Clinical Assessment of Judgment in Adults and the Elderly: Development and Validation of the Three Domains of Judgment Test-Clinical Version (3DJT-CV).

(1) Background: This article discusses the first two phases of development and validation of the Three Domains of Judgment Test (3DJT). This computer-based tool, co-constructed with users and capable of being administered remotely, aims to assess the three main domains of judgment (practical, moral, and social) and learn from the psychometric weaknesses of tests currently used in clinical practice. (2) Method: First, we presented the 3DJT to experts in cognition, who evaluated the tool as a whole as well as the content validity, relevance, and acceptability of 72 scenarios. Second, an improved version was administered to 70 subjects without cognitive impairment to select scenarios with the best psychometric properties in order to build a future clinically short version of the test. (3) Results: Fifty-six scenarios were retained following expert evaluation. Results support the idea that the improved version has good internal consistency, and the concurrent validity primer shows that 3DJT is a good measure of judgment. Furthermore, the improved version was found to have a significant number of scenarios with good psychometric properties to prepare a clinical version of the test. (4) Conclusion: The 3DJT is an interesting alternative tool for assessing judgment. However, more studies are needed for its implementation in a clinical context.

The defense of mental disorder and crimes against the person committed under the influence of cannabis: A Canadian perspective.

The legalization of cannabis raises many queries, one of which regards the criminal liability of users under the influence of cannabis when crimes against the person are committed. This perspective review consequently aims to examine the defense of mental disorder (also referred to as the insanity defense) in Canadian criminal law and revise court decisions involving cases with cannabis use rendered in the field between 1995 and 2021. The purpose was to specify the factors allowing Canadian criminal courts to grant or refuse the defense of mental disorder to help further operationalize the jurisprudential criteria for forensic practice. We noted that presence of a severe and persistent primary psychopathology was the most decisive factor when determining the verdict of the accused who consumed cannabis.