title: A motion to exclude and the 'fixed' versus 'flexible' battery in 'forensic' neuropsychology: challenges to the practice of clinical neuropsychology.
abstract: Two recent publications in Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology (ACN) have been used by defense attorneys as the centerpiece for an argument that only a 'fixed' battery approach, exemplified by the Halstead-Reitan battery (HRB), satisfies the Daubert criteria for admissibility; and therefore, the HRB represents the only method of forensic neuropsychological assessment that should be admitted into evidence. Since this case has important implications for the practice of clinical neuropsychology in the United States, this 'Motion to Exclude' and its rationale are presented, which demonstrates how the legal profession uses neuropsychological literature. The critical issues of this argument for clinical neuropsychological practice are reviewed.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, 1001 SWKT, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, United States. erin_bigler@byu.edu
authors.forename: Erin D
authors.initials: ED
authors.lastname: Bigler
mesh_terms: D003416:Criminal Law; D005554:Forensic Medicine; D006801:Humans; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests / Q000592:standards*; D009484:Neuropsychology / Q000592:standards*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results