Insanity evaluations are characterized by continued professional debate and the paucity of empirical research. To address the latter, the construct validity of the Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scales (R-CRAS; Rogers, 1984) was examined via an extensive re-analysis of 413 insanity cases. A series of six separate discriminant analyses was examined to address major components of insanity evaluations. These analyses yielded highly discriminating patterns (M hit rates of 94.3%) and accounted for substantial proportion of the variance (M=63.7%). In general, predicted relationships between individual variables and the discriminant functions were supported. We also addressed the usefulness of the R-CRAS additional variables for the assessment of insanity. We found that these variables contributed substantially to the determination of criminal responsibility. Finally, we pose important and polemical issues for forensic experts conducting evaluations of criminal responsibility.
Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.