Search

AbstractThe aim of this study was to develop a measure of quality for Single Expert Reports (known as child custody evaluations or CCEs in the United States) and assess their psychometric properties. The Quality Measure for Child Custody Evaluations (QM-CCE) was derived from a previous survey of judges, lawyers and psychologists that identified 30 key components of a CCE plus an item assessing Overall Quality. Forty-four students enrolled in Master of Psychology programs in New South Wales (N = 44), Australia read seven mock reports and rated the quality using the QM-CCE. Inter-rater reliability was within the acceptable to excellent range across reports (ICC = .79 − .95). Exploratory Factor Analysis found a single dimension that underpins the measure. Internal consistency of the sub-scales was excellent (α = .98). Inter-rater reliability was also excellent (ICC = .99). Although the single item, Overall Quality, was highly correlated with the Multi-item Response, systematic patterns of difference were found. Given the promising psychometric properties of the QM-CCE, it may be a useful instrument not only for research purposes but for evaluators to improve the quality of their work and for legal professionals to decide the weight accorded to the CCE.

AbstractEleven highly experienced Australian professionals (psychologists, family lawyers, and judges) were interviewed regarding Single Expert Reports (also known as a Child Custody Evaluation CCE) written by psychologists. A semi-structured interview explored their opinion about the role of and weight afforded to the CCE; the value of psychologists as Single Experts (evaluators), what makes a CCE helpful or unhelpful where there are allegations of mental illness, alienation, family violence and sexual abuse; the inclusion of formal risk assessments in reports; and how psychologists could improve the quality of CCEs. Thematic Analysis was used to capture emergent themes from the data. Four major themes were identified. The first three themes explain what components make for a high-quality report: (1) Thoroughness, (2) Transparency and (3) a Pathway Forward. The fourth theme was informed by the first three themes, in that if the above components were done to a high standard, the overall CCE could be given more weight, and be of greater (4) Assistance to the Court. Findings add depth to previous survey data, confirm the essential components of a CCE that make it helpful in family law proceedings, and provide clarification about how psychologists can improve the quality and consistency of CCEs.