What is it about?
The American Psychological Association (APA) occasionally submits amicus briefs to important courts, including the US Supreme Court. This comment takes issue with an article by Marcus et al, who alleged APA's amicus briefs contain a "significant number of inaccurate citations," and argued these "miscitations" misinform the court about important psychological findings and could lead to significant injustice and harm. In this commentary, we take issue with the method in which Marcus et al. (2025) reached these conclusions, and argue that most of the inaccurate citations are likely harmless errors with little effect on APA’s reputation or court decisions.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
APA spends significant resources to create briefs that accurately inform American courts about issues for which there is a general consensus among psychologists. The briefs are carefully reviewed to avoid advocacy. As a result, APA enjoys respect among judges and its briefs are often considered and cited by courts. An unfair suggestion that the briefs are misleading
Perspectives
Writing this article was a great pleasure as it has co-authors I respect and admire. I was very grateful to be invited to write this commentary and correct an unfair criticism of a process that provides an important resource to courts.
Joel Dvoskin
University of Arizona College of Medicine
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Citation accuracy, misinformation, and harmless error in American Psychological Association amicus curiae briefs: Commentary on Marcus et al. (2025)., American Psychologist, October 2025, American Psychological Association (APA),
DOI: 10.1037/amp0001568.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
