title: A critical review of published competency-to-confess measures.
abstract: The development of standardized assessments for competency-to-confess evaluations has remained largely neglected for the last several decades. Groundbreaking research was conducted on Miranda waivers during the late 1970s, but researchers have failed to sustain programmatic research. This critical review focuses on four published Miranda measures (Comprehension of Miranda Rights, Comprehension of Miranda Rights-Recognition, Comprehension of Miranda Vocabulary, and Function of Rights in Interrogation). When evaluated by contemporary standards, the validation of these measures is very limited. Major improvements are needed for interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, content validity, construct validity, and criterion-related validity.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas 76203-1280, USA.
authors.forename: Richard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Rogers
authors.forename: Mandy J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Jordan
authors.forename: Kimberly S
authors.initials: KS
authors.lastname: Harrison
mesh_terms: D002961:Civil Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D003142:Communication; D003416:Criminal Law / Q000379:methods; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry; D006167:Guilt; D006801:Humans; D016743:Mental Competency / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014481:United States