings may also be seen in forensic chological concepts relate to legal principles and communicating
settings, the forensic practitioner must possess the competencies opinions in a manner that is useful to legal representatives and
needed to adapt treatment to account for a wide range of practical other professionals working within the justice system. Psycholo-
and legal differences as well as substantive ethical concerns.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

gists may serve as consultants in very specialized areas, such as

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

jury selection and witness preparation, and must possess spe-

Generalized and Specialty Consultation Competencies cialized knowledge not commonly part of a graduate training
in Forensic Psychology program curriculum. Consultation in a forensic setting also
In forensic settings, psychologists are called upon to consult in requires careful attention to ethical imperatives and how these
a myriad of contexts, ranging from therapeutic settings to court- differ from those of other professions. If, for example, a woman
rooms. We list the relevant generalized and specialized competen- were to enter psychotherapy because she was psychologically
cies in Table 3. traumatized following a motor vehicle accident, the therapist
The foundation of professional consultation is familiarity with could obtain consent, assess her clinical condition, formulate a
the core literature in psychological consultation (see Brown, Pryz- treatment plan, and provide therapy. However, if her attorney
wansky, & Schulte, 2006; Caplan & Caplan, 1993). In a clinical were to contract with the psychologist for a personal injury
setting, psychologist consultants must be willing to work within evaluation, it would mean conducting an objective evaluation to
consultee restraints and be able to communicate opinions to fellow determine the woman’s exact condition and then evaluating if
professionals from other disciplines in a manner that can facilitate and to what degree the accident (or possibly some other event)
the work of others. was the proximate cause or a contributing cause to that distress.
In forensic settings, consultation is complicated by competing Such an assessment would require the exploration of much
demands and interests that at times may be at cross-purposes, collateral information that may or may not support the woman’s
which in turn require the development and application of unique contention. Finally, the evaluator would need to assess any
competencies. This begins with competency in understanding the potential damages (e.g., the prognosis, need for ongoing psy-
mission and policies of the forensic organization(s) in which the chological care or other rehabilitation, the estimated length of

Table 3
Generalized and Specialty Consultation Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Generalized
Knowledge
A. Familiarity with core literature on consultation
B. Cross-disciplinary knowledge (e.g., basic psychopharmacology & utilization of community resources/programs in multidisciplinary settings)
Skills
A. Identification of appropriate consultant roles, expectations, obligations, and goals
B. Communication with non-psychologist and non-mental health consultees
C. Application of expert guidance in response to client needs
D. Application of ethical and legal standards to diverse groups
Attitudes
A. Willingness to work and apply psychology within the limitations of consultee needs and organization
B. Willingness to recognize one’s own limits and respond appropriately through additional learning, seeking supervision, or consultee referral
Specialty
Knowledge
A. Understanding the mission of judicial and correctional organizations and the role of psychology in accomplishing organizational goals
B. Understanding of unique organizational subcultures (e.g., norms and mores, consultee perception of psychology)
C. Familiarity with pertinent forensic consultation subspecialties (e.g., jury selection, witness preparation, eyewitness identification procedures)
D. Understanding of ethical imperatives that differ between the mental health professionals and legal/law enforcement professionals
Skills
A. Applying psychological theory and techniques to meet nonclinical consultee needs and goals
B. Communication of clinical and professional opinions in a manner relevant to legal and other justice system professionals
Attitudes
A. Commitment to values and ethics of psychology and active avoidance of misuse of psychologists’ work
B. Respect for the missions and values of disciplines within the forensic context (e.g. the judiciary, law enforcement, protective agencies)
 416 VARELA AND CONROY

services, the impediments to her life functioning that may have methods of legal research. This may involve competence in nav-
resulted from the accident). igating the law library or available legal databases (e.g., Lexis-
Nexis Academic, West Law, Bureau of Justice Statistics).
Generalized and Specialty Research Competencies in Forensic psychology researchers must also be competent with
Forensic Psychology respect to how they approach forensic organizations, such as
correctional institutions, adult and child protective agencies, and
Standard research competencies play a role in forensic psy- courts, and propose research that answers questions salient to the
chology, but are usually insufficient and specialized competen-
organization and can be executed in a manner consistent with
cies must be developed to work in this field. We list the
institutional policies and procedures. They should also recognize
generalized and specialized research competencies in forensic
the ways in which research might impact the organization. For
psychology in Table 4.
example, a study methodology that involves placing large numbers
The generalized competencies of research in psychology include
mastery of the scientific method, research design and statistical of high risk and combative prisoners together may pose safety and
methods, knowledge and understanding of the influence of multi- security risks in a correctional setting that would preclude con-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

cultural diversity on the research process and an understanding of ducting the research. Forensic hospitals that serve patients whose
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

the ethics that guide all psychological research. Competent re- competence to stand trial has been called into question may be
searchers across settings approach their work with skepticism and very concerned about proper consent for research, even going so
humility, and a willingness to allow their methods and conclusions far as to require a legally authorized representative for each par-
to be scrutinized. Researchers seeking to answer forensic psychol- ticipant. Also, forensic psychological researchers must be skilled
ogy questions, however, must be skilled in formulating research at adjusting research methods to answer important questions with
questions pertinent to the psycholegal issues and behavioral phe- less experimental control. For example, a researcher examining the
nomena relevant to the justice system (e.g., risk of criminal recid- impact of residency restriction on recidivism among sexual offend-
ivism, methods of counseling victims). Developing legally rele- ers cannot randomly assign participants to different residency
vant research questions may require an investigator to be facile in restriction conditions nor can a researcher examine child custody

Table 4
Generalized and Specialty Research Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Generalized
Knowledge
A. Scientific method and research design, including program evaluation
B. Statistical methods
C. Existing research regarding biopsychosocial phenomena under investigation
D. Ethical guidance pertaining to research
E. Impact of multicultural diversity on psychological research
Skills
A. Critical evaluation of existing research as well as one’s own methods and findings
B. Effective collaboration with a multidisciplinary research team
C. Effective reporting and communicating research findings
D. Incorporation of multicultural considerations in the development of research questions, design of research methods, and formulation of
conclusions
Attitudes
A. Scientific skepticism and humility
B. Willingness to self-monitor to eliminate personal biases and maintain scientific objectivity in all phases of research
C. Readiness to allow scrutiny of one’s research methods, findings, and conclusions
D. Sensitivity to multicultural issues in all phases of research
E. Understanding limitations of psychological research methods and inferences
Specialty
Knowledge
A. Research base related to psycholegal issues and behavioral phenomena relevant to the justice system
B. Knowledge of research issues unique to forensic settings (e.g., applying research design principles in forensic setting, techniques of legal
research, participant motivations)
C. Knowledge of ethical issues relevant to research in forensic settings (e.g., vulnerable research populations, research in coercive environments)
Skills
A. Development of research questions to address forensic issues
B. Designing research within limitations of many forensic settings (e.g., limits on random assignment, outcome measurement)
C. Understanding how to approach research in correctional/legal environments (gaining access, securing documents, complying with
administrative polices, gaining support of correctional/courtroom/ agency staff, resolving disagreements)
D. Conducting legal research
E. Communication of research findings to non-psychologist stakeholders in the justice system
Attitudes
A. Acceptance of non-scientific mission of many forensic settings
B. Sensitivity to ways in which research may impact the forensic organization (misunderstandings, negative publicity)
C. Respect for the concerns of forensic organizations (e.g., security, rights of persons served)
 COMPETENCIES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY 417

outcomes by randomly assigning custody conditions. Forensic The competent supervisor, regardless of setting, must be able to
researchers must also recognize and account for participant moti- assess supervisee skills, set supervision goals, and effectively
vations (e.g., distorted responding) when designing studies and communicate supervisory feedback while remaining committed to
interpreting findings. For example, persons and institutions in- lifelong learning and sensitive to the supervisor-supervisee power
volved in employment litigation may be motivated by the prospect differential. A forensic supervisor needs to be familiar with any
of financial loss or gain. Beyond the important ethical consider- relevant psycholegal issue that is being evaluated or in some way
ations common to all psychological research, forensic researchers impacts the service being rendered. The supervisor must also have
must address additional issues, such as coerced participation a thorough understanding of any statutes, case law, rules of evi-
among individuals who are members of vulnerable groups (e.g., dence or rules of the jurisdiction governing the work to be done.
prisoners, the elderly under guardianship). Lastly, forensic re- While it is unlikely any forensic psychologist has expertise in all
searchers must also be competent in communicating research of the subspecialties of the discipline, it is essential to have
findings to professionals in the justice system in an effective
competence in the specific area being supervised. The supervisor
manner, considering these professionals possess an understanding
has total legal responsibility for the work product and must never
of the psycholegal issue (often a more complete understanding
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

agree to supervise anything she or he is not fully qualified to

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

than the researcher) but are unfamiliar with research design and
perform independently (Bennett et al., 2006). Even a supervisor
statistical methods.
with stellar experience, training, and credentials in forensic psy-
chology generally, may, for example, have great expertise in
Generalized and Specialty Supervision-Training conducting sanity evaluations but have only textbook knowledge
Competencies in Forensic Psychology of personal injury evaluations or child custody assessments.
Once again, competencies associated with providing supervision If work is being done in anticipation of a court proceeding, the
and training considered to be forensic comprise both generalized supervisor will likely need to be personally present for, and ac-
and specialty skills. We list both sets of competencies associated tively participating in, much of the evaluation. The supervisor will
with these endeavors in forensic practice in Table 5. need to take full responsibility for any report provided or records

Table 5
Generalized and Specialty Supervision-Training Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Generalized
Knowledge
A. Supervision models and approaches
B. Supervision and training ethics as well as laws related to supervision and psychology practice
C. Impact of multicultural diversity on supervision and practice
D. Currency in developing areas of research, practice, and practice-related law
Skills
A. Assessment of supervisee knowledge, skills, and abilities
B. Establishing supervisor and supervisee goals and expectations as well as method(s) to evaluate training progress
C. Matching training/supervision actions to supervisee training level and client needs, and modify these in response to changes over time
D. Effective provision of written and/or oral performance feedback
E. Communicating psychological principles and research findings to non-psychologist trainees
F. Modeling appropriate professional behavior across diverse settings
G. Evaluating the effectiveness of one’s supervision and training and making modifications accordingly
Attitude
A. Willingness to engage in life-long learning
B. Flexibility in applying supervision methods in response to supervisee, client, and contextual changes
C. Acknowledging limitations of competency and commitment to refraining from supervision outside one’s scope of expertise without assistance
D. Sensitivity to power differential inherent in supervision and training relationships
Specialty
Knowledge
A. Specialized knowledge in areas of training needed by stakeholders in the justice system
B. Knowledge of psycholegal issues and law/jurisprudence pertinent to practice settings
C. Knowledge and applied experience in subspecialties within civil and criminal forensic psychology
D. Knowledge of all laws, regulations, policies, codes of conduct, and guidelines that apply to the particular tasks under supervision
Skills
A. Ability to establish relationships and shared understanding of training activities with other clinical and nonclinical stakeholders
B. Recognition of boundaries between clinical and administrative supervision
C. Specific skills needed in any subspecialty (e.g., evaluating response style, using forensic assessment instruments, providing testimony,
conducting specialized treatments)
D. Ability to provide the supervisee with rich training experiences while still maintaining full responsibility for the work product
Attitudes
A. Accepting that attorneys not mental health professionals determine case strategies
B. Accepting that the trier of fact and not the mental health professional is the decision-maker
C. Accepting that the mental health professional may not be able to provide the client with the opinion he/she would like
D. Accepting that mental health professionals do not win or lose cases, they simply provide assistance to the trier of fact
 418 VARELA AND CONROY

maintained. In addition, the supervisor will need the necessary possible that the scope of necessary interviews could be extended
expertise to guide the supervisee through the entire process. That to grandparents, teachers, potential step-parents, and other related
means, for example, not only having the necessary ability to parties. Any evaluation instruments selected would need to with-
conduct a forensic assessment, but also knowing how to negotiate stand courtroom challenges. This means the supervisor would need
and contract for forensic work with the various stakeholders, how a thorough understanding of evidentiary rules in the jurisdiction. It
to present informed consent or notification to the examinee, what is likely that both records and any reports generated would be
specific rights the examinee may have throughout the process, how property of the court and the family would only have access
to access and evaluate the necessary collateral information, how to through their attorneys. Finally, in the interest of promoting a
construct an assessment report for court purposes, how to maintain thorough training experience, the supervisor would need to have
records that will stand up to judicial scrutiny, how to respond to the student accompany him or her in preparing for and providing
court orders and subpoenas, and how to present effective testimony court testimony.
that will be most helpful to the trier of fact. Supervisory modeling
in this arena includes not only relating to examinees, but also Generalized and Specialty Management-
negotiating with clinicians from other disciplines (e.g., psychia-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Administration Competencies in Forensic Psychology

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

trists, social workers), as well as law enforcement personnel,

attorneys (including judges), representatives of involved agencies Once again, competencies associated with working in an admin-
(e.g., Child Protective Services, the Social Security Administra- istrative role considered in a forensic context comprise both gen-
tion), and sources of collateral information. eralized and specialty skills. We list both sets of competencies
In addition to supervision, forensic psychologists often provide associated with these endeavors in forensic practice in Table 6.
mental health training to professionals from other disciplines. It is becoming increasingly common for psychologists to func-
Training is commonly requested by law enforcement and correc- tion as program, department, or institution administrators. Individ-
tions personnel, attorneys and members of the judiciary, and a uals in these positions would need all of the fundamental mana-
variety of workplace supervisors. Law enforcement personnel, for gerial competencies required for the day to day running of any
example, may request training related to suicide prevention, non- organization: competencies in the areas of communication, moti-
violent crisis intervention, dealing with persons who have severe vation, finance, workplace safety, dispute resolution, the selection
mental illness, preventing burnout, and assisting employees who of job candidates, evaluation of employee performance, and
have witnessed traumatic events. Attorneys and members of the decision-making regarding the termination of employees. Psychol-
judiciary may request training, for example, in dealing with per- ogist administrators must also possess an understanding of perti-
sons with severe mental illness, establishing effective risk man- nent employment laws and how these must be considered when
agement plans, the meaning of various diagnostic categories, and establishing organizational policies. They would also require
evaluating expert behavioral science evidence. knowledge of other relevant laws, policies, and procedures that
For example, consider the case of a couple who come to a clinic impact the organization. The competent psychologist manager-
requesting treatment to help them be better parents to some diffi- administrator must engage in these tasks with an attitude of fair-
cult children. The clinic may decide to assign the case to an ness and appreciation of the knowledge and skills of subordinates.
advanced student who will work under supervision. The supervisor Forensic psychologists also have occasion to step into special-
may or may not meet with the clients initially while the student ized administrative roles. Settings where this is often the case
will continue ongoing treatment in conjunction with regular meet- would include correctional institutions, hospitals, court clinics,
ings with the supervisor. Informed consent will be obtained, a university training clinics, and a variety of mental health agencies
treatment plan will be negotiated with the clients, appropriate in communities that routinely provide some type of forensic ser-
records will be maintained, and initial and discharge reports will be vice. Clearly, any manager or administrator would need to thor-
written for the file. Upon request, the couple could have complete oughly understand any specific psycholegal issue that is being
access to all records and reports. addressed for a court of law. The forensic administrator’s under-
But now consider how the scenario would radically change if standing of law, however, must extend beyond the instant case and
this were in the context of a child custody evaluation. In this include the whole spectrum of law relative to the provision of such
case, the supervisor would have to work directly with the services. Laws vary from one jurisdiction to another in regard to
student throughout the evaluation. Work would need to be done right to treatment as well as right to refuse treatment. For example,
through the respective attorneys to collect a plethora of collat- California is currently embroiled in long standing litigation with
eral information. The supervisor would need to review all potentially serious consequences regarding what level of mental
relevant statutes, case law, and licensing board rules with the health care a prison system must provide to its inmates (Plata et al.
trainee. The supervisor would also need to be familiar with the v. Schwarzenegger, 2010). Many organizations providing forensic
various ethical guidelines pertaining to these evaluations (e.g., services also use various forms of seclusion and restraint, as well
EPPCC, SGFP, the Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in as emergency medication. Both statutes and case law are often
Family Law Proceedings, APA, 2010; the Guidelines for Psycho- very complex in this regard.
logical Evaluations in Child Protective Matters, Committee on Forensic settings are typically staffed by a variety of disciplines
Professional Practice & Standards, 2011). In most jurisdictions the that must be brought into collaboration for the mission of the entity
supervisor would need to explain the guiding principle now is the to succeed. In a prison hospital, for example, staff will generally
“best interests of the child” rather than the well-being or prefer- include correctional personnel whose primary mission is the safety
ences of the parents. Interviews would need to be conducted with and security of the institution, as well as various medical personnel
both parents, as well as all children involved. It is also quite whose mission it is to provide treatment—missions that frequently
 COMPETENCIES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY 419

Table 6
Generalized and Specialty Management-Administration Competencies in Forensic Psychology

Generalized
Knowledge
A. Management and organizational theories and principles
B. Relevant employment and practice laws
C. Understanding of the larger organizational mission and goals (if applicable)
Skills
A. Generalized organizational and management skills
B. Ability to prioritize competing demands and allocate resources
C. Ability to develop clinic policies and processes that ensure ethical practice that meets relevant standards of care
D. Ability to establish a process for evaluating the effectiveness of agency services (if applicable)
Attitudes
A. Commitment to fairness in implementation of organizational policies
B. Respect for the knowledge and skills of employees
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Specialty
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Knowledge
A. Laws and jurisprudence relevant to psycholegal issues addressed in clinic (and changes over time)
B. Policy and procedure unique to the forensic setting
Skills
A. Ability to foster collaboration between members of diverse professions represented in forensic settings
B. Ability to find points of congruence between mental health mission and larger organizational mission (if applicable)
Attitudes
A. Respect for the goals and values of the variety of professionals and staff members working in the forensic context (e.g. attorneys, law
enforcement personnel, service agency staff)
B. Willingness to compromise non-essential parts of the mental health mission to accommodate other goals of organizations
C. Awareness that serious organization changes in most forensic organizations must be accomplished over time

collide. For a manager, fostering respect among disciplines re- together in such a way as to facilitate ongoing collaboration. This
quires a thorough understanding of the underlying needs, values, will require an understanding of the three disciplines and respect
professional responsibilities and goals, and philosophies of all for their values. It will also require a thorough knowledge of both
players. correctional and medical policies, as well as law governing re-
Well-designed policy and procedure can provide both guidance straints, civil rights, and involuntary treatment.
and protection for an organization. It is, however, imperative that
any administrator in a forensic setting be thoroughly versed in Acquisition and Maintenance of Competency in
policy and procedure at all levels (unit, departmental, institutional, Forensic Psychology
and in some cases national). For example, correctional policy and
procedure can be very foreign to the newly arrived clinician and it Consistent with the final dimension of the Competency Cube,
becomes the manager’s responsibility to provide orientation and the acquisition of competency in forensic psychology takes place
guidance. Similarly, law enforcement organizations have their own at all levels of higher education. Even undergraduates are exposed
unique culture complete with norms and values that extend beyond to courses specifically addressing the intersection of psychology
written rules and regulations. What is perfectly acceptable em- and law.
ployee conduct in a university setting may not be acceptable in a In this century it is very possible to begin formal forensic
prison, jail, police department, or other forensic setting. psychology training with a track or emphasis in graduate school,
By way of example, suppose a forensic psychologist is the with some programs offering the joint JD-PhD degrees. It is now
manager of a prison hospital unit where an inmate with serious possible to progress to an internship having at least one forensic
mental illness has assaulted an officer. The correctional staff is rotation. Beyond that specialized postdoctoral fellowships that
primarily concerned with physical safety and would like to have concentrate specifically in the forensic arena are increasing. How-
the offender placed in restraints overnight and demand assurances ever, current practitioners who may be many years removed from
that he will remain in seclusion for a lengthy period of time. The their formal training may need to seek other avenues to specialize
medical staff, on the other hand, believe their patient is making and competently provide forensic services. For the professional in
progress in treatment and it is important for him to remain in a the community wishing additional or continued training in this
least restrictive environment and emergency medication should be area an extensive array of workshops are generally available from
administered involuntarily to facilitate this. However, the institu- the American Academy of Forensic Psychology, the American
tion legal counsel, whose mission it is to protect the institution Psychological Association, state psychological organizations, as
administration and employees from legal suit, opines that, since well as private and other continuing education providers. Continu-
the inmate can be prevented from engaging in further assault by ing education workshops rarely, if ever, provide the opportunity to
being confined to a locked cell, neither emergency medication nor become fully competent in any area of practice, especially forensic
four-point restraints are warranted and could be interpreted as a psychology. For the practitioner seeking to expand his or her skill
civil rights violation. The administrator of the medical or psychi- repertoire, a combination of didactic training (i.e., workshops
atric unit is now tasked with bringing these divergent viewpoints and/or graduate coursework) and supervised practice with an es-
 420 VARELA AND CONROY

tablished expert can provide adequate and defensible training. This opmental perspective on juvenile justice (pp. 73–104). Chicago, IL:
is particularly important, considering professional credentials may University of Chicago Press.
come under scrutiny in many forensic contexts, as well as one’s Brown, D., Pryzwansky, W., & Schulte, A. (2006). Psychological consul-
work products. In addition, a number of states now have particular tation and collaboration: Introduction to theory and practice. Boston,
training requirements specified in statute for psychologists to MA: Pearson.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
engage in various types of forensic evaluations (e.g., competence
Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. B. (1993). Mental health consultation and
to stand trial, child custody). At the highest level, there is the collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
option of seeking board certification. Committee on Professional Practice and Standards. (2011). Guidelines for
psychological evaluations in child protection matters. Retrieved from
Concluding Comments http://www.apa.org/practice/guidelines/child-protection.pdf
Committee on the Revision of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic
The present article is our attempt to provide a taxonomy of the Psychology. (in press). Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology.
various generalized and specialty competencies associated with Retrieved from www.ap-ls.org/aboutpsychlaw/SGFP_Final_
forensic psychology for the express purpose of assisting clinicians Approved_2011.pdf
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

who are considering a foray into the forensic arena. Given the Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993).
breadth of this field, it is impossible to create a listing of compe- Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).
tencies that is both precise and exhaustive. Rather, we have Fouad, N. A., Grus, C. L., Hatcher, R. L., Kaslow, N. J., Hutchings, P. S.,
Madson, M. B., . . . Crossman, R. E. (2009). Competency benchmarks:
broadly described these generalized and specialty competencies in
A model for understanding and measuring competence in professional
such a manner as to provide sufficient guidance for psychologists
psychology across training levels. Training and Education in Profes-
in entering this field while recognizing there may be additions, sional Psychology, 3, S5–S26. doi:10.1037/a0015832
deletions, and other modifications for application to specific areas Frederick, R. I. (1997). Validity Indicator Profile manual. Minnetonka,
of forensic research and practice. Undoubtedly, there will be MN: NCS Assessments.
fellow practitioners and researchers with strong opinions regarding Grisso, T. (2003). Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and
our list of competencies, including disagreements and recommen- instruments (2nd ed.) New York, NY: Kluwer.
dations for change. We would consider this a very positive devel- International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology Prac-
opment inasmuch as debate, even spirited argument, over the tice Standards Committee. (2010). Standards for psychological services
professional competencies required in our field can only serve to in jails, prisons, correctional facilities, and agencies. Criminal Justice
highlight important issues and considerations for those of us who and Behavior, 37, 749 – 808. doi:10.1177/0093854810368253
practice, conduct research, and train forensic psychologists. Jenkins v. United States, 307 F. 2d 637 (D. C. Cir. 1962).
Krishnamurthy, R., VandeCreek, L., Kaslow, N. J., Tazeau, Y. N., Miville,
Given the rapid and continuing growth of forensic psychology,
M. L., Kerns, R., . . . Benton, S. A. (2004). Achieving competency in
this taxonomy of competencies must necessarily be considered a
psychological assessment: Directions for education and training. Journal
work-in-progress. As psychologists become involved in even more of Clinical Psychology, 60, 725–739. doi:10.1002/jclp.20010
areas of the justice system and are called upon to assist in new Lally, S. J. (2003). What tests are acceptable for use in forensic evalua-
ways, the competencies needed by these professionals will also tions? A survey of experts. Professional Psychology: Research and
change. We fully expect that a similar list made even just two Practice, 34, 491– 498. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.34.5.491
decades in the future, by the next generation of forensic psychol- Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2007).
ogists, will have substantial additions. Psychological evaluations for the courts (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Munsterberg, H. (1908). On the witness stand: Essays on psychology and
References crime. New York, NY: Doubleday.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psy- National Council of Schools and Programs in Professional Psychology.
chologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060 –1073. (2007). Competency developmental achievement levels. Retrieved from
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1060 http://www.ncspp.info/DALof%20NCSPP%209 –21-07.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2010). Guidelines for child custody Otto, R. K., & Heilbrun, K. (2002). The practice of forensic psychology: A
evaluations in family law proceedings. American Psychologist, 65, 863– look to the future in light of the past. American Psychologist, 57, 5–18.
867. doi:10.1037/a0021250 doi:10.1037/0003-066X.57.1.5
Archer, R. P. (Ed.) (2006). Forensic uses of clinical assessment instru- Packer, I. K. (2008). Specialized practice in forensic psychology: Oppor-
ments. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. tunities and obstacles. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,
Bennett, B. E., Bricklin, P. M., Harris, J. D., Knapp, S., Vandecreek, L., & 39, 245–249. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.39.2.245
Younggren, J. N. (2006). Assessing and managing risk in psychological Petition for the recognition of a specialty in professional psychology:
practice: An individualized approach. Rockville, MD: The Trust. Forensic psychology. (2000). Submitted by Division 41 of the American
Bersoff, D. N., Goodman-Delahunty, J., Grisso, J. T., Hans, V. J., Poyth- Psychological Association and The American Board of Forensic Psy-
ress, N. G., & Roesch, R. G. (1997). Training in law and psychology: chology.
Models from the Villanova conference. American Psychologist, 52, Plata v. Schwarzenegger, 603 F 3.d, 1088 (U.S. 9th Cir., 2010).
1301–1310. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1301 Poythress, N. G., Nicholson, R., Otto, R. K., Edens, J. F., Bonnie, R. J.,
Board of Trustees of the Society for Personality Assessment. (2006). Monahan, J., & Hoge, S. (1999). The MacArthur Competence Assess-
Standards for education and training in psychological assessment: Po- ment Tool—Criminal Adjudication: Professional manual. Odessa, FL:
sition of the Society for Personality Assessment. Journal of Personality Psychological Assessment Resources.
Assessment, 87, 355–357. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8703_17 Quinsey, V. L., Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Cormier, C. A. (2006). Violent
Bonnie, R., & Grisso, T. (2000). Adjudicative competence and youthful offenders: Appraising and managing risk (2nd ed.). Washington, DC:
offenders. In T. Grisso & R. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial: A devel- APA. doi:10.1037/11367-000
 COMPETENCIES IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY 421

Rodolfa, E., Bent, R., Eisman, E., Nelson, P., Rehm, L., & Ritchie, P. Terman, L. M. (1931). Psychology and the law. Los Angeles Bar Associ-
(2005). A cube model for competency development: Implications for ation Bulletin, 6, 142–153.
psychology educators and regulators. Professional Psychology: Re-
search and Practice, 36, 347–354. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.36.4.347
Rogers, R., Bagby, R. M., & Dickens, S. E. (1992). Structured Interview of
Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psy-
chological Assessment Resources.
Rogers, R., Tillbrook, C. E., & Sewell, K. W. (2004). Evaluation of Received August 15, 2011
Competency to Stand Trial—Revised (ECST-R) and professional man- Revision received November 16, 2011
ual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Accepted November 18, 2011 䡲
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Call for Nominations

The Publications and Communications (P&C) Board of the American Psychological Association
has opened nominations for the editorships of Behavioral Neuroscience, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Journal of Educational Psychology, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology:
Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, Psychological Bulletin, and Psychology of
Addictive Behaviors for the years 2015–2020. Mark S. Blumberg, PhD, Steve W. J. Kozlowski,
PhD, Arthur Graesser, PhD, Jeffry A. Simpson, PhD, Stephen P. Hinshaw, PhD, and Stephen A.
Maisto, PhD, ABPP, respectively, are the incumbent editors.
Candidates should be members of APA and should be available to start receiving manuscripts in
early 2014 to prepare for issues published in 2015. Please note that the P&C Board encourages
participation by members of underrepresented groups in the publication process and would partic-
ularly welcome such nominees. Self-nominations are also encouraged.
Search chairs have been appointed as follows:
● Behavioral Neuroscience, John Disterhoft, PhD
● Journal of Applied Psychology, Neal Schmitt, PhD
● Journal of Educational Psychology, Neal Schmitt, PhD, and Jennifer Crocker, PhD
● Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes,
David Dunning, PhD
● Psychological Bulletin, Norman Abeles, PhD
● Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, Jennifer Crocker, PhD, and Lillian Comas-Diaz, PhD
Candidates should be nominated by accessing APA’s EditorQuest site on the Web. Using your
Web browser, go to http://editorquest.apa.org. On the Home menu on the left, find “Guests.” Next,
click on the link “Submit a Nomination,” enter your nominee’s information, and click “Submit.”
Prepared statements of one page or less in support of a nominee can also be submitted by e-mail
to Sarah Wiederkehr, P&C Board Search Liaison, at [email protected].
Deadline for accepting nominations is January 11, 2013, when reviews will begin.