Search

Whereas the interest in personality descriptions in expert court reports is usually devoted to the explanation of the behavior of offenders, in the present study these descriptions are used as a means to assess the clinical judgement of the experts. Whatever the efforts of the experts to fulfill the condition of objectivity required by the legal proceedings, two major difficulties impedes the achievement of this task. The first one refers to the way in which the observations are presented (typically in natural or common language). The second one is related to the circumstances in which the expert report is carried out and especially to the information that is at the expert’s disposal. As regards to the bias introduced by the language one of the most important criticisms rests on the fuzzy semantic content of trait attribution, exemplified by the polysemic nature of adjectives used to describe personality. It. follows that when co-occurrences between trait attributions are examined, the principal semantic dimension found is usually an evaluative one. The opposition good-bad thus introduced is however without any informative value. This fact has been established from natural language trait attributions, but it is sometimes encountered when personality rating scales or even inventories are used.

The effects of the activities of multinational corporations on the economy of the Federal Republic of Germany have hardly ever been examined empirically. The role of the multinational corporations (MNCs) in the process of structural change had not been studied either until an enquiry was recently undertaken for the Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs1. The following article is based on the expert report which deals with this and other aspects for the first time and is to be published shortly.

Este trabajo ha sido realizado en el marco del proyecto de investigación FFI2014-53050-C5-3-P (2015-2018) del Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO) del Gobierno español, cofinanciado con fondos FEDER de la Unión Europea., En las últimas décadas del siglo XIII, en pleno proceso de configuración del nuevo Reino de Valencia y de su medicalización, se vislumbró por parte de las autoridades y de los ciudadanos el papel que podían desarrollar los médicos para esclarecer muertes violentas. Fue el problema del posible envenenamiento de un individuo la primera circunstancia que obligó a los jueces a recurrir a los médicos, pues éstos podían con su conocimiento experto contribuir a dilucidar la verdad. Por eso se les pidió incluso el uso de la disección post mortem, si era necesario. En realidad, los médicos fueron conscientes de sus limitaciones en este campo y de que debían actuar con cautela., FFI2014-53050-C5-3-P (2015-2018) del Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO) del Gobierno español, FEDER de la Unión Europea

In the medico-legal context, expert witnesses are required, under the Practice Direction supplement to the Civil Procedure Rules Part 35 for Experts and Assessors (2005), to “indicate if … they are not satisfied that an opinion can be expressed finally and without qualification” (p.10). This declaration in an expert report for the courts in the UK requires that the expert would have assessed the confidence they have in the opinion expressed in their report. While experts preparing a medico-legal report will therefore draw upon their specific professional expertise as the basis for their confidence in the opinions expressed, few experts will have formal training in the assessment of deception, and not all will be readily familiar with the broader literature,1–5 theory and research relating to assessment of deception and malingering. There is an established literature6–9 in psychology on “lying” which addresses key aspects relevant to the evaluation of an individual's presentation at interview. This psychological literature can play a key part in the necessary knowledge base for interviewers who must evaluate the validity of an individual's reported difficulties, and assess the confidence they have in the interview process. This article briefly reviews research relating to malingering, lying and deception in so far as it relates to the medico-legal setting.

Based on the 1983 WHO Expert Report, Smoking control strategies in developing countries, the problem in these countries is briefly reviewed. Many countries are well on the way to adding a formidable epidemic of smoking related diseases to their already overwhelming health problems. Rational policies of prevention are reasonably well understood. But, just as in developed countries, the difficulty is to get them applied. Doctors in the industrialized world could do much to support their colleagues in the threatened countries. All of us should feel a responsibility towards helping to prevent the tragedy.