Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • AAPL

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
  • AAPL
  • Alerts
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
Research ArticleRegular Article

Future Orientation and Competence to Stand Trial: The Fragility of Competence

Aaron J. Kivisto, Todd M. Moore, Paula A. Fite and Bruce G. Seidner
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online September 2011, 39 (3) 316-326;
Aaron J. Kivisto
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Todd M. Moore
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paula A. Fite
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruce G. Seidner
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Test of indirect effects of age on competence through future orientation. Estimates are standardized. ***p < .001.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Baseline model for tests of invariance across levels of future orientation.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations of Observed Study Variables

    Variable12345678910111213
    Age—.20*.22*.18*.12*.02*.01.22*.06.04.09*−.01−.02
    MacCAT-CA understanding—.44*.39*.15*.40*.26.06−.08†−.10*−.05−.02−.04
    MacCAT-CA reasoning—.43*.30*.44*.30*−.01−.10*−.10*−.04−.07†−.05
    MacCAT-CA appreciation—.19*.34*.23.04−.06−.04−.01−.01.01
    JILC F-Recl—.30*.21*−.02−.02−.02.03−.01.00
    WASI vocabulary—.55*−.16*−.21*−.27*−.11*−.13*−.12*
    WASI matrix reasoning—−.15*−.17*−.20*−.07†−.07†−.04
    MAYSI alcohol/drug—.37*.33*.26*.25*.26*
    MAYSI anger/irritabillity—.65*.51*.44*.44*
    MAYSI depression/anxiousness—.55*.55*.49*
    MAYSI somatic concerns—.33*.38*
    MAYSI suicidal ideation—.38*
    MAYSI thought disturbance—
    Mean14.9711.4112.2210.334.2343.1944.671.763.582.252.67.55.68
    SD1.673.042.581.901.5911.0811.072.412.622.131.801.19.95
    • * p < .01.

    • † p < .05.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Performance by Age and Sample Across Study Variables

    Detained Youth Age GroupsCommunity Youth Age Groupsttotal*
    11–1314–1516–17Total11–1314–1516–17Total
    MacCAT-CA
        Understanding10.0711.3011.6711.2610.6911.2312.3211.551.48
        Reasoning10.6211.8812.2911.8511.7312.3513.2312.574.28†
        Appreciation9.3610.3110.4810.239.8910.3510.8110.431.61
    MAYSI-2
        Alcohol/drug1.952.973.563.06.03.57.79.5318.73†
        Anger/irritability3.864.744.414.462.403.032.712.7410.55†
        Depression/anxiousness2.533.342.772.961.461.721.511.5710.55†
        Somatic2.643.043.012.962.172.462.472.394.84†
        Suicidal ideation.81.95.66.80.27.36.27.306.56†
        Thought disturbance1.00.89.80.87.51.55.46.505.95†
    WASI
        Vocabulary38.0337.9140.3538.9747.8746.3147.5947.2312.23†
        Matrix reasoning41.5041.0242.4241.7047.7246.3848.2847.508.28†
        FSIQ84.8284.3487.0685.5897.2894.7097.2596.4111.88†
    JILC
        Future orientation3.784.004.244.064.104.334.624.403.18‡
    • * Difference between detained and community total scores.

    • † p < .001.

    • ‡ p < .01.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Tests of Invariance Across Future Recognition From WASI to MacCAT-CA Paths

    Model DescriptionComparative Modeldfχ2ΔdfΔχ2
    Baseline model (Model 1)—89183.11——
    Intellectual ability to understanding path constrained equalModel 190184.6011.49ns
    Intellectual ability to understanding and reasoning paths constrained equalModel 191187.1724.06ns
    Intellectual ability to understanding, reasoning, and appreciation paths constrained equalModel 192198.69315.58*
    • NS, not significant.

    • * p < .01.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 39 (3)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 39, Issue 3
1 Sep 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Future Orientation and Competence to Stand Trial: The Fragility of Competence
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Future Orientation and Competence to Stand Trial: The Fragility of Competence
Aaron J. Kivisto, Todd M. Moore, Paula A. Fite, Bruce G. Seidner
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Sep 2011, 39 (3) 316-326;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Future Orientation and Competence to Stand Trial: The Fragility of Competence
Aaron J. Kivisto, Todd M. Moore, Paula A. Fite, Bruce G. Seidner
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Sep 2011, 39 (3) 316-326;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Juvenile Adjudicative Competence
    • Development and Decisional Competence
    • The Present Study
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • A Forensic Science-Based Model for Identifying and Mitigating Forensic Mental Health Expert Biases
  • Benefits of Correctional Psychiatry Teaching and Clinical Exposure for Third-Year Medical Students
  • Bias in Peer Review of Forensic Psychiatry Publications
Show more Regular Article

Similar Articles

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Information for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts

Other Resources

  • Academy Website
  • AAPL Meetings
  • AAPL Annual Review Course

Reviewers

  • Peer Reviewers

Other Publications

  • AAPL Practice Guidelines
  • AAPL Newsletter
  • AAPL Ethics Guidelines
  • AAPL Amicus Briefs
  • Landmark Cases

Customer Service

  • Cookie Policy
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Order Physical Copy

Copyright © 2025 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law