Forensic Psychology Study Guide PDF

Study Guide: Forensic Psychology and the Social Context of Crime (Week 1) Key Concepts and Definitions 1. Forensic Psychology ​ Defined as the application of psychology to courts of law and the broader criminal justice system (CJS). ​ Narrow definition (Gudjonsson & Haward, 1998): Con...

Study Guide: Forensic Psychology and the Social Context of Crime (Week 1) Key Concepts and Definitions 1. Forensic Psychology ​ Defined as the application of psychology to courts of law and the broader criminal justice system (CJS). ​ Narrow definition (Gudjonsson & Haward, 1998): Concerned with evidence for judicial purposes. ​ Broader definition (British Psychological Society, 2017): Includes criminal investigations, psychological problems related to criminal behavior, and the treatment of offenders. ​ American Psychological Association (2017): Psychology applied to legal, contractual, and administrative matters. 2. Roles of Forensic Psychologists ​ Mediation between legal parties. ​ Assessing violent behavior threats. ​ Competence evaluations for trial. ​ Consultant work for police departments. 3. Knowledge and Skills for Forensic Psychologists (UK, DCLP 1994) ​ Understanding the psychology of criminal behavior and the legal framework. ​ Application of psychology in criminal investigations, legal, custodial, and treatment processes. ​ Assessing offenders, victims, and investigators. Criminal Psychology vs. Forensic Psychology ​ Criminal Psychology focuses solely on offenders, while Forensic Psychology includes both civil and criminal law aspects. ​ Overlapping skills and knowledge, but forensic psychology covers broader applications. Researcher-Practitioner Model ​ Late 1940s: Concept originated in clinical psychology to bridge research and practice. ​ Emphasis on evidence-based practice. Social Context of Crime Sources of Crime Knowledge ​ Personal experience, media, social media.  ​ Media portrayals often sensationalize violent crime. Crime Statistics ​ Vary due to differences in data collection and interpretation. ​ Requires cautious analysis due to potential bias or manipulation. Extent and Economic Impact of Crime ​ Crime index measures serious crimes (e.g., murder, rape). ​ U.S. Criminal Justice System costs exceed $200 billion annually. ​ High lifetime likelihood of imprisonment (7%) and racial disparities. White-Collar Crime ​ Defined as crimes by respectable individuals during their occupation (Sutherland, 1949). ​ Examples: Fraud, embezzlement. Crime Rates and International Comparisons ​ Prevalence Rates: Number of victims of a crime type. ​ Incidence Rates: Frequency of victimization. ​ Definitions of crime differ across countries, complicating comparisons. Variability in Justice Systems ​ Practitioners must be aware of the diverse structures and definitions of crimes. ​ Caution is necessary when generalizing findings. Exam Questions Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs) 1.​ What is the broader definition of forensic psychology according to the British Psychological Society (2017)? a) Psychology solely related to court evidence b) Psychology applied to criminal investigations and behavior c) Civil litigation support only d) Application limited to juvenile justice​ 2.​ Which of the following is a role performed by a forensic psychologist? a) Treating general anxiety in private practice b) Conducting workplace productivity assessments c) Evaluating threats of violence for the Secret Service d) Designing educational curricula​ Short Answer Questions  1.​ Explain the difference between prevalence and incidence rates in crime statistics. 2.​ Describe two key skills a forensic psychologist should possess according to the UK’s DCLP. Essay Questions 1.​ Discuss how media portrayals of crime can affect public perception and the interpretation of crime statistics. 2.​ Compare and contrast criminal and forensic psychology, providing examples of roles within each field. Activity-Based Question ​ Use the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime data portal to analyze crime trends in a country of your choice. Summarize your findings and reflect on the implications for crime prevention policies. Study Guide: Week 5 – Police Interrogations and False Confessions 1. Interrogation vs. Interview ​ Interrogation: ○​ Aggressive, confession-driven approach. ○​ Associated with U.S. policing (e.g., Reid Model). ​ Interview: ○​ Focuses on gathering accurate information. ○​ Associated with U.K. policing (e.g., PEACE Model). 2. U.K. Approach: The PEACE Model ​ Developed collaboratively in the 1990s to avoid coercion and false confessions. ​ Five Phases: 1.​ Planning and Preparation: ​ Establish interview goals, determine techniques (e.g., memory mnemonics), and plan logistics (location, duration). 2.​ Engage and Explain: ​ Build rapport to ease anxiety and encourage cooperation. ​ Set ground rules (e.g., it's acceptable to say "I don't know"). 3.​ Account, Clarification, and Challenge: ​ Use open-ended prompts and active listening. ​ Avoid leading, suggestive, or compound questions. 4.​ Closure: ​ Summarize the interview, clarify statements, and outline next steps. 5.​ Evaluation: ​ Assess evidence and interviewer performance for improvements. Key Principles: ​ Focus on truth-finding rather than securing confessions. ​ Treat suspects fairly, particularly those with intellectual or social vulnerabilities. 3. U.S. Approach: The Reid Model ​ Two-Phase Strategy: 1.​ Behavioral Analysis Interview:  ​ Gather information and assess guilt based on behavioral cues (e.g., body language, inconsistencies). 2.​ Nine-Step Interrogation: ​ Employ psychological techniques to elicit confessions. Interrogation Tactics: ​ Maximization: ○​ Scare tactics: exaggerating the crime’s seriousness or presenting false evidence. ​ Minimization: ○​ Soft-sell techniques: offering moral justifications or minimizing the offense. Environmental Setup: ​ Small, bare rooms to induce social isolation and sensory deprivation. ​ Observation through one-way mirrors to exploit signs of distress or fatigue. 4. False Confessions ​ Types of False Confessions: 1.​ Voluntary: ​ Self-motivated without police pressure. ​ Motivations: desire for notoriety, protecting the real perpetrator, or inability to separate fantasy from reality. 2.​ Coerced-Compliant: ​ Result of stressful interrogation conditions. ​ Suspect confesses to escape the situation (e.g., avoid custody, go home). ​ Example: Central Park Jogger Case (1989). 3.​ Coerced-Internalized: ​ Suspect genuinely believes they committed the crime. ​ Triggered by "Memory Distrust Syndrome" (e.g., manipulated by interrogators or influenced by alcohol-induced amnesia). 5. Potential Explanations for False Confessions ​ Interrogation-Related Regulatory Decline: ○​ Stressful tactics reduce resistance, impairing decision-making and goal focus. ​ Dialogue Construction:  ○​ Interrogation dialogue shapes the confession narrative. ○​ Suspects and interrogators may interpret admissions differently, leading to ambiguities. Key Factors (Davis & Leo, 2012): ​ Long interrogation lengths, fatigue, sleep deprivation. ​ Emotional stress and police-induced pressures. 6. Comparative Effectiveness: PEACE vs. Reid ​ Meta-Analysis Findings (Meissner et al., 2014): ○​ Reid-style interrogations yield higher confession rates but also increase false confessions. ○​ PEACE model reduces false confessions and encourages non-coercive truth-finding. 7. Case Studies of False Confessions ​ Central Park Jogger Case (1989): ○​ Five teens confessed under duress after lengthy interrogations. ○​ DNA evidence later proved their innocence; convictions were vacated in 2002. ​ Peter Reilly Case (1973): ○​ A teenager falsely confessed to his mother's murder due to suggestive interrogation tactics and lies about failing a polygraph test. ○​ Conviction overturned after suppressed evidence was revealed. 8. Key Research Findings ​ Confession evidence is highly persuasive, even when obtained coercively. ​ Police, lawyers, and jurors struggle to distinguish true confessions from false ones. ​ Kassin, Meissner, & Norwick (2005): ○​ Found college students outperformed police officers in identifying false confessions. 9. Summary ​ False confessions can have devastating consequences, contributing to wrongful convictions (e.g., 25% of cases overturned by DNA evidence involve false confessions). ​ Adopting non-coercive interviewing methods (e.g., PEACE model) is essential for reducing false confessions. ​ However, voluntary false confessions and deeply ingrained biases present persistent challenges. Study Guide: Week 7 – Lie Detection 1. Introduction to Lie Detection ​ Definition of a Lie (Ekman, 1992, 1996): ○​ Intention to mislead the target. ○​ No disclosure of the intent to deceive. ​ Challenges: ○​ Lie detection is complex due to multiple indicators (e.g., facial expressions, gestures, verbal cues). ○​ Many signs of lying (e.g., fear, fidgeting) are also indicators of strong emotions unrelated to deception. ○​ People generally perform just slightly better than chance in detecting lies. Key Observations: ​ Asymmetrical facial expressions and abrupt onset of emotions are possible indicators. ​ False happiness lacks eye muscle engagement. ​ Anger is harder to fake due to difficult-to-control muscle groups. 2. Professional Lie Detectors: Are They Better? ​ Traditional View: ○​ Professionals (e.g., police, psychologists) are only marginally better than chance at lie detection. ​ Challenges in Research: ○​ Studies often use low-stakes lies, lack real-world implications, and rely on non-professional settings. ○​ High-stakes lies, such as those in criminal investigations, may present more detectable cues. Key Studies: ​ Vrij & Mann (2001): ○​ Used videos of relatives lying in press conferences about missing/murdered loved ones. ○​ Accuracy rates: Professionals performed no better than chance (50%). ​ Whelan, Wagstaff, & Wheatcroft (2015): ○​ Found some evidence suggesting police are better than chance in detecting liars. 3. Why Are Professionals Often Poor at Lie Detection? ​ Reliance on Invalid Cues: ○​ Common myths include liars avoiding eye contact, making excessive body movements, or speaking with inconsistent pitch. ○​ Stromwall & Granhag (2003): Professionals often believe in these invalid cues, despite evidence to the contrary. ​ Weak Predictive Power of Valid Cues: ○​ Even the best cues (e.g., verbal inconsistencies) are mediocre predictors. Biases: ​ Professionals may rely on stereotypes or preconceived notions, which hinder accuracy. ​ Laypeople and professionals employ different strategies, but both are often inaccurate. 4. The Polygraph ​ What is a Polygraph? ○​ Measures physiological changes, including: ​ Blood pressure variations. ​ Breathing rates and depth. ​ Galvanic Skin Response (sweating). ○​ Generates wave patterns interpreted as indicators of deception. Development: ​ Invented by Larson (1922) and Keeler (1934). ​ Used in 70+ countries for investigations and confessions. 5. Comparison Question Technique (CQT) ​ Phases of CQT: 1.​ Question Formulation: ​ Neutral (irrelevant), relevant (crime-specific), and control (elicits deceptive responses) questions. 2.​ Stimulation Phase: ​ Examinee is convinced of the polygraph’s accuracy. 3.​ Testing Phase: ​ Responses to control vs. relevant questions are compared.  4.​ Interpretation: ​ Guilty individuals react more strongly to relevant questions; innocent individuals react more to control questions. Theoretical Basis: ​ Psychological Set Theory (Backster, 1962): ○​ People focus on the greater threat (e.g., crime questions for the guilty, control questions for the innocent). 6. Problems with the Polygraph ​ General Issues: ○​ High susceptibility to false positives (innocent individuals judged guilty). ○​ Difficulty standardizing control questions. ○​ Emotional responses (e.g., anxiety) can mimic deception signals. ​ Critiques of CQT: ○​ High-stakes stress may cause innocent individuals to react similarly to guilty ones. ○​ Countermeasures (e.g., faking physiological responses) reduce reliability. ​ Lab vs. Field Studies: ○​ Lab Studies: ​ Controlled but lack real-life consequences. ​ Low ecological validity. ○​ Field Studies: ​ Real-world cases increase validity but suffer from issues like subjective "ground truth." 7. Validity of the Polygraph ​ Accuracy Rates (Meijer & Verschuere, 2010): ○​ Guilty individuals correctly identified: ~89%. ○​ Innocent individuals correctly identified: ~76%. ○​ False positives: ~24% of innocent people were judged guilty. ○​ False negatives: ~13% of guilty individuals judged innocent. Conclusion: ​ While polygraphs perform better than chance, their error rates make them unreliable as sole evidence, particularly for the innocent. 8. Conclusion ​ Lie detection is inherently complex and fraught with challenges: ○​ Professionals are often no better than laypeople due to biases and reliance on invalid cues. ○​ The polygraph offers some utility but is limited by methodological flaws and significant error rates. ​ Improvements require integrating evidence-based methods and minimizing reliance on unsubstantiated assumptions. Study Guide: Week 8 – Profile Analysis 1. Introduction to Offender Profiling ​ Definition: Using crime scene information to infer offender characteristics. ​ Purpose: 1.​ Narrowing down the pool of suspects. 2.​ Aiding investigations through behavioral analysis. ​ Key Perspectives: 1.​ Profiling as clinical judgment: Intuition and experience-driven (e.g., FBI approach). 2.​ Profiling as research-led: Objective and evidence-based (e.g., Canter’s approach). Components of a Profile: ​ Demographics: Age, gender, ethnicity, SES. ​ Employment and relationship status. ​ Personality factors. ​ Spatial characteristics (e.g., geographical profiling). 2. Origins of Offender Profiling ​ Historical Beginnings: ○​ Dr. Thomas Bond’s 1888 profile of Jack the Ripper (focused on physical and psychological traits). ​ Modern Profiling: ○​ James Brussel’s 1956 analysis of the New York bomber. ○​ Psychoanalytical and behavioral insights led to accurate offender predictions. 3. FBI-Style Offender Profiling ​ Key Concepts: ○​ Modus Operandi (MO): ​ Necessary actions to complete a crime. ​ Can evolve as offenders refine their methods. ○​ Crime Signature: ​ Unique, personal behaviors tied to the offender. ​ Less likely to change over time.  ​ Crime Scene Classification: ○​ Organized Crimes: Evidence of planning; controlled behavior. ○​ Disorganized Crimes: Chaotic, impulsive actions. ○​ Mixed Crimes: Features of both. ​ Methodology: ○​ Developed by Ressler, Burgess, and Douglas (1988). ○​ Based on interviews with 36 offenders, emphasizing intuition and experience. ○​ Weak empirical foundation; often presented as an "art" rather than a science. Evaluation: ​ Limited research to validate FBI profiling. ​ Critics argue that: ○​ Typologies like organized/disorganized lack clarity and empirical support (Canter & Wentink, 2004). ○​ Profiles may not decisively outperform non-expert predictions (Snook et al., 2010). 4. Investigative Psychology and Statistical Profiling ​ David Canter’s Approach: ○​ A research-based model grounded in statistical analysis. ○​ Focus on empirical relationships between crime scene characteristics and offender traits. ○​ Broader application beyond violent crimes (e.g., fraud, robbery). ​ Key Techniques: ○​ Smallest Space Analysis (SSA): ​ Plots relationships between crime scene features. ​ Identifies patterns and co-occurrences. ○​ Example: Salfati and Canter (1998) categorized murder crime scenes into three major themes linked to offender traits. ​ Differences from FBI Profiling: ○​ Emphasizes probabilities, not certainties. ○​ Recognizes situational factors' influence on behavior over static personality traits. 5. Theoretical Assumptions of Profiling 1.​ Homology Hypothesis:  ○​ Crime scene behaviors predict offender traits. ○​ Weak empirical support; offenders often adapt their methods. 2.​ Consistency: ○​ Offenders’ crime patterns remain consistent across incidents. ○​ Supported in some studies, especially for linking serial crimes. 6. Effectiveness of Profiling ​ Does Profiling Work? ○​ Limited empirical evidence of profiling's practical utility. ○​ Examples where profiling misled investigations. ○​ Profilers may provide detailed insights, but their superiority over non-experts is debated. ​ Challenges: ○​ Profiling trivial crimes is rarely useful. ○​ Crimes with few unique characteristics are harder to analyze. ○​ Methodological limitations hinder systematic evaluations. 7. Conclusion ​ Profiling remains a controversial tool in criminology. ​ Empirical gaps in FBI-style and statistical profiling hinder scientific validation. ​ While investigative psychology takes a more rigorous approach, profiling should be viewed as one part of broader investigative efforts. Study Guide: Week 9 – Mental Disorders and Crime 1. Relationship Between Mental Illness and Crime ​ Legal vs. Psychological Definitions: ○​ Law views mental illness as a term defined by common understanding. ○​ Psychology uses diagnostic criteria and research-based frameworks. ​ Public Perception and Media Influence: ○​ Media exaggerates violence linked to mental illness, shaping public perception. ○​ Schizophrenia and mental illness often portrayed as dangerous. ​ Overrepresentation in the Criminal Justice System: ○​ People with mental illness are disproportionately involved with police, courts, and prisons. ○​ Societal systems (medical vs. criminal justice) influence pathways for "problematic individuals." 2. Conceptual Challenges ​ Defining Terms: ○​ Mental disorder: Broad term for various mental functioning issues, including lifelong conditions. ○​ Mental illness: Treatable, often temporary interruptions in mental functioning. ​ Key Research Questions: ○​ "Does mental illness cause violent crime?" is complex due to methodological and confounding issues. 3. Confounding Variables ​ Social and Environmental Factors: ○​ Lower socioeconomic status and violent communities are linked to higher violence among the mentally ill. ​ Psychiatric Categories and Violence: ○​ Some diagnostic criteria (e.g., Antisocial Personality Disorder) include violence as a characteristic, creating circular definitions. ​ Medication Effects: ○​ Psychiatric drugs (e.g., neuroleptics) can induce aggression, complicating direct links to mental illness. 4. Psychosis and Criminal Violence ​ Evidence Linking Psychosis to Violence: ○​ Studies (e.g., Nederlof et al., 2013) show schizophrenia is associated with higher violence rates. ○​ Risk factors: genetic vulnerability, family violence, childhood adversity, and impulsivity. ​ Challenges: ○​ Overlapping diagnoses (e.g., substance abuse, anxiety disorders) obscure causality. ○​ Need for research on the mechanisms linking psychosis to violence. 5. PTSD and Crime ​ Veterans and PTSD: ○​ PTSD prevalence among Vietnam veterans: 10–15%. ○​ PTSD often linked to criminal behavior, with violent behavior more common in sufferers. ○​ Research suggests trauma alone doesn't lead to violence; PTSD following trauma is the key factor. ​ Cross-National Comparisons: ○​ Differences between conscripted (e.g., Israel) vs. volunteer military forces (e.g., USA, UK) affect PTSD-crime links. ○​ Israeli veterans with PTSD show smaller criminality increases compared to US/UK counterparts. 6. Mental Disorders and Crime in General ​ Research Findings: ○​ Major mental disorders are associated with increased criminality, particularly violent crime. ○​ Substance abuse has a stronger correlation with crime than mental illness alone. ​ Stockholm Study (Hodgins, 1992): ○​ 32% of non-mentally-ill men became criminals vs. 50% of those with mental disorders. ○​ Risks were higher for violent crimes than non-violent ones. 7. Victimization of the Mentally Ill ​ Elevated Victimization Rates: ○​ Mentally ill individuals are more likely to be victims of crime (2–140 times higher risk). ​ Predictors of Victimization: ○​ Risk factors: homelessness, substance abuse, and lack of guardianship (e.g., marriage, employment). ○​ Gender differences in stress response influence victimization patterns (e.g., "fight or flight" in men vs. "tend and befriend" in women). 8. Psychopathy and Crime ​ Key Features of Psychopathy (Hare, 1998): ○​ Traits: remorselessness, predatory violence, and manipulative behavior. ○​ Psychopaths are disproportionately represented in prison populations. ○​ 1% of the general population vs. higher rates among offenders. ​ Psychopathy Checklist (PCL): ○​ Developed by Robert Hare; regarded as the gold standard for assessing psychopathy. ○​ Ongoing debate: ​ Criminal behavior as a defining feature of psychopathy (Factor 4). ​ Or, as Cooke suggests, a "downstream correlate" rather than central to psychopathy. 9. Conclusions ​ Complex Relationship: ○​ Mental illness can elevate the risk of violent crime but is not a direct cause. ○​ Substance abuse and comorbidity often play more significant roles. ​ Public Risk Perception: ○​ The general population is at greater risk from young men and substance abusers than from individuals with schizophrenia. ​ Victimization and Crime: ○​ Mentally ill individuals face increased risks of both committing and being victims of crime. Study Guide: Jury Decision Making and the CSI Effect Overview This guide delves into the jury system, psychological theories relevant to jury deliberations, and the "CSI Effect," including its origins, types, and implications for juror behavior and decision-making. The Jury System Role and Importance ​ Juries are tasked with observing arguments, assessing evidence, and rendering unbiased verdicts based on: ○​ Facts of the case ○​ Correct application of the law Usage ​ Small percentage of criminal trials use juries (e.g., 12% in England and Wales). ​ Recognized in English common law and U.S. law as fundamental to a fair trial. Eligibility and Decision Rules ​ UK Eligibility: ○​ Registered electors aged 18-69. ○​ UK residents for at least 5 years since age 13. ​ Decision Rules: ○​ Initially require unanimity. ○​ Can shift to a 10/12 majority after deliberation, at the judge’s discretion. Challenges in Studying Juries ​ Legal Restrictions: ○​ Contempt of Court Act prohibits observing real jury deliberations. ​ Research Approaches: ○​ Mock juries and archival analyses, though these face ecological validity issues. Psychological Theories Relevant to Juries Decision-Making Styles  ​ Thinking and Reasoning (Kuhn, Weinstock, & Flaton, 1994):​ ○​ Jurors must: ​ Construct and evaluate alternative accounts of events. ​ Coordinate evidence with these accounts. ○​ Components: ​ Mental representations of evidence. ​ Representations of accounts/verdict definitions. ​ Mental operations to coordinate these elements. ​ Epistemological Styles (Warren, Kuhn, & Weinstock, 2010):​ ○​ Absolutists: ​ Believe in a single correct account. ​ Seek absolute and objective truth. ○​ Multiplists: ​ Consider all perspectives as subjective. ​ Prioritize personal interpretations. ○​ Evaluativists: ​ Balance subjective viewpoints. ​ Strive for consensus while recognizing subjectivity. The Story Model (Pennington & Hastie, 1986) ​ Jurors create chronological narratives to interpret evidence and decide verdicts. ​ Narratives include: ○​ Actions, intentions, motivations, and states of mind. ​ Verdict Basis: ○​ Conviction if the narrative supports guilt. ○​ Acquittal if it supports innocence. The CSI Effect Origins and Definition ​ Coined by legal authorities and media to describe the impact of forensic TV shows (e.g., CSI) on juror behavior. ​ Definition: ○​ Assumes forensic fiction influences public perceptions of forensic science and the justice system. Types of CSI Effect ​ Producer’s Effect:  ○​ CSI educates the public about forensic science (e.g., Anthony Zuiker’s claim). ​ Professor’s Version: ○​ Increases enrollment in forensic science courses. ​ Police Chief’s Version: ○​ Educates criminals to adopt sophisticated evasion techniques. ​ Victim’s Effect: ○​ Raises victims’ expectations for evidence collection at crime scenes. ​ Strong Prosecutor’s Effect: ○​ Jurors expect forensic evidence in every trial, leading to wrongful acquittals when absent. ○​ Example: Robert Blake’s trial. ​ Weak Prosecutor’s Effect: ○​ Prosecutors adjust strategies (e.g., voir dire, negative evidence testimonies) to address high juror expectations. ​ Defendant’s Effect: ○​ Jurors overvalue forensic evidence, leading to wrongful convictions. ○​ Example: Barry George’s trial. Empirical Evidence ​ Legal Practitioners: ○​ Robbers (2008): ​ 70% observed unreasonable juror expectations for forensic evidence. ​ 85% adjusted trial strategies to mitigate CSI Effect. ​ Juror Studies: ○​ Podlas (2006), Shelton, Kim, & Barak (2007): ​ Limited support for the Strong Prosecutor’s Effect. ○​ Baskin & Sommers (2010): ​ Viewing crime shows reduced willingness to convict without forensic evidence. ○​ Smith & Bull (2012, 2013): ​ Supported both the Strong Prosecutor’s and Defendant’s Effects. Considerations ​ Inconsistencies in measuring crime show viewership. ​ Broader cultural and technological factors may influence juror expectations. Key Takeaways 1.​ Juries play a pivotal role in ensuring fair trials but are influenced by cognitive and social dynamics.  2.​ Psychological theories offer insights into how jurors process information and reach decisions. 3.​ The CSI Effect highlights the intersection of media influence and legal processes, emphasizing the need for tailored strategies by legal practitioners. This guide provides a comprehensive framework for understanding jury decision-making and the implications of forensic fiction on legal outcomes. Week 11: Treatments for Offenders - Detailed Study Guide 1. Effective Prison Purpose of Prison ​ Three major ideologies (Hollin, 2002): ○​ Retributionism: Prison as punishment. ○​ Utilitarianism: Aims to reduce reoffending through changes. ○​ Humanitarianism: Focuses on rehabilitation for offenders who often come from deprived or victimized backgrounds. ​ Restorative Justice: ○​ Focuses on helping victims recover and encouraging offenders to reflect and accept responsibility. ○​ Utilizes reconciliation and mediation alongside the justice system. Explaining Violence in Prison ​ Deprivation Theory (Goffman, 1961; Sykes, 1958): ○​ Violence arises due to degrading prison conditions. ○​ Macro (e.g., prison size, crowding) and micro (e.g., sentence length, visitor frequency) factors play roles. ​ Importation Theory (Poole & Regoli, 1980): ○​ Pre-prison attitudes, values, and behaviors influence prison adaptation and violence. ○​ Factors include past violence, subcultural norms, and prior offenses. ​ Evidence (Lahm, 2008): ○​ Both deprivation and importation theories hold merit; they are not mutually exclusive. Effectiveness of Prison ​ Educational programs show the highest effectiveness in reducing reoffending. ​ Evidence contradicts the "nothing works" view; modern programs demonstrate positive impacts. ​ Increasing focus on cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBT) for various offender types. 2. Psychological Treatments for Offenders General Overview ​ Psychological treatments reduce reoffending by around 10% or more. ​ Most common paradigm: Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT).  ​ Interventions target cognitive deficits like poor self-control, rigid thinking, and lack of empathy. Cognitive Deficits Addressed by Treatment ​ Cognitive style: Simplistic and rigid thinking. ​ Critical reasoning: Tendency to blame others; avoids self-reflection. ​ Interpersonal problem-solving: Social ineptness and lack of awareness of alternatives. ​ Self-control: Impulsiveness and difficulty delaying gratification. ​ Social perspective-taking: Egocentric thinking and misinterpreting others’ actions. ​ Values: Poor moral reasoning and recognition of inconsistencies in actions. Effectiveness of Psychological Therapies ​ Mixed results: ○​ Some interventions show modest benefits. ○​ Others may have zero or even negative effects (e.g., harsher sentencing). ​ Key finding: Programs focusing on control and punishment are largely ineffective. 3. Sex Offender Therapy in Prison Therapeutic Approaches ​ Dominant approach: Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT). ​ UK programs like the Core Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP) have been replaced (e.g., Horizon) due to mixed results. Therapeutic Features ​ Delivered in multidisciplinary settings. ​ Structured group work (e.g., 8 offenders, 2 tutors). ​ Focused on: ○​ Limiting offending behaviors. ○​ Relapse prevention skills. ○​ Cognitive behavioral activities (e.g., role-playing, videos, group discussions). Effectiveness ​ Evaluations suggest modest reductions in reoffending. ​ Prevention programs (e.g., Berlin Project Dunkelfeld) aim to address potential offenders before crimes occur. 4. Treating Violent Criminals Anger Management ​ Classic method for addressing violent behaviors. ​ Aims: 1.​ Increase awareness of anger processes. 2.​ Enhance self-monitoring. 3.​ Highlight benefits of controlling anger. 4.​ Build skills for managing anger triggers. ​ Focuses on cognitive appraisals of triggering events. Violence Reduction Programs ​ Violence is learned behavior, often rooted in difficult life experiences. ​ Offenders adopt antisocial logic that normalizes violence. ​ Programs target: ○​ Identifying and modifying triggers. ○​ Expanding coping mechanisms. ○​ Enhancing moral reasoning. Aggression Replacement Training (ART) ​ Focus on internal and external aggression causes. ​ Three components: 1.​ Social Skills Training: Replace antisocial behaviors with prosocial ones. 2.​ Anger Control: Manage anger triggers and rethink provoking situations. 3.​ Moral Reasoning: Develop prosocial moral reasoning to replace egocentric thinking. ​ Evidence of ART's effectiveness is promising but requires further validation. 5. Roles of Psychologists in Prisons ​ Risk Assessment: ○​ Evaluate past history and contributing factors to plan rehabilitation. ○​ Decisions on progression (e.g., release on license, reduced security). ​ Individual Clinical Work: ○​ Focus on stress management, interpersonal skills, and CBT for emotional disorders. ​ Discretionary Life Panels (UK): ○​ Review lifer cases to assess readiness for progression or release.