ch 1 (MT 1) Flashcards
what is forensic psychology and what are its research routes?
psychology within/in conjunction with the legal system
includes research and clinical route
what are 6 roles of forensic psychologists?
-criminal + civil evaluation
-expert testimony
-assessment, treatment, consultation on risk factors
-policy consultation to lawmakers
-consultation + training for law enforcement / justice / correctional systems
-training + supervision of students
Name + describe Haney’s 8 potential conflicts between the disciplines of law and psychology (1980) (12 pts)
- law is conservative, resists innovation / psych is creative, novel, innovate approaches
- hierarchical + authoritative, lower courts bound by higher / empirical, ideas depend on consistent supporting data
- Adversarial system used to arrive at the “truth” / objective experimental model, ascertain “truth” thru hypothesis testing
- Prescriptive laws (tell people how to behave) / descriptive (goal of describing behavior as it naturally occurs)
5.Ideographic, focuses on indiv case / nomothetic, group studies, less focus on case studies - Operates on principle of certainty + definitive outcome / methods rely on probabilistic models
7.Approach is reactive / approach is proactive
8.Operational + applied in nature, concerns arise from real world / academic in nature, can lose touch w “real world”
according to Haney’s Taxonomy, define + give 2 examples of psychology:
a) IN law
b) AND law
c) OF law
a) psychology IN law: explicit + conventional use of psychology by lawyers in the legal process
-eg applying psychology to select jurors
-obtaining psychological testimony on insanity defense
b) psychology AND law: use of psychological principles to analyze/examine the legal system
-eg: research on eyewitness accuracy
-research on jury decision-making
c) psychology OF law: law is the object of psychological study
-eg what are the fnxs of law?
-how do laws affect behaviors / attitudes?
name + describe one of the challenges from conflicts between law and psychology that Haney described (2pts)
-because law is hierarchical + authoritative, higher courts can overturn decisions made by lower courts
-psych uses nomothetic style of inquiry – ie generalizes ideas based on group studies that don’t look at single cases as nothing more than outliers / faulty readings
describe psychology’s influence on the legal system (indirect and direct)
-indirect: research is published in journal articles, books, and popular periodicals
-judges may cite publications as secondary sources for their opinions
-direct: psychologists who have specialized knowledge communicate research results via expert testimony in court (eg amicus curiae briefs)
what is the role of expert witnesses? what is the need for expert testimony?
-can be called to provide evidence in criminal + civil cases
-need for expert testimony is based on belief that experts have specialized knowledge beyond the ordinary understanding of judge and/or jury (eg eval defendant’s ability to stand trial, educate court about psychological research)
compare lab experiments to archival case reviews + field experiments (2pts)
-vs archival: labs = know who’s telling the truth, if polygraphers are right/wrong
-archival: more ecological validity (realism): takes info from real cases, eyewitnesses, viewing events on that lineup
-usually no ground truth + don’t find out if suspect is innocent / guilty
-vs field: field has higher ecological validity, use bit of lab experiments (work w real eyewitnesses + real crimes w police), are also randomly assigned to diff conds
-again, no ground truth + high stakes (failing polygraph means suspect might be charged w serious crime), lack of accuracy
Name one eyewitness identification procedure that has been found to result in a trade-off and specify the costs and benefits of using the procedure. (3 points)
-cognitive interview: meta-analysis found ↑ in correct info reported, but also wrong info
3 roles of forensic psychologists?
-provide expert testimony
-training + supervision of students
-criminal + civil evaluation
-assessment, treatment, consultation on risk factors
-policy consultation to lawmakers
what is the standard of proof in criminal law?
beyond a reasonable doubt
name + describe how legal cases are cited in Canada
style of cause: [party that brings case to court] v [party that defends/responds], [year case was heard]
name + describe 4 criteria for admitting expert testimony in R v Mohan (‘94)
- relevance - info must be applicable to issue at trial
- necessity - must not be already known to judge/jury
- no exclusionary rule - no existing rule against admitting info
- qualifications - expert must have relevant education / training
what are the standards for admissibility of expert testimony in the US? describe them
-Frye Standard (1923): expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only when the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community
-Daubert Standard (1993):
1. Is the technique generally accepted?
2. Have standards been est for applying the technique?
3. Is the technique testable? Has the technique been tested?
4. What are the error rates?
5. Has the technique been subjected to peer review + publication?
-now used in federal court
describe the concept of judges as gatekeepers and an issue with this
-in Daubert, the SCOTUS put judges in the position of deciding what science gets heard at trial
-judges aren’t usually trained in science; don’t always recognize flawed research when they confront it
