Forensic Psychology
Leer de tools die aangeboden worden tijdens de lessen. Hij kan toepassingsvragen stellen.
Zeker wanneer zo een tool uitgelegd wordt (bv ODARA (les 5)) of wanneer zelf een tool
tijdens de les echt ingevuld wordt met scores etc! Bekijk het stukje van ODARA zeker terug.
Lesson 1: Introduction
Forensic psychology ≠ forensic science or law enforcement
• (Forensic) psychologist studies human behavior
Expert in (criminal) human behavior
• Tries to apply psychological principles to assist legal system
History
• Middle Ages and earlier: good and wrong was related to religion, demons, witches,
sinners ... (vocabulary that was used), psychopathy was also related to religion (cause was a
demon…)
• End of Middle Ages: first use of ‘insanity’, but you were still seen as liable and responsible
for your own actions
• 18th century: “insane person = wild animal” , so an insane person can’t be held responsible
for a crime
• 19th century: Lombroso: developed criminal atavism (= you can recognize criminals by
their physical anomalies (if you look at one’s physique you can determine if one is able to
commit a crime))
Specific characteristics were for specific crimes:
“In general, thieves are notable for their expressive faces and manual dexterity, small
wandering eyes that are often oblique in form, thick and close eyebrows, distorted or
squashed noses, thin beards and hair, and sloping foreheads. Like rapists, they often
have jug ears. Rapists, however, nearly always have sparkling eyes, delicate features,
and swollen lips and eyelids. Most of them are frail; some are hunchbacked.”
(Lombroso, 1876)
• 19th century: development of theories about insanity and criminal behavior
• 1879: First laboratory for experimental psychology (W. Wundt)
• 1908: ‘On the witness stand’ (Münsterberg)
> Series of essays to describe research on eyewitness testimony, false confessions
and uses of psychology in legal problems
• 20th century: psychologists were more and more called upon to apply their (rudimentary)
knowledge to the legal system as expert (e.g., testifying as expert witness)
> Psychology = a tool in arriving at fair and just legal outcomes
• Some high-profile cases revealed the lack of fit between classical clinical psychological
approach and the legal context
> E.g.: a child psychologist (without specific forensic expertise) being called
upon as expert witness in a child sexual abuse case
> E.g.: the use of assessment techniques that are not adapted to the forensic
1
, context
> E.g.: the classical type of psychological reporting was not useful to court
• 1970 – 1980 (US): more and more application of psychology in legal issues
> Development of: Specific training, Guidelines, Specialized journals, First generation
assessment tools
Starting from here we have a unique discipline that differs from classical clinical
psychology
Stanley Milgram Experiments (1961)
Fake subject must act. The real subject must send electrical shocks
to the fake subject; however, these shocks aren’t real. We wanted
to see how far people would go to administer shocks that are
painful.
What could this teach us about criminal behavior in certain
situations?
Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)
People received the role of prisoner or the role of guard. They had to stop the experiment
because the ‘guards’ abused their role.
Current situation
Forensic psychology has only been recognized as a specialization in 2001 by the American
Psychological Association.
Practice of forensic psychology
Behavioral sciences department (Belgian federal police)
1. Polygraph
Used, it’s controversial
Is an additional tool, no one will ever make a decision solely based on a polygraph
2. Database management of sexual crimes
3. Interrogation of minors
4. Behavioral analysis
• Supporting interrogations (psychologist follows the interrogation of the police
officer and can also send tips to the officer)
• Profiling
• Threat analysis
• Observation at reconstruction
• Witness protection (assessment)
1.1 Practice of forensic psychology
Three main activities for forensic psychologists
1. Assessment
2. Treatment
3. Consultation
2
,Assessment
Therapeutic vs. forensic assessment (clinical psychologist with client vs forensic psychologist
with criminal)
Differences in:
• Goal (reduce psy. suffering vs. addressing legal question)
• Relationship (care and support vs. investigative and truth seeking)
• Client (examinee vs. whoever pays (court, attorney ...)
• Consequences (design intervention vs. possible loss of liberty)
• Accuracy of info (examinee generally more reliable vs. questionable)
Methods:
• Clinical interview (!!!)
• Psychological testing
> Warning: the instruments mentioned in the following slides are not necessarily the
‘best’ instruments and are therefore not necessarily recommended for use in
(forensic) practice.
Projective tests (Rorsach, TAT…) never base a report on projective test alone
Objective tests (MMPI-II…) -> the test in example is not the best, best to use other
instruments
Intelligence (WAIS-IV …)
Neuropsychological (Trail Making Test …)
Forensic assessment instruments (PCL-R …)
• Collateral information
Need for accuracy in forensic evaluations
-> detection of malingering (underreporting or exaggerating)
Archival information
-> e.g. police reports, charges and convictions in the past …
-> need for permission
Information from partner, family, friends, …
Information of other healthcare professionals
-> e.g. (mental) health records, traces of chronic substance abuse, …
Exercise (example)
Intro:
• Woman calls the police because husband has beaten 9-year old daughter
• Statements are made at the police station, a doctor is called for a medical
examination of the child
• Forensic psychologist is asked to assess the personality of the accused for the court
Story of accused (husband):
• “Daughter was inobedient, I asked her calmly to do something twice, she refused and
slammed the door. I went after her and gave her a pat on her behind. Well, three
actually.”
• “Seems like nothing wrong to me, it’s an adequate form of discipline, especially if you
want your child to be raised as an obedient and respectful person.”
• “We live in a quite harmonious family. There are no real issues. There has
never been aggression.”
3
, Interview with the forensic psychologist: (first you ask general questions to understand and
then you can start accusing)
• FP: “The medical report states your daughter had a clear bruise on the front of her
head, she had several red dots in her face and she was heavily shivering.”
• A: “I suppose she was a bit startled, yes.”
• FP: “What about the bruise?”
• A: “It must have accidentally happened while I was patting her behind.”
• FP: “Your wife already pressed charges against you in the past.”
• A: “Oh, we once had a disagreement and we pushed eachother. She first pushed me. I
pushed her back, and she fell a bit unlucky.”
• FP: “I see you’re in agression counseling.”
• A: “Indeed, quite interesting, but not really necessary. Bit of a waste of time actually.
Besides, my counselor totally agrees on the fact that discipline is important when
raising children.”
Treatment
Treatment of victims:
There are several challenges:
High threshold for victims (things like shame, cost, complexity of finding the right
help, waiting lists …)
Lack of forensic insight and knowledge in a lot of psychologists
as a psychologist it’s very important to have insight in trauma, if not then you’re
not suited to treat victims since it can lead to wrong diagnosis and the wrong focus
Treatment of offenders
Several challenges arise:
Often takes place after an individual has been in contact with the law (after arrest
or sentence) or put under pressure by social system
Lack or absence of intrinsic motivation
Usually involvement of a third party (justice system) asking for information on the
progress (which makes it harder to gain their trust)
Confrontation with hostility, threats or even aggression and emotional burden
(PTSS, burn-out ...) of hearing stories
- However: study of Leavitt et al. (2006) found no more risk of aggressive
behavior in the forensic context (but emotional burden is still an aspect)
It’s also important to know who your client is:
Empathy vs. critical/suspicious attitude
Need for critical attitude because it’s important for the assessment (to look out for
manipulation). This can influence your empathy for the client. Regardless empathy is
a must.
Treatment can occur when a person begins to exhibit psychological problems
while in prison.
4
Leer de tools die aangeboden worden tijdens de lessen. Hij kan toepassingsvragen stellen.
Zeker wanneer zo een tool uitgelegd wordt (bv ODARA (les 5)) of wanneer zelf een tool
tijdens de les echt ingevuld wordt met scores etc! Bekijk het stukje van ODARA zeker terug.
Lesson 1: Introduction
Forensic psychology ≠ forensic science or law enforcement
• (Forensic) psychologist studies human behavior
Expert in (criminal) human behavior
• Tries to apply psychological principles to assist legal system
History
• Middle Ages and earlier: good and wrong was related to religion, demons, witches,
sinners ... (vocabulary that was used), psychopathy was also related to religion (cause was a
demon…)
• End of Middle Ages: first use of ‘insanity’, but you were still seen as liable and responsible
for your own actions
• 18th century: “insane person = wild animal” , so an insane person can’t be held responsible
for a crime
• 19th century: Lombroso: developed criminal atavism (= you can recognize criminals by
their physical anomalies (if you look at one’s physique you can determine if one is able to
commit a crime))
Specific characteristics were for specific crimes:
“In general, thieves are notable for their expressive faces and manual dexterity, small
wandering eyes that are often oblique in form, thick and close eyebrows, distorted or
squashed noses, thin beards and hair, and sloping foreheads. Like rapists, they often
have jug ears. Rapists, however, nearly always have sparkling eyes, delicate features,
and swollen lips and eyelids. Most of them are frail; some are hunchbacked.”
(Lombroso, 1876)
• 19th century: development of theories about insanity and criminal behavior
• 1879: First laboratory for experimental psychology (W. Wundt)
• 1908: ‘On the witness stand’ (Münsterberg)
> Series of essays to describe research on eyewitness testimony, false confessions
and uses of psychology in legal problems
• 20th century: psychologists were more and more called upon to apply their (rudimentary)
knowledge to the legal system as expert (e.g., testifying as expert witness)
> Psychology = a tool in arriving at fair and just legal outcomes
• Some high-profile cases revealed the lack of fit between classical clinical psychological
approach and the legal context
> E.g.: a child psychologist (without specific forensic expertise) being called
upon as expert witness in a child sexual abuse case
> E.g.: the use of assessment techniques that are not adapted to the forensic
1
, context
> E.g.: the classical type of psychological reporting was not useful to court
• 1970 – 1980 (US): more and more application of psychology in legal issues
> Development of: Specific training, Guidelines, Specialized journals, First generation
assessment tools
Starting from here we have a unique discipline that differs from classical clinical
psychology
Stanley Milgram Experiments (1961)
Fake subject must act. The real subject must send electrical shocks
to the fake subject; however, these shocks aren’t real. We wanted
to see how far people would go to administer shocks that are
painful.
What could this teach us about criminal behavior in certain
situations?
Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)
People received the role of prisoner or the role of guard. They had to stop the experiment
because the ‘guards’ abused their role.
Current situation
Forensic psychology has only been recognized as a specialization in 2001 by the American
Psychological Association.
Practice of forensic psychology
Behavioral sciences department (Belgian federal police)
1. Polygraph
Used, it’s controversial
Is an additional tool, no one will ever make a decision solely based on a polygraph
2. Database management of sexual crimes
3. Interrogation of minors
4. Behavioral analysis
• Supporting interrogations (psychologist follows the interrogation of the police
officer and can also send tips to the officer)
• Profiling
• Threat analysis
• Observation at reconstruction
• Witness protection (assessment)
1.1 Practice of forensic psychology
Three main activities for forensic psychologists
1. Assessment
2. Treatment
3. Consultation
2
,Assessment
Therapeutic vs. forensic assessment (clinical psychologist with client vs forensic psychologist
with criminal)
Differences in:
• Goal (reduce psy. suffering vs. addressing legal question)
• Relationship (care and support vs. investigative and truth seeking)
• Client (examinee vs. whoever pays (court, attorney ...)
• Consequences (design intervention vs. possible loss of liberty)
• Accuracy of info (examinee generally more reliable vs. questionable)
Methods:
• Clinical interview (!!!)
• Psychological testing
> Warning: the instruments mentioned in the following slides are not necessarily the
‘best’ instruments and are therefore not necessarily recommended for use in
(forensic) practice.
Projective tests (Rorsach, TAT…) never base a report on projective test alone
Objective tests (MMPI-II…) -> the test in example is not the best, best to use other
instruments
Intelligence (WAIS-IV …)
Neuropsychological (Trail Making Test …)
Forensic assessment instruments (PCL-R …)
• Collateral information
Need for accuracy in forensic evaluations
-> detection of malingering (underreporting or exaggerating)
Archival information
-> e.g. police reports, charges and convictions in the past …
-> need for permission
Information from partner, family, friends, …
Information of other healthcare professionals
-> e.g. (mental) health records, traces of chronic substance abuse, …
Exercise (example)
Intro:
• Woman calls the police because husband has beaten 9-year old daughter
• Statements are made at the police station, a doctor is called for a medical
examination of the child
• Forensic psychologist is asked to assess the personality of the accused for the court
Story of accused (husband):
• “Daughter was inobedient, I asked her calmly to do something twice, she refused and
slammed the door. I went after her and gave her a pat on her behind. Well, three
actually.”
• “Seems like nothing wrong to me, it’s an adequate form of discipline, especially if you
want your child to be raised as an obedient and respectful person.”
• “We live in a quite harmonious family. There are no real issues. There has
never been aggression.”
3
, Interview with the forensic psychologist: (first you ask general questions to understand and
then you can start accusing)
• FP: “The medical report states your daughter had a clear bruise on the front of her
head, she had several red dots in her face and she was heavily shivering.”
• A: “I suppose she was a bit startled, yes.”
• FP: “What about the bruise?”
• A: “It must have accidentally happened while I was patting her behind.”
• FP: “Your wife already pressed charges against you in the past.”
• A: “Oh, we once had a disagreement and we pushed eachother. She first pushed me. I
pushed her back, and she fell a bit unlucky.”
• FP: “I see you’re in agression counseling.”
• A: “Indeed, quite interesting, but not really necessary. Bit of a waste of time actually.
Besides, my counselor totally agrees on the fact that discipline is important when
raising children.”
Treatment
Treatment of victims:
There are several challenges:
High threshold for victims (things like shame, cost, complexity of finding the right
help, waiting lists …)
Lack of forensic insight and knowledge in a lot of psychologists
as a psychologist it’s very important to have insight in trauma, if not then you’re
not suited to treat victims since it can lead to wrong diagnosis and the wrong focus
Treatment of offenders
Several challenges arise:
Often takes place after an individual has been in contact with the law (after arrest
or sentence) or put under pressure by social system
Lack or absence of intrinsic motivation
Usually involvement of a third party (justice system) asking for information on the
progress (which makes it harder to gain their trust)
Confrontation with hostility, threats or even aggression and emotional burden
(PTSS, burn-out ...) of hearing stories
- However: study of Leavitt et al. (2006) found no more risk of aggressive
behavior in the forensic context (but emotional burden is still an aspect)
It’s also important to know who your client is:
Empathy vs. critical/suspicious attitude
Need for critical attitude because it’s important for the assessment (to look out for
manipulation). This can influence your empathy for the client. Regardless empathy is
a must.
Treatment can occur when a person begins to exhibit psychological problems
while in prison.
4
