Background/Objective: Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is the tool most extensively used worldwide for evaluating the veracity of a testimony. CBCA, initially designed for evaluating the testimonies of victims of child sexual abuse, has been empirically validated. Moreover, CBCA has been generalized to adult populations and other contexts though this generalization has not been endorsed by the scientific literature. Method: Thus, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the Undeutsch Hypothesis and the CBCA checklist of criteria in discerning in adults between memories of self-experienced real-life events and fabricated or fictitious memories. Results: Though the results corroborated the Undeutsch Hypothesis, and CBCA as a valid technique, the results were not generalizable, and the self-deprecation and pardoning the perpetrator criteria failed to discriminate between both memories. The technique can be complemented with additional reality criteria. The study of moderators revealed discriminating efficacy was significantly higher in filed studies on sexual offences and intimate partner violence. Conclusions: The findings are discussed in terms of their implications as well as the limitations and conditions for applying these results to forensic settings.

A meta-analysis of the state-of-the-art on the efficacy of batterer treatment programmes was conducted from the year 1975 to 2013. A total of 19 Spanish and English language research articles were retrieved yielding 49 effect sizes from a sample of 18,941 batterers. The results revealed that the recidivism rate as measured by couple reports (CR) was significantly higher than the rate based on official reports (OR), since the recidivism as measured by OR is underestimated. Overall, treatment showed a non significant positive weighted mean effect, δ=0.41. Nevertheless, the counternull effect size, EScounternull =0.82, suggested a null effect was as probable as a treatment efficacy rate of 38%. The intervention type was not a significant moderator of recidivism, but the counternull effect sizes, EScounternull = 0.82 and 0.94, revealed an efficacy rate of 38% and 42% based on ORs, for Duluth Model and behavioral-cognitive treatment, respectively. The long-term treatment interventions had a significantly positive medium effect size, δ=0.49. The implications of these findings for the design and assessment of future intervention programmes are discussed

Victimization of a crime is defined in terms of the physical and psychological injury sustained by the victim. A field study was designed with women victims of intimate partner violence (WVs-IPV) to assess the epidemiology of injury in mental health markers and to quantify injury by combining the analysis of the population of WVs-IPV (difference in means) with clinical cases (clinical significance). A total of 50 WVs-IPV, of both physical and psychological violence as confirmed by unappealable legal judgements, voluntarily responded to the SCL-90-R. The results showed WVs-IPV informed of more clinical symptoms in all of the clinical dimensions measured (i.e., somatization, obsession-compulsion, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, anxiety, hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, and psychoticism), and of higher scores in the distress indexes (i.e., GSI, PST, PSDI). These results were generalizable to other samples of the WVs-IPV population, but not all. The mean injury was 53% in depression and obsession-compulsion, 48% in anxiety, 45% in interpersonal sensitivity, 44% in phobic anxiety, 43% in paranoid ideation, 38% in psychoticism, 36% in somatization, and 20% in hostility; and 48%, 45%, and 43% in the GSI, PST, and PSDI distress indexes, respectively. Moreover, the study of cases in victims found a significant rate of clinical cases (clinical significance) in all of the dimensions and distress indexes. The results were also generalizable to other studies in the same population. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for both clinical and forensic evaluation. ,La victimización de un delito se define por el daño infringido, incluido el psicológico. Se diseñó un estudio de campo con mujeres víctimas de violencia de género (M-VVG) para conocer la epidemiología del daño en los marcadores de salud mental y cuantificar el daño, combinando el estudio de la población (diferencia de medias) con el de casos (significatividad clínica). Una muestra de 50 M-VVG física y psicológica (confirmada por sentencia judicial) respondió voluntariamente al SCL-90-R. Los resultados mostraron que las M-VVG informaban de más síntomas clínicos en todas las dimensiones clínicas medidas (i.e., somatización, obsesión-compulsión, sensibilidad interpersonal, depresión, ansiedad, hostilidad, ansiedad fóbica, ideación paranoide, psicoticismo), así como de mayor severidad en los índices de malestar (i.e., GSI, PST, PSDI). Estos resultados son generalizables a otras muestras de la población de M-VVG, pero no a todas ellas. El promedio de daño fue del 53% en depresión y obsesión-compulsión, 48% en ansiedad, 45% en sensibilidad interpersonal, 44% en ansiedad fóbica, 43% en ideación paranoide, 38% en psicoticismo, 36% en somatización y 20% en hostilidad, así como del 48%, 45% y 43% en los índices de malestar GSI, PST y PSDI, respectivamente. Asimismo, el estudio de casos constató entre las víctimas una tasa significativa de casos clínicos (significatividad clínica) en todas las dimensiones y en los índices de malestar, resultados también generalizables a otros estudios de la misma población. Se discuten las implicaciones de los resultados para la evaluación clínica y forense.

ResumenSe diseñó un estudio con el objetivo de comparar la eficacia de la evaluación forense basada en una medida psicométrica con la basada en el análisis de contenido de la entrevista del daño psicológico en casos de violencia de género. Para este cometido, la evaluación forense no solo ha de proporcionar una evaluación del daño psicológico, sino también establecer una relación causa-efecto entre hechos enjuiciados y daño, así como un diagnóstico diferencial de simulación. Para ello se solicitó a 101 mujeres, mentalmente sanas y sin antecedentes de violencia de género, que simularan daño psicológico derivado de la vivencia de violencia de género en el MMPI-2 y en una entrevista narrativa en recuerdo libre, la entrevista clínico-forense de Arce y Fariña (2001). Los resultados mostraron que las mujeres disponían de una capacidad muy elevada de simulación en el modelo psicométrico, el MMPI-2, del 79,6%. En cuanto al diagnóstico diferencial de simulación, si bien las escalas de validez clasificaron consistentemente de forma correcta como simuladoras al 80,2%, el 19,8% no fueron detectadas como tales. Como en la evaluación forense el error tipoii no es admisible (clasificación de un daño simulado como real), la evaluación psicométrica no es prueba suficiente de daño. El análisis de contenido de la entrevista clínico-forense puso de manifiesto que el 3% de las participantes lograron simular la huella psicológica, detectándose en el 97% narrativas no normativas, esto es, falsas. Si bien el análisis de contenido de la entrevista clínico-forense dificulta y detecta más la simulación que la evaluación psicométrica, tampoco es prueba suficiente por sí misma, ya que no controla totalmente el error tipoii. Se discuten las implicaciones para la práctica forense de estos resultados.AbstractWith the aim of comparing in the forensic assessment of the psychosocial injury in intimate partner violence cases, the efficacy of the psychometric measure with the content analysis of the clinical interview, a study was designed. For this, forensic assessment not only must provide a diagnostic of the psychological injury, but also a differential diagnosis of malingering. 101 mentally healthy and with no-history of intimate partner violence (IPV) females answered, under malingering instructions of psychological injury consequence of IPV, to the MMPI-2, and were submitted to a free narrative interview, the forensic-clinical interview (Arce & Fariña, 2001). The results showed that participants had a very high capacity, 79.6%, to malinger in the psychometric measure, the MMPI-2. As for the differential diagnosis of malingering, the validity scales and configurations classified correctly as malingerers to the 80.2% of the protocols, failing in the remaining 19.8%. As in forensic assessment, the TypeII Error (classification of malingered injury as real) is not admissible; the psychometric measure is not sufficient evidence of psychological injury. The content analysis of the forensic-clinical interview revealed that 3% of the participants were capable to malinger the psychological injure, while in 97% were detected non-normative narratives, that is, were classified as false. Although the content analysis of the interview makes malingering significantly more difficult and detects more malingering than the psychometric measure, fails to comply with full control of the TypeII Error. Thus, the content analysis of the clinical-forensic interview is not in itself sufficient forensic evidence. The implications of the results for forensic practice are discussed

Purpose: The literature on the prevalence of child maltreatment is extensive, but studies are required to assess the impact on mental health to enhance the effectiveness of intervention programs. Method: Thus, a field study was undertaken to evaluate depression, anxiety, and anger in 65 child victims of multiple types of maltreatment. Results: The results showed that child maltreatment victim (CM‐V) reported more depressive (36%), anxiety (45%), and anger (69%) symptoms than the normative sample. However, subjects were asymptomatic in approximately 25% of depression, 20% anxiety, and 5% of anger. Epidemiologically, the results revealed that the probability of caseness among the CM‐Vs sample increased to around 85% for depression and anxiety and 90% for anger. Conclusions: The clinical, social, and legal implications of the results are discussed.

In judicial terms, a victim refers to any person who has suffered injury arising from an action or omission of an action that constitutes an offence, and the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. A review of Spanish judicial judgements underscored that the lack of evidence of psychological injury in cases of intimate-partner violence (IPV) accounted for approximately 40% of acquittals. Thus, the Spanish standard of proof for the forensic evaluation of psychological injury i.e., the MMPI-2 and the unstructured interview were assessed in order to determine if they met the statutory requirement for the assessment of psychological injury and the differential diagnosis of feigning. The results of the comparison of 51 women victims of IPV with firm convictions against their aggressors, and 54 women mock victims of IPV showed that the F, K, Fb, Fp and Ds scales, and the F-K index discriminated significantly and with medium and large effect sizes, between adjudicated and mock victims. However, the results did not provide a valid decision criterion for forensic settings i.e., false negatives (identifying feigner as honest protocols) were not classified correctly. In conclusion, the standard forensic procedure for the evaluation of psychological injury in cases of IPV did not constitute valid proof for judges who acquitted defendants on the grounds of not proven due to the lack of evidence of psychological injury.