Psychology 2400: Deception Detection & Disorders - Dr. Kirk Luther

Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Can you spot the liar? How well did you do? What cues did you look for? Deception How often do you lie in the run of a day? What is the most common reason you lie? Outline 1 2 3 Deception Be...

Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Can you spot the liar? How well did you do? What cues did you look for? Deception How often do you lie in the run of a day? What is the most common reason you lie? Outline 1 2 3 Deception Behavioural cues Deception Detection Tools -Verbal & Non-verbal Disorders -Polygraph -Factitious -Thermal imaging -Malingering -ERP -Defensiveness -fMRI The Polygraph Physiological measures used for centuries Dry rice powder Polygraph based on belief that deception leads to physiological change William Marston Not a Lie Detector!  Respiration The Polygraph Heart rate Measures Sweating Polygraph uses Helps in criminal investigations (suspect) Verify a crime has occurred (victim) Insurance companies (verify claim) Monitoring sexual offenders on probation (United States) Pre-employment screening (police, CSIS, etc.) Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Deception Behavioural cues Deception Detection Tools -Verbal & Non-verbal Disorders -Polygraph -Factitious -Thermal imaging -Malingering -ERP -Defensiveness -fMRI  Relevant / Irrelevant Test Types of polygraph tests Comparison Question Test (CQT) Concealed Information Test (CIT) Types of Polygraph tests 1. Relevant/Irrelevant test Asks questions either: Relevant to the crime “Did you steal the money?” Irrelevant to the crime “Is today Wednesday?” Types of Polygraph tests 1. Relevant/Irrelevant test Larger physiological responses to relevant questions indicates deception Only used for employee screening, no longer used by law enforcement  Types of Polygraph tests 2. Comparison Question test Includes three types of questions: IRRELEVANT RELEVANT COMPARISON Types of Polygraph tests 2. Comparison Question test The CQT begins with a pre-test interview and has two stages: 1. Examiner stresses polygraph is accurate Deck of cards 2. Comparison questions are developed  Types of Polygraph tests 2. Comparison Question test Sample questions: Question type Purpose Example Irrelevant Used to obtain a baseline. Are you left handed? Refers to respondent’s identity. Do you live in Canada? Relevant Deal with the crime. Did you assault John Smith on the evening of October 3rd? Comparison Deal with prior behaviour. Before age 25, did you Designed to provoke ever verbally threaten to anxiety. hurt anyone? Types of Polygraph tests 2. Comparison Question test Possible outcomes Truthful, deceptive, inconclusive Each comparison/relevant pair is scored If Comparison > Relevant: +1, +2, +3 If Relevant > Comparison: -1, -2, -3 Results +5 or larger indicates truth -5 or less indicates guilt If a suspect is believed to be deceptive, they are pressured to confess Types of Polygraph tests 2. Comparison Question test Problems: 1. Innocent people may fail a. React more strongly to direct questions b. Interrogated if believed to be guilty 2. Guilty Suspects may pass a. React more strongly to novel questions b. Pass polygraph, set free Types of Polygraph tests 3. Concealed Information test Does not assess deception Knowledge about details of the crime 10 Multiple choice questions One correct option Four foils  Types of Polygraph tests 3. Concealed Information test Did you steal a: a) wallet b) purse c) wedding ring d) necklace e) watch  Types of Polygraph tests 3. Concealed Information test Assumes only someone with knowledge of crime will recognize the correct answer Issue: Suspect may forget details of the crime Suspects who consistently respond to critical items are assumed to have knowledge of the crime Problem: Others may have knowledge Not used often in Canada or United States Used in Israel and Japan Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Deception Behavioural cues Deception Detection Tools -Verbal & Non-verbal Disorders -Polygraph -Factitious -Thermal imaging -Malingering -ERP -Defensiveness -fMRI The Polygraph: Accurate technology? Types of polygraph research: Laboratory experiments Process Volunteers simulate criminal behaviour Commit/Don’t commit mock crime Advantages: Ground truth is known High level of control Disadvantages Limited application to real-life situations Types of polygraph research: Field studies Process Real-life situations with actual suspects Compare original vs. blind examiners Quantify how many failed polygraphs end up with a guilty confession Advantages: High realism Disadvantages Ground truth is not known; Judicial outcomes/Confessions used to establish ground truth Doesn’t include ‘polygraph beaters’ Accuracy of the Comparison Question test Majority of guilty suspects correctly identified 84% - 92% Innocent suspects falsely identified as guilty 9% - 24% Accuracy of original examiners higher than blind scorers Accuracy of the Concealed Information test Very accurate at identifying innocent participants Up to 95% Less accurate at identifying guilty participants 76% - 85% Accuracy summary Concealed Information Test: False negative errors Comparison Question Test: False positive errors Conclusions of scientific experts 1. Theoretical rationale weak 2. Existing validation studies have serious limitations 3. No satisfactory field studies 4. Practitioners claim inappropriately high levels of accuracy Admissibility of polygraphs in court Originally did not pass ‘general acceptance test’ in the US (Frye v. United States, 1923) Currently allowed in some states if agreed by both prosecution and defence Not admissible into evidence in Canadian courts (R. v. Beland, 1987) Can you beat the polygraph? Countermeasures are effective for CQT Physical Mental The CIT not effected by anti-anxiety drugs Polygraph examiner able to tell if respondent on drugs Psychopaths are not able to beat the polygraph in lab studies Polygraph: Take Home Messages Not a lie detector Dependent on questioning techniques and interviewee’s beliefs Research raises concerns Should be used with caution Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Deception Behavioural cues Deception Detection Tools -Verbal & Non-verbal Disorders -Polygraph -Factitious -Thermal imaging -Malingering -ERP -Defensiveness -fMRI Thermal imaging Detects facial warming due to blood flow Event-related brain potentials (ERP) Brain-based measures: Event-related brain potentials (ERP) P300 used to detect guilty knowledge Research & practical limitations Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) Different brain areas activated during lying vs. truth telling Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Deception Behavioural cues Deception Detection Tools -Verbal & Non-verbal Disorders -Polygraph -Factitious -Thermal imaging -Malingering -ERP -Defensiveness -fMRI Verbal & Non-Verbal Cues to Deception  Theories behind verbal & non- verbal indicators of deception 1. Emotional/Arousal Common emotions are guilt, fear, excitement 2. Content complexity Liars have more speech errors, slower speech rate, long pauses when talking 3. Attempted behavioural control Over-control body movements, rigid behaviour Non-verbal behaviours Common beliefs Gaze Aversion Fidgeting Both NOT related to deception Liars do show less/fewer: Nodding Foot and leg movements Hand movements Verbal behaviours Higher pitched voice Speech fillers “ah” “umm” Slower rate of speech Verbal behaviours Verbal cues that may be indicative of deception: Sparse on detail Less compelling accounts No spontaneous correcting Does not admit lack of memory Cues present when motivated to lie Can professionals detect deception? Average accuracy = 56% Police, Judges, Psychologists Students: 54% accuracy Reason for low accuracy? 1. Rely on wrong cues (e.g., gaze aversion) 2. Truth-bias (i.e., tendency to judge messages as truthful) Can improve with training* Serious implications (e.g., interrogation) Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Deception Behavioural cues Deception Detection Tools -Verbal & Non-verbal Disorders -Polygraph -Factitious -Thermal imaging -Malingering -ERP -Defensiveness -fMRI Disorders of Deception 1. Factitious disorders Munchausen syndrome Munchausen syndrome by proxy 2. Malingering 3. Defensiveness 1. Factitious Disorders Intentionally produced symptoms Internal motivation to assume the sick role Absence of external incentives Patients lack insight into underlying psychological motivation 1. Factitious Disorders Munchausen Syndrome Intentionally produce physical complaint Seeks treatment Harm self to continue symptoms Chronic and hard to treat 1. Factitious Disorders Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy Report/create symptoms in children Generally the mother Most victims young Age 4 or younger Sometimes suffer long-term injuries 6-9% of children died 2. Malingering Symptoms are under voluntary control External motivations for symptoms Avoid criminal punishment Workers comp. Prevalent in forensic settings 3. Defensiveness Conscious denial or minimization of symptoms Present themselves in favourable light Sexual offenders Summary Polygraph is not a lie detector  Detects changes in physiology Polygraph not admissible in court in Canada People are NOT good at detecting deception Training increases confidence Variety of deception disorders Unit 7: Eyewitness Testimony Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Memory Eyewitness Aiding Eyewitness -Role Research Memory -Process -Police questioning -Interview strategies -Lineups The role of memory  Some facts about memory ￮ Changes in memory occur without awareness of distortions. ￮ Memories change because they are constructed and reconstructed. ￮ Repeated processing of memory causes it to change.  Stages of memory Encoding Information converted for storage Perceiving events Storage Information retained in memory Retrieval Information retrieved from memory Perceiving events Factors that affect perception ￮ Change blindness ￮ Occurs when a change in a visual stimulus is introduced and the observer does not notice it. Factors that affect perception ￮ Stress ￮ Yerkes-Dodson Law: Some stress, but not too much, is optimal Unit 7: Eyewitness Testimony Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Memory Eyewitness Aiding Eyewitness -Role Research Memory -Process -Police questioning -Interview strategies -Lineups Stages of memory Encoding Information converted for storage Storage Information retained in memory Retrieval Information retrieved from memory Attentional saturation ￮ Encoding everything we see can be overwhelming and maladaptive ￮ Can recognize familiarity, but don’t focus on all details Factors that affect encoding ￮ Attention ￮ Unexpectedness ￮ Witness Involvement ￮ State of the Witness Stages of memory Encoding Information converted for storage Storage Information retained in memory Retrieval Information retrieved from memory People guess…  Recall memory Reporting details of a previously witnessed event/person Types of memory Recognition memory retrieval Reporting whether current information is the same as previous information (e.g., lineups) Factors affecting retrieval ￮ Inferences (people guess) ￮ Stereotypes (people fill in gaps) ￮ Partisanship (biases influence memory) ￮ Scripts/Schemas (typical vs actual info) ￮ Emotional Factors (anxiety blocks retrieval) ￮ Context Effects (cues trigger memories) Factors affecting retrieval ￮ Time (memory slippage) ￮ Post-event information ￮ Enhancing memory: Other witnesses may improve memory ￮ Compromising memory: Other witnesses may impair memory Unit 7: Eyewitness Testimony Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Memory Eyewitness Aiding Eyewitness -Role Research Memory -Process -Police questioning -Interview strategies -Lineups  Archival data How do we study Naturalistic observations eyewitness issues? Laboratory simulations (most common) How do we study eyewitness issues? Independent variables Estimator variables Variables that are present at the time of the crime and cannot be changed e.g., age of witness System variables Variables that can be manipulated to increase or decrease eyewitness accuracy e.g., type of lineup used How do we study eyewitness issues? Dependent variables 1. Recall of event/crime 2. Recall of perpetrator 3. Recognition of perpetrator Measuring recall of information ￮ Amount of information reported ￮ Type of information reported ￮ Peripheral vs. Central ￮ Accuracy of information ￮ Proportion of correct information, omission errors, commission errors Measuring recognition of information Accuracy Type of errors Unit 7: Eyewitness Testimony Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Memory Eyewitness Aiding Eyewitness -Role Research Memory -Process -Police questioning -Interview strategies -Lineups Police questioning  Police questioning Goal: collect complete & accurate information Fisher et al. (1987) found that police officers… ○ Interrupted witnesses often ○ Asked short, specific questions ○ Asked off-topic questions ○ Asked leading questions ○ Findings replicated with more recent research Leading questions  Misinformation Effect Implications of poor questioning Loftus & Palmer (1974) “Smashed” vs. “Hit” “Smashed” reported higher speeds Affected future recall Did you see any broken glass? “Smashed”: 32% said yes “Hit” 14% said yes Wording of the question matters Implications of poor questioning Loftus & Palmer (1974) Take home messages: ￮ False information or information provided after an event can influence memory ￮ Subtle phrasing differences may bias witnesses’ responses Explaining the Misinformation Effect Misinformation acceptance hypothesis People guess, try to appease experimenter Source misattribution hypothesis Can recall both memories (accurate & inaccurate ones) but can’t differentiate between them Memory impairment hypothesis Original memory replaced with new, incorrect memory Aiding Eyewitness Memory Interview Strategies Techniques to aid eyewitness memory 1. Hypnosis 2. Cognitive Interview 3. Enhanced Cognitive Interview Aiding eyewitness memory: 1. Hypnosis Can increase amount of details But, these details are not necessarily accurate Hypnotized person is more suggestible, and is equally as confident in accurate and inaccurate details. Not typically permitted as evidence in Canadian courts Aiding eyewitness memory 2. Cognitive Interview (CI) Based on principles of memory storage & retrieval Used primarily for witnesses Memory retrieval techniques: 1. Mental reinstatement of context 2. “Report everything” 3. Recall event in different order 4. Change perspectivee Aiding eyewitness memory 2. Cognitive Interview (CI) Compared to standard interviews & hypnosis, the CI… Increased amount of accurate information 30% increase overall Aiding eyewitness memory 3. Enhanced Cognitive Interview (ECI) ￮ Included principles of social dynamics + the memory retrieval principles used in the CI ￮ Additional components ￮ Rapport building ￮ Supportive interviewer behaviour ￮ Transfer of control ￮ Focused retrieval ￮ Witness compatible questioning Unit 7: Eyewitness Testimony Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther Outline 1 2 3 Memory Eyewitness Aiding Eyewitness -Role Research Memory -Process -Police questioning -Interview strategies -Lineups Recognition Memory Recognition Memory 1. Live lineups or photo arrays 2. Video surveillance records 3. Voice identification Lineup identification ￮ Suspect - a person the police suspect committed the crime (may be innocent or guilty) ￮ Perpetrator - the guilty person ￮ Lineups help determine if the suspect is the perpetrator Lineup procedures Lineups contain the suspect and a set of foils: Innocent individuals Two types of strategies for selecting foils: 1. Similarity-to-Suspect Strategy Matches lineup members to the suspects appearance 2. Match-to-Description Strategy Matches items that witness provided in description Identification decisions Target-present lineps Target-absent lineups 1. Correct identification 1. Correct rejection 2. Foil identification 2. Foil identification 3. False rejection 3. False identification Live vs. Photo lineups Canadian police generally use photo array because they are: Easier to construct Portable Suspect doesn’t have the right to counsel Photos are static (i.e., no variation in suspect behaviour) Less stressful for witness Video popular option used in the UK  Lineup procedures Simultaneous lineup Sequential lineup Present all members at the Presents members one at a same time time Relies on relative judgment Relies on absolute judgment Simultaneous vs. Sequential Lineup Mixed findings More correct rejections for sequential lineups However, not all research supports this finding Other lineup procedures Show-up Only suspect shown to witness Witness is aware of who police view as a suspect Can result in bias Walk-by Conducted in natural environment Witness taken to publica location where suspect is likely to be Biased lineups Types of biases: 1. Foil bias 2. Clothing bias 3. Instructions bias Case of lineup misidentification Jennifer Thompson was raped at knifepoint Identified Ronald Cotton as attacker Cotton pleaded innocence Jennifer’s positive ID compelling evidence for conviction 11 years later, Cotton allowed DNA test Exonerated Guidelines for improvement 1. The person conducting the lineup or photo array should not know which person is the suspect. 2. Witnesses should be told that the perpetrator may not be present in the lineup 3. The suspect should not differ from foils based on witnesses description (match to description strategy) 4. Witness’ confidence should be assessed prior to feedback *Kassin added: “lineup procedures should be videotaped” Guidelines for improvement 1. Photo lineups should be videotaped. 2. Inform witnesses that clearing innocent suspects and identifying guilty ones are equally important. 3. Lineup should be presented sequentially. 4. Officers should not provide feedback. Video surveillance Errors are still common Lighting Quality Disguises Voice identification Accuracy increases when: Longer voice samples No Accent Accuracy decreases when: Whispering or emotion More foils Target voice occurs later in lineup Summary Memory is malleable Many factors can affect memory Enhanced Cognitive Interview gold standard of interviewing Various types of lineups Photo array commonly used in Canada Video lineups commonly used in the UK Unit 8: Child Victims & Witnesses Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 4 History of Reporting Interviewing Lineup Child -Memory Protocols Identification Eyewitnesses & & -Language -Social Norms Case Studies Testifying in Court History of child witnesses View of children in justice system changed over time Salem Witch Trials (1692) History of child witnesses Early 1900s Negative attitudes towards child witnesses prevailed Research in Europe Results indicated that children were highly suggestible and had difficulty separating fact from fiction (Whipple 1909; 1912) However, little known about this research History of child witnesses Increase in research in the 1970s 1. Expert psychological testimony more accepted in courtroom 2. Social scientists interested in applied research 3. Studies on adult eyewitness testimony increasing 4. Legal community interested in research regarding child witnesses Unit 8: Child Victims & Witnesses Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 4 History of Reporting Interviewing Lineup Child -Memory Protocols Identification Eyewitnesses & & -Language -Social Norms Case Studies Testifying in Court Children’s memory & communication Recall for Events Recent research indicates children can recall events accurately using proper questioning techniques: Free recall tends to produce more accurate information than direct questioning Accuracy of children comparable to adults when using a free narrative approach  Source Report something heard as Misattribution something experienced Memory Multiple Reporting scripts issues Events May harm child’s credibility Often do not disclose Delay immediately High risk of suggestibility Questioning matters Children tend to answer any question asked of them “Is milk bigger than water?” “Is blue heavier than yellow?” More likely to produce erroneous response to yes/no & leading questions When the questions are unanswerable: More likely to say “I don’t know” to WH-questions Children look for approval/disapproval cues Language Issues Recall of events related to language ability Language development helps structure memories Conversations about event = rehearsal, strengthen memory Relationship between age and language ability Language Issues Children face complex language in Criminal Justice System Must tailor language to match child’s language ability Children may use words they don’t fully understand Social norm issues Interview context novel for child Usually, adult knows all the answers Child is now the expert Children pick up on approval/disapproval cues Positive/negative reinforcement Motivated to gain approval from adults  Suggestibility Social compliance: Children trust and want to cooperate with adult interviewers Cognitive system: Children differ from adults in the ways they encode, store, and retrieve information Children can misattribute where information comes from Reporting on event they heard about (not experienced directly) Interaction of both factors responsible for suggestibility Unit 8: Child Victims & Witnesses Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 4 History of Reporting Interviewing Lineup Child -Memory Protocols Identification Eyewitnesses & & -Language -Social Norms Case Studies Testifying in Court Techniques to interview children 1. Anatomically detailed dolls 2. Human figure drawings 3. Criterion-based content analysis 4. Step-wise interview 5. Narrative elaboration 6. Cognitive interview 7. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Protocol 1. Anatomically Detailed Dolls Assumption: Children will provide more information than they would otherwise  1. Anatomically Detailed Dolls Problems: i. Research does not support assumption that children cannot provide detailed accounts Examined reporting by 3-12-year-olds alleged sexual abuse victims Children separated into two groups (3-6/7-12) # of details with doll/open-ended questions comparable Young children more likely to play with dolls in suggestive manner Reported more fantasy-based details when using doll  1. Anatomically Detailed Dolls Problems: ii. Dolls are not standardized No specifications or guidelines are available for manufacturers of dolls Variation in how mental health professionals make dolls No standardized way to incorporate the dolls into interviews  1. Anatomically Detailed Dolls Problems: iii. Unable to assess child’s behaviour with dolls No standardized procedure for scoring behaviour exhibited by children when interacting with dolls  2. Human Figure Drawings Also called: Human Body Diagrams Brown et al. (2007) 5-7-year-olds ability to use drawings Relatively few new details when drawings used Increase in false touch reporting by children Use of representational aids for diagnosing sexual abuse can be inaccurate and dangerous  3. Criterion-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) Part of statement validity analysis (SVA) a. Structured interview with the victim; b. Systematic analysis of the verbal content of the victim’s statements by using CBCA; and c. Application of a statement validity checklist Attempts to distinguish between true and fabricated statements 18 criteria Assumes difference in quality and content 3. Criterion-Based Content Analysis General Characteristics Logical Structure: Is the statement coherent? Quality of Details: Specific descriptions of times, places, people? Specific Contents Contextual Embedding: Is the action connected to other daily routine events? Unusual details: Are there details that are unusual but meaningful? Motivation-Related Contents Spontaneous corrections/additions Admitting lack of memory of knowledge 3. Criterion-Based Content Analysis Some research indicates this protocol is successful Critics argue CBCA: Lacks standardization; Age positively correlated with CBCA score; No theoretical framework; and Subjective (low inter-rater reliability); 4. Step-Wise Interview Children are asked free recall questions, followed by more specific questions, as needed Procedure is consistent with what we know about how to interview children to elicit accurate information Procedure used in Canada Main Limitation: No empirical field experiments 5. Narrative Elaboration Technique Children organize stories into categories Participants Settings Actions Conversations/Affective states Consequences Children practice telling stories with the cards prior to being asked about the critical event 5. Narrative Elaboration Technique Problems: Abstract concepts Repeated prompting Little testing in forensic settings Simply asking children to report information (without the cards) can provide just as much information  6. Cognitive Interview Based on memory retrieval techniques Has been adapted for use with children Children reported more accurate information compared to control conditions Research findings mixed No field studies 7. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol (NICHD) Open-ended questioning with two types of prompts Provides information on how to start interview and introduce topic of abuse Positive results have been obtained with the use of this protocol Gold standard of child interviewing  7. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol (NICHD) 1. Pre-substantive 2. Substantive 3. Closure Phase Phase Instructions Transition to Thanking the child Narrative training substantive issues Ending on a neutral Training in episodic Obtain information topic memory about event under investigation Eliciting additional information 7. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol (NICHD) Structured guidelines e.g., How to phrase questions Uses child’s cues to build on open-ended prompts for further information Reduces chances of suggestibility/interviewer bias Validated by numerous empirical field studies Case Study: The McMartin Pre-School Unit 8: Child Victims & Witnesses Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 4 History of Reporting Interviewing Lineup Child -Memory Protocols Identification Eyewitnesses & & -Language -Social Norms Case Studies Testifying in Court  Lineup Idenfitication Lineup identification Children and adults produce comparable correct identification rates (target-present lineups) Children produce lower correct rejection rates than adults (target-absent lineups) Lineup procedure Children have difficulty with sequential lineups Sequential lineup effective for adults The elimination lineup was developed for children Two-judgment theory of identification accuracy Relative judgment Absolute judgment Children struggle with absolute judgments Elimination lineup Step 1 – Relative Judgment: All lineup photos are presented Child asked to pick out the person who looks most like the perpetrator Step 2 – Absolute Judgment: Child asked to compare his/her memory of the perpetrator with photo in Step 1 to decide if it is in fact the perpetrator Elimination procedure significantly reduces false positive responding Testifying in Court Testifying in court Competency inquiry: Questions posed to witnesses under 14-years Determine whether they are able to: Communicate the evidence Understand the difference between the truth and a lie Determine if they feel compelled to tell the truth Testifying in court Bill C-2 Need to demonstrate general ability to perceive, recall, and communicate Common questions: What grade are you in? What is your teacher’s name? Questioned about ability to distinguish between truth/lie Common themes: Defining various terms Consequences of lying Courtroom accommodations Screen/shield Separate child and defendant. Child does not see defendant’s face Closed-circuit television Child & Lawyers in separate room Testimony televised to courtroom Support person Pre-recorded video testimony Hearsay Close courtroom to public/media Summary Questioning matters Developmental issues Language, memory, social norms, suggestibility NICHD protocol gold standard of child interviewing Elimination lineup procedure most effective for children Courtroom accommodations Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour -Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a -Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Predicting a -Current Issues -Bias verdict -Nullification What’s the purpose of a jury? Jury Functions Apply the law and render a verdict Protect against out-of-date laws Community conscience Increase knowledge of justice system When are juries used?  Types of Offences Summary Minor offences Sentence fewer than 6 months Fine: < $2,000 Tried by judge alone Indictable Serious offences Can be tried by judge alone OR jury Hybrid Crown decides The Right to a Trial by Jury Type of Offence Judge Alone Judge & Jury Summary Offences Yes No Indictable Offences Yes Yes  Jury Act Outlines how jurors are selected Random names drawn from community Receive summons and arrive at court Summons does not guarantee jury status ~100 people arrive Judge explains selection process Jury created 12 person jury (criminal trials) 6 person jury (civil trials) Selecting a Jury Challenges Randomly Part of Selected selected jury pool as juror Challenges Peremptory Challenge Limited number allowed 20 for murder and 12 for other No reason provided Challenge for Cause Lawyer must give a reason (e.g., too much pre-trial publicity) Scientific Jury Selection Not possible in Canada Two approaches in the US: Broad based Case specific Selection – Broad Based Approach Traits & Attitudes Questions assessing traits are asked during the voir dire Answers help determine the type of person to challenge. Selection -Case Specific Approach Case-specific questionnaire Administered to potential jurors Develop profile of ideal juror Question prospective jurors New Selection Approach… “voir Google” Use Internet to vet jurors Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram Rules are murky Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour -Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a -Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Predicting a -Current Issues -Bias verdict -Nullification Characteristics of Juries Representative: Random selection Voter list of telephone directory Composition of jury can be challenged R. v. Nepoose (1991) R. v. Nahdee (1993) Characteristics of Juries Impartiality: No pre-existing biases Ignore inadmissible evidence e.g., Luka Magnotta No connection to defendant e.g., R. v. Guess (1998) e.g., R. v. Murrin (1999) Threats to Impartiality Pre-Trial Publicity: Exposure to negative led to more guilty verdicts Jurors cannot ignore information, despite instructions Works for both negative and positive publicity Publication Ban Publication Ban: The Case of Robert Pickton Publication ban didn’t work U.S. media Increase in social networking sites Bias in the Jury Pool Three options to overcome bias: 1. Change of venue 2. Adjournment 3. Challenge for cause Bias in the Jury Pool Challenge for Cause Lawyers question potential jurors Two triers selected from jury pool and listen Decide if person impartial If yes, becomes 1st juror and replaces trier Problems: Jurors alter answers Difficult to be honest Unaware of own biases Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour -Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a -Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Predicting a -Current Issues -Bias verdict -Nullification Process of Reaching a Verdict i. Jury Selection  ii. Listening to Evidence iii. Disregarding Inadmissible Evidence iv. Judge’s Instructions v. Deliberations vi. The Final Verdict  ii. Listening to Evidence Note-taking Facilitate memory and understanding Problem: Note-takers exert too much influence Problem: Jurors may rely too heavily on note-takers Main research conclusions Does serve as memory aid Does not have undue influence Provides an accurate record ii. Listening to Evidence Asking Questions Helpful? Research Conclusions Does promote understanding Asked appropriate questions Does not help with seeking truth Not harmful or helpful Up to the judge iii. Disregarding Inadmissible Evidence Juries instructed to disregard evidence Jurors may not ignore evidence (Hans & Doob, 1976) Disregard if given logical reason (Kassin & Sommers, 1997) May produce backfire effect iv. Judge’s Instructions Outline how to apply law to facts Legal accuracy is important, not clarity Hesitant to deviate – overturned Implications for justice system? Attempts to rewrite v. Deliberations Decision Making Models a) Mathematical Models b) Explanation-based models v. Deliberations a) Mathematical Models Jury makes set of mental calculations Mathematical weight assigned to each piece of evidence Little support for this theory v. Deliberations b) Explanation-based Models Evidence organized into a coherent whole Story Model More consistent with how jurors make decisions Good approach for lawyers v. Deliberations Jury sequestered until final verdict is reached Group Polarization Leniency Bias vi. The Final Verdict Unanimous verdict needed in Canada Otherwise hung jury US & UK allow majority Vote Faster decision Less discussion First poll highly predictive Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour -Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a -Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Predicting a -Current Issues -Bias verdict -Nullification Predicting Verdicts Common variables assessed: Demographic Personality Attitudes Defendant characteristics Victim characteristics Expert testimony Predicting Verdicts: Demographics Racial bias More guilty verdicts for “other race” Small effect Black Sheep effect Weak evidence – lenient Strong evidence - punitive Small and inconsistent relationship overall Predicting Verdicts: Personality Authoritarianism - rigid thinkers; comply with authority Pro-prosecution bias More guilty verdicts Persuasiveness High in extroversion Tall extroverted Males Better predictors than demographics Predicting Verdicts: Attitudes Not well studied “Death-penalty supporting” jurors more likely to render a guilty verdict Predicting Verdicts: Defendant Characteristics Criminal history Prior convictions Attractiveness More lenient toward attractive defendants Predicting Verdicts: Victim Characteristics Female’s sexual history in sexual assault cases Used to infer credibility Rape shield provisions Challenged in 90s Only for “mistaken belief of consent” Onus on defendant Predicting Verdicts: Expert Testimony Influence varies depending on: Gender of expert Complexity of testimony Credentials of expert Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour -Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a -Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Predicting a -Current Issues -Bias verdict -Nullification  Video link on Brightspace Jury Nullification Jury Nullification Job is to apply the law, but… Juries may ignore the law Might feel law is unfair Punishment is too harsh for the crime Jury Nullification Not a well known option by juries Impact of instructions (nullification vs. standard) SCC ruling prevents discussion of nullification Robert Latimer Henry Morgentaler Case Examples  Video link on Brightspace Case Example: Robert Latimer Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Predicting a Current Issues -Bias verdict -Nullification How Do We Conduct Jury Research? Conducting Jury Research: i. Archival Records High external validity Limitations No control over data collection Can’t go back for more data No cause-effect Conducting Jury Research: ii. Simulation Techniques High internal validity Manipulate variables Determine Cause-Effect Low external validity Artificial Students Conducting Jury Research: iii. Field Studies High external validity Limitations Permission required Semi-Control Conducting Jury Research: iv. Post-Trial Interviews Illegal in Canada High external validity Many problems Social desirability Inaccurate recall Forget Don’t know Can’t establish cause-effect Unit 9: Juries P SYC H O LO GY 2 4 0 0 D R. K I R K LU T H E R  Outline 1 2 3 4 Jury Purpose Characteristics Behaviour Jury Research -Functions -Threats to -Reaching a Grand Juries -Selection impartiality verdict -Bias -Predicting a Current Issues verdict -Nullification Grand Juries Used to determine whether criminal charges should be brought No judge present Unanimous decision not needed Currently used in the U.S. Composed of 16-23 members Once common in Canada Abolished Typically use preliminary hearings instead  Video link on Brightspace Grand Juries Explained Current Issues CSI Effect Jurors want physical evidence Current Issues Law and Religion Testifying with face covered R. v. N.S. (2009) Jury Duty and PTSD Historically, not considered as an issue More recently, psychopathology among jurors is starting to receive some attention by the courts Remove juries?  Summary Jury selection Representative, Challenges to jury composition, Impartiality Process of reaching a verdict Jury nullification Study juries Archival records, Simulation techniques, Field research, Post Trial interviews Grand juries Current issues  Unit 10: Psychopathy Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 What is Case Study: Myths, Causes, & Psychopathy? Ted Bundy Treatment -Definition -Measurement -Characteristics What is psychopathy? Personality disorder “Intra-species predators” Use charm or violence Show no remorse or shame Seen across cultures: e.g., Alaskan kunlangeta Measuring Psychopathy Early description: Mask of Sanity book (1941) Most popular measure: Hare PCL-R o Semi-structured interview o Scored 0-2 Self-report: PPI-R & SRP Measuring Psychopathy: Items in the Hare PCL-R Glibness/superficial charm Grandiose sense of self-worth Pathological Lying Conning/Manipulative Factor 1 Lack of remorse or guilt Shallow emotions Lacks empathy Fails to accept responsibility Measuring Psychopathy: Items in the Hare PCL-R Need for stimulation Poor behavioural controls Early behavioural problems Lack of realistic long-term goals Factor 2 Impulsive Irresponsible Promiscuity Criminal Versatility Psychopathy: Other Related Terms Antisocial Personality Disorder: pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others Sociopathy: label for someone whose psychopathic traits are assumed to be due to environmental factors (vs. genetic predisposition) Psychopathy and Offending Highly correlated with criminal behaviour Psychopaths: Start offending at a younger age Offending behaviour persists longer Engage in more violent offences Engage in more types of offences Make up 10-20% of the prison population are psychopaths Responsible for ~60% of societal crime Fraud most closely linked with psychopathy Characteristics of Psychopathy Difficulty in avoiding punishment (Lykken, 1957; Schmauk, 1970) Low anticipatory responses (Hare’s countdown paradigm) Low pain sensitivity Low concern for pain of others Low startle reflex  Unit 10: Psychopathy Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 What is Case Study: Myths, Causes, & Psychopathy? Ted Bundy Treatment -Definition -Measurement -Characteristics  Case Study: Ted Bundy American serial killer and rapist Tortured and murdered between 30-100 women across the US Netflix documentary: Conversations with a Killer Gave interviews during time in prison Provided insights into the mind of a serial murderer Executed in 1989 Case Study: Ted Bundy  Unit 10: Psychopathy Psychology 2400 Dr. Kirk Luther  Outline 1 2 3 What is Case Study: Myths, Causes, & Psychopathy? Ted Bundy Treatment -Definition -Measurement -Characteristics Myths about Psychopathy Psychopaths are born and not made All psychopaths are violent You either are or are not a psychopath There are no female psychopaths Psychopaths are all intelligent Psychopaths are untreatable Psychopathy and Violence Violent and versatile o Start at younger age and persist longer o More violent crimes/greater variety o More likely to offend when incarcerated/post-release Unique type of violence (instrumental vs. reactive): o Instrumental violence associated with high PCL-R scores o Target strangers, motivated by revenge/gain Positive emotions prior to rape & tendency for sexual sadism Psychopathy in the Community ~ 1% of general population Not all psychopaths violent o Business world: “snakes in suits” Cause problems in workplaces o Spreading vicious rumors o Blaming others for failure o Dissension among employees  Psychopathy and Interviewing Suspect Behaviour: Recommendations: Try to outsmart interviewer Case familiarity Enjoy being focus of attention Convey experience & confidence Attempt to control Admiration Will not be fooled by bluffs Avoid criticism Attempts to shock Avoid emotion about case Causes of Psychopathy Some evidence for heritability (twin studies) Environmental factors may express traits o Criminal parents and physical neglect/abuse Cognitive or emotional deficit o Don’t pay attention to inhibitory information o Lack of response to emotional items o Result of physical dysfunction in the brain Psychopathy and Treatment Can Psychopaths be treated? Violent recidivism: o Treated nonpsychopaths – reduction in reoffending o Treated psychopaths – increase in reoffending BUT…other recent research shows more positive results Treatment more effective when used for youth Psychopathy and Treatment Naked LSD Sessions…? Psychopathy and Schizophrenic patients in Oak Ridge Stripped down and given LSD Intention: Bring humility Sense of openness More information: http://www.oakridgeclassaction.ca/lsd Summary Psychopathy is a complicated and complex personality disorder Hare PCL-R most common measure for diagnosing psychopathy Myths about psychopathy