Forensic Briefs

Artificial intelligence promises faster forensic evaluations, but speed does not guarantee quality. Drs. Benjamin Silber and Heath Hodges discuss the evolving ethical landscape, confidentiality and transparency, hallucinations, bias, and the credibility of AI-assisted work in court. They examine how AI could affect vulnerable people in overburdened legal systems, compare automated record review with expert clinical judgment, and consider potential benefits and risks in private practices, hospitals, and other forensic settings. Their discussion emphasizes responsible human oversight.

Dr. Jennifer Christman explores how human and systemic biases become embedded in artificial intelligence and why clinicians should resist overreliance on algorithmic conclusions. The conversation examines AI in violence risk assessment before turning to young people, social media, and the manosphere. Dr. Christman explains how recommender algorithms can normalize misogynistic beliefs and discusses how forensic psychologists may need to expand juvenile evaluations to better understand digital media, AI use, relationships, sexual attitudes, and online influences.

Artificial intelligence offers forensic psychologists intriguing new tools, but when does assistance become inappropriate delegation? Dr. Dana Formon examines lower- and higher-risk uses of generative AI, from proofreading and consultation-like applications to report writing, record review, assessment interpretation, and risk calculations. She discusses how psychologists can develop AI competence, evaluate tools, protect confidential information, document AI-assisted work, determine when disclosure is appropriate, and preserve independent professional judgment within a field subject to unusually high legal and ethical scrutiny.

Artificial intelligence is changing not only how forensic professionals work, but also how examinees, attorneys, and justice-involved individuals prepare for evaluations. Dr. Tallie Armstrong discusses how AI may influence symptom presentation, psychosexual and custody evaluations, digital risk, and emerging clims involving AI-related psychological harm. She also considers constructive applications, including individualized competency-restoration materials, courtroom visuals, social stories, and interactive learning tools, while emphasizing informed consent, privacy, documentation, professional judgment, and the limits of current technology.

Artificial intelligence is rapidly entering professional and personal life, but what does it mean for forensic psychology? Five board-certified forensic psychologists explain how generative AI and large language models work, why their responses may change, and how psychologists are beginning to use and evaluate these tools. The discussion addresses hallucinations, privacy, transparency, competency, copyrighted assessment materials, examinee use of AI, and whether AI-generated work can withstand courtroom scrutiny.

In this episode, Dr. Apryl Alexander discusses her path into forensic psychology and her work with justice-involved youth. The conversation explores polyvictimization, the abuse-to-prison pipeline, school discipline, racial disparities, trauma-informed treatment, and the limitations of focusing only on individual behavior. Dr. Alexander challenges forensic psychologists to consider children’s lived environments, systemic inequities, and opportunities for prevention and advocacy.

In this episode, Dr. Shoba Sreenivasan explores the complex intersection of military service, trauma, sexual offending, and forensic risk assessment. She discusses why veterans appear disproportionately represented among people incarcerated for sexual offenses, what is known and unknown about repeat offending, and how SVP recidivism research complicates assumptions about risk. The conversation also examines VA services, housing barriers, trauma-informed care, and cultural issues in forensic assessment.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Julie Goldenson explores aspirational forensic report writing, emphasizing growth mindset, self-awareness, consultation, and trauma-informed practices as foundations for ethical, high-quality forensic mental health work.

In this special host-led episode, Drs. Michelle Guyton and Alex Millkey discuss the rise of remote forensic psychological evaluations. They review the history of telehealth, summarize research on remote competency and psychiatric assessments, and present findings from their own Oregon-based study comparing in-person and remote fitness to proceed evaluations. The conversation explores benefits, limitations, unanswered questions, and practical considerations for clinicians navigating technology in forensic practice.

In this episode, Terry Kukor explores aspirational forensic practice and the role of consultation in strengthening forensic mental health work. He discusses what it means to “strive” under the Specialty Guidelines, emphasizing humility, curiosity, tolerance for uncertainty, empathy, and critical thinking. The conversation examines common impediments to high-level practice, the value of consultation in reducing bias and improving reasoning, and how thoughtful collaboration can help forensic clinicians continually grow while maintaining ethical and professional integrity.

James W. Mikesell, PhD, ABPP, is a board-certified clinical and forensic psychologist with over two decades of experience conducting specialized forensic evaluations and consultations in civil, criminal, juvenile, and family law cases. He is board certified in both forensic and rehabilitation psychology and currently serves as President of the American Academy of Forensic Psychology. Dr. Mikesell holds adjunct faculty appointments at Syracuse University and Upstate Medical University and is actively involved in national guideline development, professional mentoring, and forensic education.

In the first of a two-part conversation, Drs. Rick Frederick and James Mikesell explore foundational issues surrounding psychologists as expert witnesses. The discussion addresses ethics, the specialty guidelines, discovery obligations, impeachment, and the tension between test security and due process rights. Drawing on case law, professional standards, and real-world practice, our guests outline why transparency, protective orders, and legal literacy are essential for ethical and effective forensic work in civil and criminal contexts.

Dr. David DeMatteo returns to Forensic Briefs to examine the Sequential Intercept Model and the evolution of problem-solving courts. Our conversation explores diversion points across the justice system, the rise and impact of drug and mental health courts, and the balance between public safety and public health approaches. Dr. DeMatteo highlights research, policy implications, and practical ways forensic clinicians can apply these frameworks in evaluations, testimony, and system-level reform.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Reid Meloy returns to examine threat assessment and management through the development and application of the TRAP-18. He discusses proximal warning behaviors, distal risk factors, time-sequencing of violent pathways, and emerging research using artificial intelligence in forensic risk assessment. The conversation also analyzes the Capital Gazette mass murder, highlighting failures in threat management and the critical warning sign of attackers “going dark” before violence.

Dr. J. Reid Meloy is a board-certified forensic psychologist (ABPP) with a national and international consulting practice in criminal, civil, and counterterrorism cases. A past president of the American Academy of Forensic Psychology, he is the developer of the TRAP-18 and co-creator of the WAVR-21 threat assessment instruments. Dr. Meloy has authored more than 270 scholarly publications and 14 books, and has served as a consultant to the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit and major public agencies worldwide.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Reid Meloy examines the psychology of extreme violence through the lens of affective and predatory aggression. Drawing from decades of clinical, forensic, and psychoanalytic work, he discusses pathways to violence, planning and emotional states, psychosis and rationality, stochastic terrorism, and the role of social media and ideology. The conversation highlights practical implications for threat assessment, expert testimony, and understanding violent behavior in contemporary contexts.

Dr. J. Reid Meloy is a board-certified forensic psychologist (ABPP) with a national and international consulting practice in criminal, civil, and counterterrorism cases. A past president of the American Academy of Forensic Psychology, he is the developer of the TRAP-18 and co-creator of the WAVR-21 threat assessment instruments. Dr. Meloy has authored more than 270 scholarly publications and 14 books, and has served as a consultant to the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit and major public agencies worldwide.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Emily Salisbury explores gender-responsive strategies within the criminal legal system. She discusses how trauma, relationships, economic marginalization, and gender norms shape women’s pathways into justice involvement. The conversation examines the risk-needs-responsivity model, gender-specific assessment tools, reproductive justice, and probation practices, highlighting how policy and practice changes can improve outcomes for justice-involved women and their families.

Dr. Emily Salisbury is an Associate Professor of Social Work and Director of the Utah Criminal Justice Center at the University of Utah. A nationally recognized applied criminologist, she is a founding scholar of gender-responsive correctional treatment and co-creator of the Women’s Risk Needs Assessment (WRNA). Her research and policy work focus on rehabilitation, decarceration, and reintegration of justice-involved women, with broad impact across correctional systems in the U.S. and internationally.

Dr. Terry Kukor explains how relevancy-focused reports shift forensic writing from procedure-based sections to findings-based answers. Learn practical filters for what belongs in a report, how to reduce cognitive strain, and why addressing disconfirming data strengthens credibility.

This episode examines the national competency crisis, focusing on misdemeanor defendants, rising incompetence findings, statutory responses across states, and the ethical, clinical, and systemic consequences for courts, evaluators, and defendants with serious mental illness.

Andi Brierley joins Forensic Briefs to discuss his journey from incarceration to academia, exploring how lived experience informs desistance, peer mentorship, and rehabilitation. He highlights the power of credibility, connection, and rethinking “peer” roles in justice reform.