The role of psychological evaluation in certification of juveniles for trial as adults
Level 4 - case-series / case-control
Descriptive case series without a control group (by design analogy, non-clinical CEBM).
What was done
The authors analyzed 18 juvenile cases from 1970 in Harris County, Texas, to examine the demographic profiles, psychological test findings, and the role of psychological evaluations in proceedings certifying juveniles for trial as adults. Testing data included the Wechsler Intelligence Scale, Bender-Gestalt, Draw-A-Person, Rorschach, and Thematic Apperception Test. Findings were reported descriptively without inferential statistical significance tests.
What was found
The cohort consisted of 17 males and 1 female (15 African American, 3 Caucasian; five 15-year-olds, twelve 16-year-olds, and one 17-year-old). Offenses examined were 8 cases of robbery by firearms, 7 of murder, 3 of rape, and 3 of assault to murder. Cognitive testing showed 1 subject in the high normal range (IQ 111–119), 6 average (91–110), 2 dull normal (80–90), 7 borderline (66–70), and 2 defective (≤65), with the typical juvenile functioning at roughly the 16th percentile. Psychologists were called as expert witnesses in only 2 of the 18 cases.
Why it matters
The paper provides early descriptive evidence on the intellectual profiles of youth facing adult transfer and highlights underutilization of psychological experts in formal court hearings.
Limits
The study is limited to a small descriptive case series (n = 18) from a single county in 1970 with no comparison group or statistical hypothesis testing. Findings are purely observational and subject to confounding.
Cited by
- supports In the state of Texas, a 15-year-old adolescent can legally be tried as an adult for a criminal offense.