Abstract
Do psychologists' evaluations of juvenile offenders prior to dispositional placement have a measurable effect on judges' decision making? Is the nature of any such influence best explained by the quality of the written report, the relationship between the psychologist and the judge, or a combination of these and other factors? The current study attempted to address these issues by investigating the quality of 172 predisposition psychological evaluation reports from a Philadelphia-area juvenile court jurisdiction and the association between report quality and judges' recommendation acceptance. Results point to the need for practicing psychologists and judges to become mote aware of the relevant domains of assessment for this type of evaluation and of what constitutes quality reporting within each domain.