The Inventory of Legal Knowledge (ILK) and adults with intellectual disabilities

Pages83-89
Date12 June 2017
Published date12 June 2017
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/JIDOB-10-2016-0018
AuthorMalorie E. Watson,Aaron J. Kivisto
Subject MatterHealth & social care,Learning & intellectual disabilities,Offending behaviour,Sociology,Sociology of crime & law,Deviant behaviour,Education,Special education/gifted education,Emotional/behavioural disorders
The Inventory of Legal Knowledge (ILK)
and adults with intellectual disabilities
Malorie E. Watson and Aaron J. Kivisto
Abstract
Purpose Adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) entering the legal system in the USA are at heightened risk
of being incorrectly labeled as malingering. The Inventory of Legal Knowledge (ILK) was recently developed
to assess response style of individuals undergoing competency to standtrial (CST) evaluations. The purpose
of this paper is to present preliminary data on the utility of the ILK with adults with ID.
Design/methodology/approach In total, 32 adults were recruited from an American day program for
adults with ID. Using a simulation design, the first 24 participants were assigned to the honest responding
group and the remaining eight were assigned to the fake bad group. The normative performance of the
honest responding group was compared to established norms for adults without ID, the most efficient
ILK cut-off score was examined, and convergent validity of the ILK and other malingering measures tested.
Findings Compared to the established mean score, the recommended cut-off score, and two
independent published samples of non-ID adults, the normative performance of the honest responding ID
group was significantly lower. Analyses of area under the curve revealed that the ILK lacked sufficient ability to
discriminate adults with ID instructed to respond honestly from those instructed to feign incompetence, and
correlational analyses failed to support the convergent validity of the ILK in this sample.
Research limitations/implications The present findings do not support the use of the ILK with adults
with ID, even with adjusted cut scores. The development of novel malingering measures that can be used in
the context of CST evaluations with adults with ID is needed.
Originality/value The present study is the first to examine the psychometric properties of the ILK with
adults diagnosed with ID and without concomitant psychiatric symptomatology.
Keywords Intellectual disability, Forensic, Adult, Malingering, Competence to stand trial, Feigning
Paper type Research paper
To be competent to sta nd trial in the US lega l system, defendant s generally have
to be able to underst and the legal procee dings and be able to w ork with their atto rney
(Dusky v. United St ates, 1960). Given the incentives to feign impairment during competency to
stand trial (CST) evaluations, evaluators must be able to assess accurately for malingering
(Conroy and Kwartner, 2006). Several instruments have been developed for this purpose, each
of which typically focuses on either malingered cognitive deficits or malingered psychiatric
symptoms. Recentl y, the Inventory of L egal Knowledge (IL K) was developed to ev aluate
malingered defic its specific to CST, in cluding defenda ntsknowledge of the legal process,
the roles of different parties involved, and the capacity to meaningfully assist ones attorney
(Otto et al., 2010, 2011; Musick and Otto, 2010). Given this, the ILK has the potential to
become widely use d in CST evaluation s in the USA.
In one of the first ILK validation studies, Guenther and Otto (2010) examined the psychometric
properties of the ILK with a sample of college students and a sample of psychiatric inpatients.
Using a simulation design, participants in both samples were randomly assigned to one of two
conditions; honest or fake bad. In order to assess test-retest reliability, 60 of the college students
were administered the ILK twice. Results showed the ILK to have acceptable test-retest reliability
(r¼0.76), although this was considered to be partially due to practice effects. Further,
participants in both samples assigned to the fake bad condition earned lower scores, on
average, relative to those assigned to the honest responding group, providing preliminary validity
support for the ILK.
Received 22 October 2016
Revised 3 January 2017
Accepted 3 January 2017
Malorie E. Watson is a MA
Student in Clinical Psychology
and Aaron J. Kivisto is an
Assistant Professor of Clinical
Psychology, both at the School
of Psychological Sciences,
University of Indianapolis,
Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
DOI 10.1108/JIDOB-10-2016-0018 VOL. 8 NO.2 2017, pp. 83-89, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN2050-8824
j
JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES AND OFFENDING BEHAVIOUR
j
PAGE 8 3

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT