Rough Notes:

Aristotle's Psychology

 
 

 

 
 

The History of Psychology

The beginning of the history of psychology is hard to pinpoint, mainly because it is difficult to establish exactly what psychology is.

Psychology Psi
Psychology Psi (Public Domain)

Since the dawn of civilization and the establishment of the earliest religions and spiritual beliefs, various priests, shamans and spiritual leaders were responsible for the mental wellbeing of their people. From shamen to Jewish Qabbalists, curing the mind was a huge part of the spiritual path, even if treatment was couched in magic and mystery, using rituals to drive out demons.

If we define psychology as a formal study of the mind and a more systematic approach to understanding and curing mental conditions, then the Ancient Greeks were certainly leading proponents. As with many scientific studies, Aristotle was at the forefront of developing the foundations of the history of psychology. Aristotle's psychology, as would be expected, was intertwined with his philosophy of the mind, reasoning and Nicomachean ethics, but the psychological method started with his brilliant mind and empirical approach.

Of course, it would be unfair to concentrate fully on Aristotle's psychology without studying some of the other great thinkers who contributed to the history of psychology, but his work certainly is the basis of modern methods. Any modern psychologist of note fully understands the basics of Aristotelian thought and recognizes his contribution to the history of psychology.

 

 

Aristotle's Psychology and the Influence of Plato

To give Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC) complete credit for being the first thinker to develop a theory of proto-psychology is unfair to some of the other philosophers from Greece and beyond. However, whilst there is little doubt that the Babylonians and Buddhists, amongst others, developed concepts involving the mind, thought and reasoning, much of their tradition was passed on orally and is lost. For this reason, the Ancient Greeks provide a useful starting point as we delve into the history of psychology.

Plato
Plato (Public Domain)

The teacher of Aristotle, Plato (428/427 BC - 348/347 BC), provided some useful insights into the theoretical structure of the human mind, based largely upon his elegant Theory of Forms. He used the idea of a psyche, a word used to describe both the mind and the soul, to develop a rough framework of human behavior, reasoning and impulses.

Plato proposed that the human psyche was the seat of all knowledge and that the human mind was imprinted with all of the knowledge it needed. As a result, learning was a matter of unlocking and utilizing this inbuilt knowledge, a process he called anamnesis.

In his famous work, 'The Republic,' Plato further developed this idea and first proposed the idea that the mind consisted of three interwoven parts, called the Tripartite Mind.

  • The Logistikon: This was the intellect, the seat of reasoning and logic.
  • The Thumos: This was the spiritual centre of the mind, and dictated emotions and feelings.
  • The Epithumetikon: This part governed desires and appetites.

According to Plato, the healthy mind discovered a balance between the three parts, and an over reliance upon these parts led to the expression of personality. For example, gluttony and selfishness could be explained by a dominance of the Epithumetikon, letting desires govern behavior.

In the Republic, a treatise aimed at theorizing the perfect society, Plato proposed that the rulers of such a society, those who determined course and policy, should be drawn from men where the Logistikon held sway. Individuals with a strong Epithumetikon made excellent merchants and acquirers of wealth whilst the Thumos, which can loosely identified with will and courage, was the domain of the soldier.

Later, Plato renounced his idea of a tripartite mind and returned to earlier proposals of a dualistic explanation for the mind, balanced between intellect and desire. However, this three way split would reemerge in Aristotle's idea of a trinity of souls and, based upon the idea prevalent in many societies and religions, which gave a reverence to the number three, 20th Century psychoanalysts maintained the idea of a human mind balanced between three impulses.

 

Aristotle's Psychology - Para Psyche

Aristotle
Aristotle (Creative Commons)

Aristotle, building upon the work of the earlier philosophers and their studies into mind, reasoning and thought, wrote the first known text in the history of psychology, called Para Psyche, 'About the Mind.' In this landmark work, he laid out the first tenets of the study of reasoning that would determine the direction of the history of psychology; many of his proposals continue to influence modern psychologists.

In the book, the definition of psyche, as was common at the time, used 'mind' and 'soul' interchangeably, with the Ancient Greek philosophers feeling no need to make no distinction between the two. At this period, apart from dalliances with Atheism from Theodorus, Greek philosophers took the existence of divine influence as given. Only Socrates really questioned whether human behavior and the need to be a 'good person' was about seeking personal happiness rather than placating a divine will.

In Para Psyche, Aristotle's psychology proposed that the mind was the 'first entelechy,' or primary reason for the existence and functioning of the body. This line of thought was heavily influenced by Aristotle's zoology, where he proposed that there were three types of souls defining life; the plant soul, the animal soul and the human soul, which gave humanity the unique ability to reason and create. Interestingly, this human soul was the ultimate link with the divine and Aristotle believed that mind and reason could exist independently of the body.

He was one of the first minds to examine the urges and impulse that drove and defined life, believing that the libido and urge to reproduce was the overriding impulse of all living things, influenced by the 'plant soul.' Whilst he partially linked this to the process of achieving immortality and fulfilling the purposes of a divine mind, he proposed this reproductive urge many centuries before Darwin. This idea is a fine example of one of the great intuitive mental leaps that define Aristotle's legacy.

Aristotle's Psychology of Impulses and Urges

Continuing this line of thought, Aristotle attempted to address the relationships between impulses and urges within the human mind, many years before Freud resurrected many of the basic tenets of Aristotle's psychology with his psychoanalysis theory. Aristotle believed that, alongside the 'Libido,' were 'Id' and 'Ego,' the idea of desire and reason, two forces that determined actions.

Aristotle's psychology proposed that allowing desire to dominate reason would lead to an unhealthy imbalance and the tendency to perform bad actions. Here, Aristotle's thought created a paradigm that remained unchallenged for centuries and one that still underpins the work of modern psychology and philosophy, where desire is renamed as emotion and reason as rationality.

Uniquely, Aristotle also understood the importance of time on the actions driving a person, with desire concerned with the present and reason more concerned with the future and long-term consequences. As an aside and a slight divergence into sociology, this short-termism and quest for immediate results is one of the driving forces behind economic collapses, environmental degradation and political popularism.

Perhaps more people should study Aristotle and his ideas of what drives human behavior. Aristotle can, quite legitimately, be called the first behaviorist and the basis of work by B.F. Skinner and Pavlov, two of the most famous names in the history of psychology.

Aristotle's psychology included a study into the formation of the human mind, as one of the first salvos in the debate between nature and nurture that influences many academic disciplines, including psychology, sociology, education, politics and human geography. Aristotle, unlike Plato, was a believer in nurture, stating that the human mind was blank at birth and that educating the individual and exposing them to experiences would define the formation of the mind and build a store of knowledge.

The History of Psychology and Ancient Greek Medicine

Plato and Aristotle adopted a philosophical and abstract approach to defining human behavior and the structure of the mind, but that was not the only contribution of the Hellenistic philosophers. The development of Ancient Greek medicine introduced the study of physiology into the history of psychology, proposing that there were physical reasons underlying many mental ailments. Chief amongst these was the Father of Medicine, Hippocrates, who proposed that epilepsy had a physical cause and was not some curse sent by the fickle Greek Gods.

Unlike Aristotle, who saw the heart as the seat of thought and reason, Hippocrates understood the importance of the brain. This debate continued, with physicians such as Praxagoras still maintaining that the heart and arteries linked thought, through a mysterious fluid called pneuma. In a gruesome experiment, Herophilus and Erasistratus were given permission, by the ruler of Alexandria, Egypt, to perform vivisection on criminals and they determined that the nervous system and brain controlled the body and were therefore the seat of reason.

However, they still believed that the heart sent pneuma throughout the body, but that it controlled unconscious processes, such as metabolism. By contrast, the nerves sent 'psychic' pneuma throughout the body. These experiments revealed a lot of information but introduced medical ethics into the history of psychology, a debate that rages today. Whilst their studies were abhorrent when looked at through the lens of history, the Twentieth Century history of psychology includes some infamous and unwanted landmarks.

The History of Psychology - Galen and the Four Humours

Claude Galien. Lithograph by Pierre Roche Vigneron.
Claude Galien. Lithograph by Pierre Roche Vigneron. (Paris: Lith de Gregoire et Deneux, ca. 1865) (Public Domain)

Following on from Hippocrates was the physician, Galen, who provided the link between the Greeks and Islamic psychology. Of Greek extraction, this brilliant physician and researcher earned the respect of successive Roman emperors for his skill and ability, and he went on to produce volumes of work covering many aspects of the human condition, from psychology to eye surgery.

He proposed the idea of four 'humours' within the human body, each responsible for a different aspect of the human condition, and believed that an imbalance between the four would affect physical and mental wellbeing. This holistic approach to medicine inextricably linked mind and body, a factor only recently readopted by modern medicine, which tends to treat physical conditions and symptoms without paying much regard to mental health, and vice-versa.

Galen's Four Humors Were:

  • Sanguine: The blood, related to the element of air and the liver, dictated courage, hope and love.
  • Choleric: Yellow bile, related to the element of fire and the Gall Bladder, could lead to bad temper and anger, in excess.
  • Melancholic: Black bile, associated with the element of earth and the spleen, would lead to sleeplessness and irritation, if it dominated the body.
  • Phlegmatic: Phlegm, associated with the element of water and the brain, was responsible for rationality, but would dull the emotions if allowed to become dominant.
Galen Manuscript
De pulsibus by Galen. (Manuscript; Venice, ca. 1550). This Greek manuscript of Galen's treatise on the pulse is interleaved with a Latin translation. (Public Domain)

Galen believed that the balance of these four humours would be influenced by location, diet, occupation, geography and a range of other factors. Whilst this idea of humours was incorrect, it influenced medical and psychological thought for centuries, and it was developed further by the great Islamic scholar, Ibn-Sina (Avicenna).

This idea of looking at the entire body and mind, rather than blaming witchcraft and spirits, certainly influenced medicine and the history of psychology for the better although some of the cures used to alleviate the build-up of a humour, such as blood-letting, were harmful.

Of course, to modern commentators, the idea of the humors seems a little primitive and is based upon a limited knowledge of psychology. However, the importance of Galen is not the exact nature of the theory but the fact that his ideas saw the first paradigm shift away from the idea of mental conditions having a supernatural source and towards finding answers in physiology.

It is no surprises that his work upon psychology and the mind, as well as other disciplines, became the backbone of the Islamic rediscovery of the Greeks; his ideas were copied and added to by Islamic scholars. Certainly, his empirical and pragmatic approach earns him a place in the history of psychology.

 

The Coming of the Islamic Golden Age and the Growth of Psychology

There is little doubt that the Ancient Greeks laid out the course of modern psychology, although due respect has to be given to the Chinese, Indian and Persian scholars who made contributions outside the scope of this history of psychology, but which influenced modern thought in many disparate ways.

The Islamic expansion saw a culmination of this process and an integration of Greek thought allied to the wisdom of the Middle-Eastern and Eastern scholars as they drew knowledge from around the known world. The Islamic Golden Age would preserve Aristotle's psychology, add to it, and pass it on to the Europeans as the Dark Ages ended. The roots of the history of psychology certainly began here and the beliefs of the Greeks would also influence sociology, geography and economic theory.

 

Full reference: 

Martyn Shuttleworth (Jun 19, 2010). Aristotle's Psychology. Retrieved Oct 06, 2017 from Explorable.com: https://explorable.com/aristotles-psychology

Forensic psychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Part of a series on
Forensic science
Psychology
The Greek letter 'psi', a symbol for psychology
Basic types
Applied psychology
Lists

Forensic psychology is the intersection between psychology and the justice system. It involves understanding fundamental legal principles, particularly with regard to expert witness testimony and the specific content area of concern (e.g., competence to stand trial, child custody and visitation, or workplace discrimination), as well as relevant jurisdictional considerations (e.g., in the United States, the definition of insanity in criminal trials differs from state to state) in order to be able to interact appropriately with judges, attorneys, and other legal professionals. An important aspect of forensic psychology is the ability to testify in court as an expert witness, reformulating psychological findings into the legal language of the courtroom, providing information to legal personnel in a way that can be understood.[1] Further, in order to be a credible witness, the forensic psychologist must understand the philosophy, rules, and standards of the judicial system. Primarily, they must understand the adversarial system. There are also rules about hearsay evidence and most importantly, the exclusionary rule. Lack of a firm grasp of these procedures will result in the forensic psychologist losing credibility in the courtroom.[2] A forensic psychologist can be trained in clinical, social, organizational, or any other branch of psychology.[3]

Generally, a forensic psychologist is designated as an expert in a specific field of study. The number of areas of expertise in which a forensic psychologist qualifies as an expert increases with experience and reputation. Forensic neuropsychologists are generally asked to appear as expert witnesses in court to discuss cases that involve issues with the brain or brain damage. They may also deal with issues of whether a person is legally competent to stand trial.

Questions asked by the court of a forensic psychologist are generally not questions regarding psychology but are legal questions and the response must be in language the court understands. For example, a forensic psychologist is frequently appointed by the court to assess a defendant's competence to stand trial. The court also frequently appoints a forensic psychologist to assess the state of mind of the defendant at the time of the offense. This is referred to as an evaluation of the defendant's sanity or insanity (which relates to criminal responsibility) at the time of the offense.[4] These are not primarily psychological questions but rather legal ones. Thus, a forensic psychologist must be able to translate psychological information into a legal framework.[5]

Forensic psychologists may be called on to provide sentencing recommendations, treatment recommendations, or any other information the judge requests, such as information regarding mitigating factors, assessment of future risk, and evaluation of witness credibility. Forensic psychology also involves training and evaluating police or other law enforcement personnel, providing law enforcement with criminal profiles, and in other ways working with police departments. Forensic psychologists may work with any party and in criminal or family law. In the United States, they may also help with jury selection.[6]

Training and education[edit]

Forensic psychologists may hold a Ph.D. or Psy.D. in clinical psychology, social psychology, organizational psychology, or experimental psychology. In order for a psychologist to practice as a forensic psychologist in the United States, it is preferable but not necessary that the individual be a state licensed psychologist and receive certification as a Diplomate in Forensic Psychology by the American Board of Forensic Psychology (although the latter is less important to judges). Ideally, the psychologist would have some years of postdoctoral experience in forensic psychology and have training and supervision in forensic psychology. However, practices vary from state to state and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In the United States legal system, the ultimate authority is the judge and the judge may select whomever he or she sees fit to qualify as an expert.

In other countries, training and practitioner requirements vary. In the United Kingdom, for example, a person must obtain the Graduate Basis for Registration with the British Psychological Society—normally through an undergraduate degree. This would be followed by Stages 1 (academic) and 2 (supervised practice) of the Diploma in Forensic Psychology (which would normally take 3 years full-time and 4 years part-time). Assessment occurs via examination, research, supervised practice, and the submission of a portfolio showing expertise across a range of criminological and legal applications of psychology. Once qualified as a "Chartered" psychologist (with a specialism in forensic psychology), a practitioner must engage in Continued Professional Development and demonstrate how much, of what kind, each year, in order to renew his/her practising certificate.

Professional opportunities[edit]

There are numerous professional positions and employment possibilities for forensic psychologists. They can be practiced at several different employment settings.

Academic researcher[edit]

Academic forensic psychologists engage in teaching, researching, training, and supervision of students, and other education-related activities.[7] These professionals usually have an advanced degree in Psychology (most likely a PhD). While their main focus is research, it is not unusual for them to take on any of the other positions of forensic psychologists. These professionals may be employed at various settings, which include colleges and universities, research institutes, government or private agencies, and mental health agencies.[7] Forensic psychology research pertains to psychology and the law, whether it be criminal or civil.[7] Researchers test hypotheses empirically and apply the research on issues related to psychology and the law.[8] They may also conduct research on mental health law and policy evaluation.[7] Some famous psychologists in the field include Saul Kassin, very widely known for studying false confessions, and Elizabeth Loftus, known for her research on eyewitness memory. She has provided expert witness testimony for many cases.

Consultant to law enforcement[edit]

Forensic psychologists also assist with law enforcement. They work in collaboration with the police force or other law enforcement agencies. Law enforcement psychologists are responsible for assisting law enforcement personnel. They are frequently trained to help with crisis intervention, including post-trauma and suicide. Other duties of law enforcement psychologists include development of police training programs, stress management, personnel management, and referral of departmental personnel as well as their families for specialized treatment and counseling.[9] Of course, ethical issues may arise, such as the question of who the client is (the police officer referred or the department, in regards to confidentiality).[8]

Correctional psychologist[edit]

Correctional psychologists work with inmates and offenders in correctional settings. They serve both the role of an evaluator and a treatment provider to those who have been imprisoned or on parole or probation. Correctional psychologists may also take on the role of researcher or expert witness and frequently perform a wide range of psychological testing.

Evaluator[edit]

These forensic psychologists take on the role of evaluating parties in criminal or civil cases on mental health issues related to their case. For criminal cases, they may be called on to evaluate issues including, but not limited to, defendants' competence to stand trial, their mental state at the time of the offense (insanity), and their risk for future violent acts.[7] For civil cases, they may be called on to evaluate issues including, but not limited to, an individual’s psychological state after an accident or the families of custody cases.[7] Any assessment made by an evaluator is not considered a counseling session, and therefore whatever is said or done is not confidential. It is the obligation of the evaluator to inform the parties that everything in the session will be open to scrutiny in a forensic report or expert testimony.[8] Evaluators work closely with expert witnesses (discussed below) as many are called into court to testify with what they have come to conclude from their evaluations. They have a variety of employment settings, such as forensic and state psychiatric hospitals, mental health centers, and private practice. Evaluators usually have had training as clinical psychologists.[7]

Expert witness[edit]

Unlike fact witnesses, who are limited to testifying about what they know or have observed, expert witnesses have the ability to express opinion because, as their name suggests, they are presumed to be "experts" in a certain topic. They possess specialized knowledge about the topic. Expert witnesses are called upon to testify on matters of mental health (clinical expertise) or other areas of expertise such as social, experimental, cognitive, or developmental.[8] The role of being an expert witness is not primary and it is usually performed in conjunction with another role such as that of researcher, academic, evaluator, or clinical psychologist. Clinical forensic psychologists evaluate a defendant and are then called upon as expert witnesses to testify on the mental state of the defendant.[7]

In the past, expert witnesses primarily served the court rather than the litigants.[8] Nowadays, that very rarely happens and most expert witness recruitment is done by trial attorneys. But regardless of who calls in the expert, it is the judge who determines the acceptability of the expert witness.[8]

All ethical expert witnesses must be able to resolve the issue of relating to the case and being an advocate. They must decide between loyalty to their field of expertise or to the outcome of the case.[8]

Treatment provider[edit]

Treatment providers are forensic psychologists who administer psychological intervention or treatment to individuals in both criminal and civil cases who require or request these services. In criminal proceedings, treatment providers may be asked to provide psychological interventions to individuals who require treatment for the restoration of competency, after having been determined by the courts as incompetent to stand trial.[7] They may be asked to provide treatment for the mental illness of those deemed insane at the crime.[7] They may also be called to administer treatment to minimize the likelihood of future acts of violence for individuals who are at a high risk of committing a violent offense.[7] As for civil proceedings, treatment providers may have to treat families going through divorce and/or custody cases. They may also provide treatment to individuals who have suffered psychological injuries due to some kind of trauma.[7] Treatment providers and evaluators work in the same types of settings: forensic and state psychiatric hospitals, mental health centers, and private practice. Not surprisingly, their work may greatly overlap. And although not ethically encouraged, the same forensic psychologist may take on both the role of treatment provider and evaluator for the same client.

Trial consultant[edit]

Forensic psychologists often are involved in trial consulting and are part of legal psychology. A trial consultant, a jury consultant, or a litigation consultant, are social scientists who work with legal professionals such as trial attorneys to aid in case preparation, which includes selection of jury, development of case strategy, and witness preparation.[7][8] They rely heavily on research. Trial consultants may also attend seminars directed at the improvement of jury selection and trial presentation skills.[8] Becoming a trial consultant does not necessarily require a doctoral degree or even a bachelor's degree. All that is really needed is some level of training.[8]

Trial consultants are faced with many ethical issues. They are not only social scientists; they may be entrepreneurs as well, marketing their business and keeping fixed costs. This is a challenge to their ethical responsibilities as applied researchers who need to be following guidelines of ethical research.[8] Trial consultants are hired by attorneys and conflicts may arise when each party has a different viewpoint on a certain issue, such as which prospective jurors should be excused, whether the jurors’ preferences are appropriate for the case or not, etc. They must always keep in mind that they are employees of the attorneys and are not able to make the ultimate decisions regarding the case.[8]

Distinction between forensic and therapeutic evaluation[edit]

A forensic psychologist's interactions with and ethical responsibilities to the client differ widely from those of a psychologist dealing with a client in a clinical setting.[10]

  • Scope. Rather than the broad set of issues a psychologist addresses in a clinical setting, a forensic psychologist addresses a narrowly defined set of events or interactions of a nonclinical nature.
  • Importance of client's perspective. A clinician places primary importance on understanding the client's unique point of view, while the forensic psychologist is interested in accuracy, and the client's viewpoint is secondary.
  • Voluntariness. Usually in a clinical setting a psychologist is dealing with a voluntary client. A forensic psychologist evaluates clients by order of a judge or at the behest of an attorney.
  • Autonomy. Voluntary clients have more latitude and autonomy regarding the assessment's objectives. Any assessment usually takes their concerns into account. The objectives of a forensic examination are confined by the applicable statutes or common law elements that pertain to the legal issue in question.
  • Threats to validity. While the client and therapist are working toward a common goal, although unconscious distortion may occur, in the forensic context there is a substantially greater likelihood of intentional and conscious distortion.
  • Relationship and dynamics. Therapeutic interactions work toward developing a trusting, empathic therapeutic alliance, a forensic psychologist may not ethically nurture the client or act in a "helping" role, as the forensic evaluator has divided loyalties and there are substantial limits on confidentiality he can guarantee the client. A forensic evaluator must always be aware of manipulation in the adversary context of a legal setting. These concerns mandate an emotional distance that is unlike a therapeutic interaction.
  • Pace and setting. Unlike therapeutic interactions which may be guided by many factors, the forensic setting with its court schedules, limited resources, and other external factors, place great time constraints on the evaluation without opportunities for reevaluation. The forensic examiner focuses on the importance of accuracy and the finality of legal dispositions.

Practice[edit]

The forensic psychologist views the client or defendant from a different point of view than does a traditional clinical psychologist. Seeing the situation from the client's point of view or "empathizing" is not the forensic psychologist's task. Traditional psychological tests and interview procedure are not sufficient when applied to the forensic situation. In forensic evaluations, it is important to assess the consistency of factual information across multiple sources. Forensic evaluators must be able to provide the source on which any information is based. Treating psychologists do not routinely assess response bias or performance validity, whereas forensic psychologist usually do. Forensic media psychology is a sub-specialty in forensic psychology that analyzes behavior related to social media, intellectual property, entertainment, including film, television, etc., medical education and other areas where media is used in behavioral psychology.

Forensic psychologists perform a wide range of tasks within the criminal justice system.

Malingering[edit]

An important and pressing question in any type of forensic assessment is the issue of malingering and deception.[11] In some criminal cases, the court views malingering or feigning illness as obstruction of justice and sentences the defendant accordingly.[12][12]

Competency evaluations[edit]

Main article: Competency evaluation (law)

If there is a question of the accused's competency to stand trial, a forensic psychologist is appointed by the court to examine and assess the individual. The individual may be in custody or may have been released on bail. Based on the forensic assessment, a recommendation is made to the court whether or not the defendant is competent to proceed to trial. If the defendant is considered incompetent to proceed, the report or testimony will include recommendations for the interim period during which an attempt at restoring the individual's competency to understand the court and legal proceedings, as well as participate appropriately in their defense will be made.[13] Often, this is an issue of committed, on the advice of a forensic psychologist, to a psychiatric treatment facility until such time as the individual is deemed competent.[4]

As a result of Ford v. Wainwright, a case by a Florida inmate on death row that was brought before the Supreme Court of the United States, forensic psychologists are appointed to assess the competency of an inmate to be executed in death penalty cases.[14][15][16]

Sanity evaluations[edit]

The forensic psychologist may also be appointed by the court to evaluate the defendant's state of mind at the time of the offense. These are defendants who the judge, prosecutor, or public defender believe, through personal interaction with the defendant or through reading the police report, may have been significantly impaired at the time of the offense.

Other evaluations[edit]

Forensic psychologists are frequently asked to make an assessment of an individual's dangerousness or risk of re-offending. They may provide information and recommendations necessary for sentencing purposes, grants of probation, and the formulation of conditions of parole, which often involves an assessment of the offender's ability to be rehabilitated. They are also asked questions of witness credibility and malingering.[11] Occasionally, they may also provide criminal profiles to law enforcement.[17][18][19]

Due to the Supreme Court decision upholding involuntary commitment laws for predatory sex offenders in Kansas v. Hendricks, it is likely that forensic psychologists will become involved in making recommendations in individual cases of end-of-sentence civil commitment decisions.

Ethical implications[edit]

A forensic psychologist generally practices within the confines of the courtroom, incarceration facilities, and other legal setting. It is important to remember that the forensic psychologist is equally likely to be testifying for the prosecution as for the defense attorney. A forensic psychologist does not take a side, as do the psychologists described below.[20] The ethical standards for a forensic psychologist differ from those of a clinical psychologist or other practicing psychologist because the forensic psychologist is not an advocate for the client and nothing the client says is guaranteed to be kept confidential. This makes evaluation of the client difficult, as the forensic psychologist needs and wants to obtain all information while it is often not in the client's best interest to provide it. The client has no control over how that information is used.[21]Despite the signing of a waiver of confidentiality, most clients do not realize the nature of the evaluative situation.[10] Furthermore, the interview techniques differ from those typical of a clinical psychologist and require an understanding of the criminal mind and criminal and violent behavior.[22] For example, even indicating to a defendant being interviewed that an effort will be made to get the defendant professional help may be grounds for excluding the expert's testimony.[23]

In addition, the forensic psychologist deals with a range of clients unlike those of the average practicing psychologist. Because the client base is by and large criminal, the forensic psychologist is immersed in an abnormal world.[24] As such, the population evaluated by the forensic psychologist is heavily weighted with specific personality disorders.[25][26][27]

The typical grounds for malpractice suits also apply to the forensic psychologist, such as wrongful commitment, inadequate informed consent, duty and breach of duty, and standards of care issues. Some situations are more clear cut for the forensic psychologist. The duty to warn, which is mandated by many states, is generally not a problem because the client or defendant has already signed a release of information, unless the victim is not clearly identified and the issue of the identifiability of the victim arises. However, in general the forensic psychologist is less likely to encounter malpractice suits than a clinical psychologist. The forensic psychologist does have some additional professional liability issues. As mentioned above, confidentiality in a forensic setting is more complicated than in a clinical setting as the client or defendant is apt to misinterpret the limits of confidentiality despite being warned and signing a release.[13]

See also[edit]

Footnotes[edit]

  1. Jump up^ Nietzel, Michael (1986). Psychological Consultation in the Courtroom. New York: Pergamon Press. ISBN 0-08-030955-0.
  2. Jump up^ Blau, Theodore H. (1984). The Psychologist as Expert Witness. New York: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 19–25. ISBN 0-471-87129-X.
  3. Jump up^ "Speciality Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists" (PDF). Retrieved 2007-09-14.
  4. ^ Jump up to:a b Grisso, Thomas (1988). Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations: A Manual for Practice (1988 ed.). Sarasota FL: Professional Resource Exchange. ISBN 0-943158-51-6.
  5. Jump up^ Shapiro, David L. (1984). Psychological Evaluation and Expert Testimony. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. ISBN 0-442-28183-8.
  6. Jump up^ Smith, Steven R. (1988). Law, Behavior, and Mental Health: Policy and Practice. New York: New York University Press. ISBN 0-8147-7857-7.
  7. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m What are the Roles and Responsibilities of a Forensic Psychologist, retrieved March 12, 2013
  8. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l Wrightsman, L. & Fulero, S.M. (2005), Forensic Psychology (2nd ed.), Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth
  9. Jump up^ Forensic Psychology, retrieved March 12, 2013
  10. ^ Jump up to:a b Gary, Melton (1997). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. pp. 41–45. ISBN 1-57230-236-4.
  11. ^ Jump up to:a b Rogers, Richard (1997). Clinical Assessment of Malingering and Deception. Guilford Press. ISBN 1-57230-173-2.
  12. ^ Jump up to:a b "Behavior of the Defendant in a Competency-to-Stand-Trial Evaluation Becomes an Issue in Sentencing". Journal of the American Psychiatric Association. Retrieved 2007-10-10.
  13. ^ Jump up to:a b Shapiro, David L. (1991). Forensic Psychological Assessment: An Integrative Approach. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-205-12521-2.
  14. Jump up^ Executing the Mentally Ill: The Criminal Justice System and the Case of Alvin Ford. Sage Books. Retrieved 2007-10-03.
  15. Jump up^ "Executing the Mentally Ill". Sage. Retrieved 2007-10-03.
  16. Jump up^ "Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399". American Psychological Association. January 1986. Retrieved 2007-10-03.
  17. Jump up^ Holmes, Ronald (1990). Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. ISBN 0-8039-3682-6.
  18. Jump up^ Meloy, J. Reid (1998). The Psychology of Stalking. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-490560-9.
  19. Jump up^ Ressler, Robert K. (1988). Sexual Homicide: Patterns and Motives. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. ISBN 0-669-16559-X.
  20. Jump up^ Brodsky, Stanley L. (1991). Testifying in Court: Guidelines and Maxims for the Expert Witness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ISBN 1-55798-128-0.
  21. Jump up^ Datz, Albert J. (1989). ABA Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards. Washington DC: American Bar Association. ISBN 0-89707-450-5.
  22. Jump up^ Toch, Hans (1992). Violent Men: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Violence. Washington, DC: The American Psychological Association. ISBN 1-55798-172-8.
  23. Jump up^ Blau, Theodore. The Psychologist as Expert Witness. Wiley and Sons. p. 26. ISBN 0-471-11366-2. Retrieved 2008-01-23.
  24. Jump up^ Toch, Hans (1989). The Disturbed Violent Offender. New York: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-04533-6.
  25. Jump up^ Cleckley, Hervey (1982). The Mask of Sanity. New York: Plume Publishing. ISBN 0-452-25341-1.
  26. Jump up^ Millon, Theodore (1996). Disorders of Personality: DSM-IV and Beyond. New York: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0-471-01186-X.
  27. Jump up^ Meloy, J. Reid (1996). The Psychopathic Mind: Origins, Dynamics, and Treatment. Delano, MN: Brittany Steer. ISBN 0-87668-311-1.

Further reading[edit]

  • Adler, J. R. (Ed.). (2004). Forensic Psychology: Concepts, debates and practice. Cullompton: Willan.
  • Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (1999). History of Forensic Psychology. In A. K. Hess & Irving B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of Forensic Psychology (2nd ed., ). London: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Blackburn, R. (1996). What is forensic psychology? Legal and Criminological Psychology. 1996 Feb; Vol 1(Part 1) 3-16 .
  • Dalby, J. T. (1997) Applications of Psychology in the Law Practice: A guide to relevant issues, practices and theories. Chicago: American Bar Association. ISBN 0-8493-0811-9
  • Davis, J. A. (2001). Stalking crimes and victim protection. CRC Press. 538 pages. ISBN 0-8493-0811-9. (hbk.)
  • Duntley, J. D., & Shackelford, T. K. (2006). Toward an evolutionary forensic psychology. Social Biology, 51, 161-165. Full text
  • Gudjonsson, G. (1991). Forensic psychology - the first century. Journal of forensic psychiatry, 2(2), 129.
  • G.H. Gudjonsson and Lionel Haward: Forensic Psychology. A guide to practice. (1998) ISBN 0-415-13291-6 (pbk.), ISBN 0-415-13290-8 (hbk.)
  • Ogloff, J. R. P., & Finkelman, D. (1999). Psychology and Law: An Overview. In R. Roesch, S. D. Hart, & J. R. P. Ogloff (Eds.), Psychology and Law the State of the Discipline . New York: Springer. ISBN 0-306-45950-7
  • O'Mahony, B. (2013). So, You Want to Be a Forensic Psychologist? Create Space. ISBN 9781482011814
  • Roesch, R., & Zapf, P. A. (Eds.). (2012). Forensic assessments in criminal and civil law: A handbook for lawyers. NY: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199766857
  • Ribner, N.G.(2002). California School of Professional Psychology Handbook of Juvenile Forensic Psychology. Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0-7879-5948-0

External links[edit]