Forensic Psychology

Ch. 1 Forensic Psychology: Promises and Problems

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

What is Forensic Psychology?

The

word "forensic" comes from the Latin word "forensis," meaning "of the forum," where the law courts of ancient Rome were held. Today forensic refers to the application of scientific principles and practices to the adversary process where specially knowledgeable scientists play a role.

Defining Forensic Psychology

Broadly defined: Production and application of psychological knowledge to the civil and criminal justice systems.

What Is Forensic Psychology?

Any

application of psychological knowledge or methods to a task faced by the legal system

human behavior related to the legal process (eyewitness memory & testimony, jury decision making, criminal behavior) The professional practice of psychology within or in consultation with the legal system There is honest disagreement over how broad the definition should be.

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

The Promise & the Problem of Forensic Psychology

Should

the training for forensic psychology be limited to clinical psychology? Heilbruns conceptualization:

his model reflects three training areas and two approaches richer, less adversarial perspective

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Defining Forensic Psychology

Activities include: 1. courtroom testimony 2. performing child custody evaluations 3. screening of law enforcement candidates

Defining Forensic Psychology

4. provision of clinical services to offenders and staff in correctional facilities 5. research and theory building in the area of criminal behavior 6. design and implementation of intervention and prevention programs for youthful offenders.

Contributions to Forensics

Developmental Psychology Social Psychology

custody decisions trying children as adults

Clinical Psychology

interrogators use of coercion & persuasion group dynamics of juries

mental illness & competence to stand trial prediction of future violence accuracy of eyewitness testimony jurors understanding of legal instructions
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Cognitive Psychology

Text Overview
Important Themes of the Author Wrightsman (2005) Forensic applications provide much

opportunity for psychologists but they must remain vigilant and aware that their first duty is to their profession. Forensic psychology as a discipline, remains in a state of formulation and development.

Activities
Consultant to various groups (e.g., police, courts, lawyers...) Mediator to resolve legal disputes before they had to go to trial Evaluation researcher Correctional psychologist

Goals of the Law & Social Science

Different

goals that are partially in conflict (John Carroll, 1980, p. 363)

Law issues of morality, social values, social control, and justifying the application of abstract principles to specific cases. Social science issues of knowledge, truth, and deriving abstract principles from specific instances
values
values

efficiency and expediency

reproducible phenomena and underlying concepts and causes

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

The Context of Forensic Psychology (A. Hess, 1999) Epistemic Differences between Psych and Law

Dimension
Epistemology

Psychology
Objective: progressively approach an ultimate truth; bias is balanced by competing theories; rigorous critique and replication Deterministic: the behavioral sciences hold that behavior has causes that are known or potentially known

Law
Advocacy: truth is born out of a vigorous advocacy of the facts that are consistent with prevailing law Free will: both of the public and law hold that people determine their fate. Individual responsibility is considered in most cases

Causation of Behavior

The Context of Forensic Psychology (A. Hess, 1999) Epistemic Differences between Psych and Law

Dimension
Nature of law

Psychology
Descriptive: Research will reveal the underlying natural order or lawful relationships between variables. Formulaic or in typologies Empirical: based on nomothetic or normative data gathered through methods described sufficiently to replicate

Law
Prescriptive: Law directs behavior, clearly states what is proscribed or banned and authorize punishment to enforce proscriptions Rational: based on ideographic or detailed case data; compelling logic to support arguement

Knowledge

The Context of Forensic Psychology (A. Hess, 1999) Epistemic Differences between Psych and Law

Dimension
Methodology

Psychology
Experimental: control through experimental design or statistical regression allows scientist to eliminate rival hypotheses

Law
Case Method: analyses of the particulars in a case allows the investigator to draw parallels to other cases or to construct a narrative that covers the details in a tightly woven whole Expedient: Preponderance more than 50% or beyond a reasonable doubt; clear and convincing.

Criteria

Conservative p<.05

The Context of Forensic Psychology (A. Hess, 1999) Epistemic Differences between Psych and Law

Dimension
Principles

Psychology
Exploratory: encourages a multiplicity of theories that are falsifiable and verifiable, or that can be tested and found wanting Limited: restricted to the rules of evidence and the attorneys questions or amicus briefs

Law
Conservative: the predominate theory in a case prevails based on the coherence of the facts to statutes and to the stare decisis or precedent cases Broad: within the rules of procedure and evidence, and within courtroom decorum; can introduce a wide variety of evidence in a desired sequence

Latitude of courtroom behavior

Laws & Values

Values

standards for decision making

Laws

are created, amended, or discarded because society has established standards for what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

The Importance of Laws

Laws are human creations that evolve out of the need to resolve disagreements (Wrightsman, 2001) A regulation in accordance with reason promulgated by the head of a community for the sake of the common welfare (Aquinas) Laws reflect values of a society because society establishes standards for what is acceptable. Society's views can change therefore leading to new laws and new interpretations of existing laws (e.g., spousal rape)

Intuition vs. Empiricism

Psychologists are trained to answer questions about human behavior by collecting data. Conclusions arent accepted until theyre shown to be reliable and able to be replicated. Lawyers and judges are more willing to rely on their own experience, their own perspectives, and their intuition or gut feelings. Schall v. Martin (1984) Supreme court declared that judges could predict violence no matter what the research said
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

The Perspectives of Psychology and the Law

What

determines truth?
to collect data observations and experiences

psychologists
trained

police officers
personal

attorneys and judges

truth

may be irrelevant

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

 The

U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutional to limit the workday of any woman employed in a laundry or factory to 10 hours. Lawyer Louis Brandeis filed his now-famous Brandeis Brief, citing medical and social science research rather than reviewing past cases and statutes.

Muller v. Oregon (1907)

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

The Legal Systems Criticism of Psychology

Lack

of ecological validity of psychological research Going beyond the data to make moral judgments Intruding upon the legitimate activities of the legal system

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Illustrative Court Decisions

A

Criminal Case: McCleskey v. Kemp (1987)

Warren McCleskey, an African-American man, helped rob a furniture store and was convicted of killing a white police officer who responded. McCleskey was sentenced to death, but claimed that the state of Georgia administered its deathsentencing laws in a racially discriminatory manner. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected his claim (5-4) and he was executed.
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Illustrative Court Decisions

A Civil Case: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989)

Ann Hopkins was a very successful salesperson at this leading accounting firm.

She brought in $25 million in business, had more billable hours than anyone else up for partner that year.

Hopkins was passed over for partnership and advised to take a course at charm school, wear makeup and jewelry, and generally be more feminine.
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

U.S. Supreme Court

In such cases it is not permissible for employers to use discriminatory criteria, and they (not the plaintiff) must bear the burden of persuading the trier of fact that their decision would have been the same if no impermissible discrimination had taken place. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989) sex discrimination case and sex stereotyping. Did Fiske et al really influence the judes?
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Other Tensions Between Law and Psychology

Psychology's emphasis on innovation and counter- intuitive thinking v. law's stare decisis (let the decision stand) model Psych's experimental method v. Law's adversarial process. Psych's probabilistic and tentative conclusions v. law's emphasis on certainty or at least the assumption of irrevocability Psych's abstract and academic v. Law's pragmatic emphasis

Other Tensions Between Law and Psychology: Standard of Truth

Psychology (especially experimental psychology) emphasizes an analytical world view. That is, causes can be determined in probabilistic terms and assume that variables have a separate and knowable influence on our behavior
Law (especially police) will use wider and more varied methods to determine the truth (hunches) and are not bound by empirical limitations

Legal Systems Criticisms of Psychology

Psychology can lack ecological validity (invalid outside of the lab) e.g., death qualified jurors Erroneously, going beyond scientific claims and making claims that are not in the realm of their expertise. Psychological knowledge subverting reasonable legal concepts and traditions.

Future Relationship Between Psychology and the Law

Reasons

for the courts reluctance to rely on empirical research:

Judges are conservative and perceive social scientists to be liberal. Judges are self-confident and do not believe that they need any assistance from non-lawyers. Judges are human, and it is human nature to be unscientific. Judges are ignorant of, inexperienced with, or do not understand empirical social science.

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Future Relationship Between Psychology and the Law

Judges

perceive science as a threat to their power and prestige. Law and social science are rival systems with competing logics. Judges perceive science to be a threat to their power Tanford (1990).

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Will Law and Psychology Marry?

Some tend to think that psychology will have a more prominent role in legal contexts in the future (e.g., consultant roles in law enforcement)
Others tend to believe that psychology and the law will have a trouble relating because of:

Brief History of Psychology and Law

The

Applied Side:
father of modern criminology the causes of juvenile delinquency

Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909)

the

William Healy
studied

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Brief History of Psychology and Law

The

Applied Side: Sigmund Freud (1906)

cautioned Austrian judges that their decisions were influenced by unconscious processes also claimed that insights from his theory could be used to understand criminal behavior and improve the legal system
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

In the Beginning: J. McKeen Cattell Columbia University 1893 The Academic Side of Forensic Psychology

Do Chestnut or Oak Trees Lose Their Leaves Earlier in the Fall? Do Horses in the Field Stand With Head or Tail to the Wind? In Which Direction Do the Seeds of an Apple Point? What Was the Weather One Week Ago Today?

(Louis) William Stern

Studied

under Ebbinghaus Improved Cattells original study by adding realism to it. Emotions reduce accuracy of recall

(Louis) William Stern

Betrage zur Psychollogie der Aussage first journal on the psychology of testimony Subjective sincerity does not guarantee objective truthfulness Leading questions contaminate the accuracy of eyewitness accounts

What does this mean?

In conclusion: therefore, modern forensic psychology began with empirical research on the psychology of testimony

Courtroom Testimony
Americans

disinterested in this area unlike the Europeans Wundt warned his students about applying psychology without much experimentation and most heeded his warning The big exception was Munsterberg

Hugo Munsterberg
The Academic Side: Arrived in U.S. in 1892 at the invitation of William James

Adademic Contributions Prior to Munsterberg

Hermann

Ebbinghaus (1885)

demonstrated the rapid rate of early memory loss

Alfred

Binet (as early as 1900)

studied childrens competence as eyewitnesses

Louis

William Stern (1902)

published eyewitness research in Germany

Guy

Montrose Whipple (1909)

conducted classic experiments relating testimony and evidence to perception and memory
Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Munsterbergs Goals for Psychology and the Law

Raising

the position of the psychological profession to one of importance in public life

In his attempts to encourage more interaction between the fields of law and psychology, he was sometimes insulting to those in the legal profession.

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Munsterberg
1914

published The Mind of the Juryman the psychologist has every reason to be satisfied with the jury system as long as the women are kept out of it. His claims were often exaggerated and boasted in the literature On the one side he successfully pushed his American colleagues into the practical legal arena while on the other side expected more out of psychology than it could deliver

Munsterberg
Psychology and the Law
Munsterberg called for more interaction between law and psychology (maybe how he called for it was more a problem than what he called for) Munsterberg believed that the individual could not accurately judge the real world that existed outside him or her, or their own mind. Therefore, courts need psychologists because they could be more objective

Munsterbergs Three Crucial Activities

1.
2.

Demonstrated the fallibility of memory

Published On the Witness Stand (1908) Offered testimony as an expert witness in highly publicized trials

3.

Fulero & Wrightsmans Forensic Psychology, 3rd Edition

Munsterberg
Psychology could be brought into court in three ways
Showing how frail human memory is... Experimental psychology could be useful in court as his publications could demonstrate. Being available for noteworthy and famous cases (Big Bill Haywood case; IWW, bombing, word association test and the newspaper interview)

Munsterberg

Inflated claims of psychology ("pierce the mind") Advocacy Strong negative reaction from the legal community

William Marston (1893 -1947)

William Marston
One

of the most influential psychologists in the early days of forensic psychology A student of Munsterberg without alienating the legal community Received a law degree and a Ph.D. both from Harvard

William Marston
Discovered

a significant positive correlation between systolic blood pressure and lying One of the first consultants in New York City On a less serious note he was a cartoonist who created the Wonder Woman character in 1941.

Acceptance of Psychologists as Expert Witnesses

It

is generally believed that Americans served as expert witnesses since the 1920s The first case was State v. Driver 1921. Only a partial victory since the witness was accepted their testimony was not accepted. This was a West Virginia case involving a 12 year old attempted rape victim and the expert witness worked for the state as a researcher.

Acceptance of Psychologists as Expert Witnesses

People

v. Hawthorne (1940), a Michigan case. Hawthorne was tried for murder of his wifes lover and had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. The trial court rejected the expert witness (a Ph.D. with impressive credentials) in favor of a physician. The Michigan supreme court ruled that the psychologist should have been allowed to testify because of his extensive knowledge and background.

Acceptance of Psychologists as Expert Witnesses

Other psychologists were involved with the school desegregation cases in the 1950s. Brown v. Board of Education involved expert testimony of Kenneth Clark and his famous doll research.

Cognitive and Personality Assessment

While Munsterberg was proselytizing psychologys usefulness in the court room, another American psychologist was quietly making inroads into a different forensic domain. In 1909, clinical psychologist Grace Fernald worked with Psychiatrist William Healy to establish the first clinic specifically designed for youthful offenders: the Juvenile Psychopathic Institute.

Cognitive and Personality Assessment

Grace Fernald utilized the Standford Binet but noticed the need for more performance data on clients. She and Healy invented a test to measure 23 different areas of performance.

Correctional Psychology
According

to Lindner (1955) 1913 is the start date for psychological services offered within a correctional facility (a womens reformatory in New York). The main task of these psychologists was to help detect feeble-mindedness. The first state to provide comprehensive psychological services upon entering prison was Wisconsin.

Correctional Psychology
According

to Corsini (1945) in the 1940s there were 200,000 inmates being served by a mere 80 psychologists Their work consisted of testing, guidance, and consulting By the 1960s the major use of psychologists was to help diagnose and classify

Police Psychology
Terman

(1917) was the first psychologist to use mental tests to help in the selection of law enforcement personnel. Terman (Binet-Simon Test) low IQs Thurstone (1922, Army Alpha) low IQs Maude Merrill (1927, Army Alpha administered to already employed officers; better results)

Other Developments
Inactive period (1914-1970s) Resurgence in the 1970's Social psychology and social policy More "action" oriented research