Forensic Psychology Origins and Applications

The branch of psychology that applies psychological knowledge and principles to the legal system.

The accuracy of eyewitness testimony can be influenced by factors such as emotions, suggestibility, and the passage of time.

A pioneer in forensic psychology who conducted early research on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony.

A psychologist who studied the impact of emotion on witness memory and established the first journal dedicated to applied psychology.

Hugo Munsterberg, a strong advocate for the use of psychology in legal proceedings, was also a pioneer in forensic psychology.

The use of psychological assessment tools, such as intelligence tests, in legal investigations and assessments.

The process of providing expert opinions and testimony based on psychological knowledge in legal proceedings.

The study of the psychological factors that influence the legal system, such as jury decision-making, criminal profiling, and police interrogations.

The Frye Standard determines if a scientific technique or procedure can be used as evidence in court by considering if it is generally accepted within its field.

The Stanford-Binet test, a revised version of Binet's intelligence test, was used to assess the intelligence of law enforcement job candidates.

In the People vs. Hawthorne case, the court determined that an expert witness's knowledge of a subject, not their medical degree, is the key criterion for qualification.

The American Psychological Association formally recognized forensic psychology as a specialized area within the field of psychology in 2001.

Clinical-Forensic Psychology focuses on psychological issues that have legal implications, such as mental health problems affecting legal decisions.

Developmental Psychology within forensics focuses on how laws impact juveniles, the elderly, and policy development, rather than treatment.

Social Psychology in forensics investigates group dynamics and decision-making processes in juries, analyzing how jurors interact in reaching a verdict.

Forensic Cognitive Psychology investigates how people make judgments and decisions in legal proceedings, closely linked to the social psychology subfield.

A legal determination of a defendant's mental state at the time of an alleged crime, focusing on whether they could distinguish right from wrong.

Evaluates whether a defendant has the mental capacity to understand legal proceedings and participate in their own defense.

Involves examining evidence of intoxication and its potential impact on a defendant's mental state at the time of the offense.

Assessing a defendant's memory of the crime, while considering the possibility of genuine or fabricated amnesia.

Examines a defendant's potential for future violence based on mental health history and factors.

Determining if a defendant's mental state at the time of the offense, or past mental health history, justifies a more lenient sentence.

Assessing the defendant's mental state to see if a mental disorder could be used as a defense in court.

Examining a defendant with Dissociative Identity Disorder, formerly Multiple Personality Disorder, for potential legal ramifications.

The goal of a forensic interview is to obtain the most reliable and accurate information about an event, while the goal of a clinical interview is to assess and treat symptoms.

Forensic interviews prioritize fact-finding and accurate recollection of events, while clinical interviews focus on the client's perceptions and interpretations of those events.

Forensic interviewers maintain objectivity and neutrality to avoid bias, while clinical interviewers focus on empathy, building a therapeutic alliance, and supporting the client.

In a forensic assessment, the psychologist is answering a legal question, while in a clinical assessment, the client typically poses questions related to their own treatment or diagnosis.

Forensic evaluations may result in an adversarial relationship between the psychologist and client, as the client's information might be scrutinized for legal purposes, whereas a clinical assessment usually aims for a therapeutic relationship.

In forensic assessments, the psychologist focuses narrowly on answering the specific legal question, while in clinical assessments, the focus is broader and may involve understanding the client's overall functioning.

Forensic assessments prioritize accurate portrayal of information to answer the legal question, while clinical assessments value the client's perspective even if it's not entirely accurate.

In forensic assessments, the client has limited control over the information provided and the questions addressed, while in clinical assessments, the client has more autonomy to guide the assessment.

A forensic psychologist must inform the individual being evaluated about the purpose of the evaluation, the limitations of confidentiality, the non-therapeutic nature of the relationship, and other important details.

When a court order specifies the presence of the lawyer or the lawyer wishes to be present during the interview, the forensic psychologist should consider options like joint participation or observing the interview from a separate location outside the client's view.

Forensic psychologists should disclose the limitations of their report when an interview is not feasible, such as when the individual declines or circumstances prevent it. They emphasize that the opinion is based on available collateral information.

Generally, the forensic psychologist assumes non-confidentiality in legal evaluations, emphasizing that the information shared might be disclosed in court proceedings.

Forensic psychologists are tasked with evaluating an individual's mental state, competency, or other relevant aspects related to legal proceedings.

When there is insufficient information to form an opinion with reasonable certainty due to the lack of a clinical interview, forensic psychologists should document these limitations clearly in their report.

The forensic psychologist's evaluation and report serve as evidence in legal proceedings, particularly for sentence mitigation.

In forensic evaluation, the individual being evaluated should be informed about the intended recipients of the report, the potential use of the information, and the limits of confidentiality.