User:Bells7/Forensic psychology
 | This is the sandbox page where you will draft your initial Wikipedia contribution.
If you're starting a new article, you can develop it here until it's ready to go live. If you're working on improvements to an existing article, copy only one section at a time of the article to this sandbox to work on, and be sure to use an edit summary linking to the article you copied from. Do not copy over the entire article. You can find additional instructions here. Remember to save your work regularly using the "Publish page" button. (It just means 'save'; it will still be in the sandbox.) You can add bold formatting to your additions to differentiate them from existing content. |
Article Draft
[edit]Lead
[edit]Forensic psychology is the application of scientific knowledge and methods (in relation to psychology) to help assist in answering legal questions that may ariseing in criminal, civil, contractual, or other judicial proceedings. Forensic psychology includes research on various psychology-law topics, such as: jury selection, reducing systemic racism in criminal law;, eyewitness testimony, evaluating competency to stand trial;, or assessing military veterans for service-connected disability compensation. The American Psychological Association's Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists reference several psychology subdisciplines sub-disciplines, such as: social, clinical, experimental, counseling, and neuropsychology.
Article body (this article is at the end of the full article, it just needed help)
[edit]Research
[edit]Forensic psychology researchers make scientific discoveries relevant to psychology and the law and sometimes provide expert witness testimony. These professionals usually have an advanced degree in psychology, generally a PhD or similar. (most likely a PhD). These professionals may be employed in various settings, such as: which include colleges and universities, research institutes, and government, or private agencies, and or mental health agencies. Researchers test hypotheses empirically regarding issues related to psychology and the law, such as jury research and research on mental health law and policy evaluation. Their research may be published in forensic psychology journals such as Law and Human Behavior or Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, and more broadly, in basic psychology journals. Some famous psychologists in the field include Scott Lilienfeld, who was widely known for his scholarship on psychopathology and psychopathy; Saul Kassin, who is widely known for studying false confessions; Jennifer Skeem, who is widely known for studying justice-involved people with mental illness; Michael Saks, who is known for his contributions to jury research and improvements to forensic science; Barbara Spellman, who is known for her cognitive psychology-law work as well as for her open science leadership; and Elizabeth Loftus and Gary Wells, who are both known for their research on eyewitness memory.
Ethics in forensic psychology
[edit]The ethical recommendations and expectations outlined for forensic psychology specifically are listed in the APA's Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology. These guidelines involve reminders that forensic psychologists should value integrity, impartiality, and fairness, as well as avoid conflicts of interest when possible. These conflicts of interest may arise in situations in which the psychologist is working as a consultant to one side or another in a court case, when the psychologist is required to testify or evaluate something that collides with their own beliefs or values, or when a psychologist is faced with the decision of choosing between playing the role of an individual's evaluator or treatment provider in a case. This final conflict of interest also relates to the ethical guidelines relating to having multiple relationships with clients. As a standard of ethics, forensic psychologists are expected to offer a certain amount of reduced fee or pro bono services for individuals who may not be able to afford hiring a psychologist for a court case otherwise. Other ethical guidelines involve receiving informed consent from clients before communicating information regarding their treatment or evaluations, respecting and acknowledging privacy, confidentiality, and privilege among clients, remaining impartial and objective when involved in a trial, and weighing the moral and ethical costs of complying with any court orders that may conflict with professional standards. Forensic Psychologists are required to work within the limitations of their competence, as determined by their education, training, supervised experiences, consultation, research, or professional experience.
Examples of skewed ethics
[edit]An example of skewed ethics in forensic psychology would be the different tests used to measure the command of authority. Two very infamous cases of this would be the Stanford Prison Experiments and the Milgram experiment. The Stanford Prison Experiment put college aged students into a prison simulation where they were randomly assigned to fulfill the role of either “guards” or “prisoners”[1] This case was found to be unethical because it was found to be harmful to the participant past what should have been allowed. [2] Stanley Milgram conducted research on how far people would go to obey authority figure if another person was harmed in the process. How the situation influenced the individual proves as a way to draw conclusions about the individual and their upbringing. Forensic psychology finds this information useful to know when and how authority can affect a situation, but mostly to know the boundaries that research can be pushed and when something is deemed unethical.[3]
Notable research in forensic psychology
[edit]- Maryanne Garry conducted research on imagination inflation, and whether imagining a childhood event inflates confidence that it occurred. The study investigated whether imagining a childhood event that did not happen increased individuals confidence that it did. The results suggested that participants who originally reported an event did not happen changed their mind after imagining the scenario. Moreover, Garry also conducted research that used the premise of misremembered events in relation to eye witnesses and their chance of accepting (and confirming) a suggested occurrence, even if it was not accurate to what they saw.[4] The study found that 30% of participants met critera for false memory and 43% met criteria for false memories.[4]
- Research by Tess Neal found that while there are a number of psychometric measuring tools that are used by psychologists in legal cases, there are few challenges to the result they present. Neal’s publications also assist lawmakers’ understanding as to when psychological assessments can be challenged; similarly, they help psychologists to see when their assessments can be strengthened.[5]
Stanley Milgram conducted research on how far people would go to obey authority figure if another person was harmed in the process. How the situation influenced the individual proves as a way to draw conclusions about the individual and their upbringing. Forensic psychology finds this information useful to know when and how authority can affect a situation, but mostly to know the boundaries that research can be pushed and when something is deemed unethical.[3]Moved to Ethics section
The citations added are mine, there are other citations in the original article.
References (have errors here, but in the article they were moved to, errors were resolved before publication)
[edit]- ^ Zimbardo, Philip (01 August, 1971). "The Stanford Prison Experiment" (PDF) (PDF). Retrieved 07 November, 2024.
{{cite web}}: Check|archive-url=value (help); Check date values in:|access-date=and|date=(help) - ^ Perlstadt, Harry (2018). "How to Get out of the Stanford Prison Experiment: Revisiting Social Science Research Ethics". Current Research Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (CRJSSH). 1 (2): 45–59.
- ^ a b Wilson, Paul (May 2003). "The Concept of Evil and the Forensic Psychologist" (PDF). resarchgate.net (PDF). Retrieved 21 September 2024.
{{cite web}}: Check|archive-url=value (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ a b Wade, Kimberley A.; Garry, Maryanne; Pezdek, Kathy (2018-03). "Deconstructing Rich False Memories of Committing Crime: Commentary on Shaw and Porter (2015)". Psychological Science. 29 (3): 471–476. doi:10.1177/0956797617703667. ISSN 0956-7976.
{{cite journal}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Neal, Tess M. S.; Slobogin, Christopher; Saks, Michael J.; Faigman, David L.; Geisinger, Kurt F. (2019-12). "Psychological Assessments in Legal Contexts: Are Courts Keeping "Junk Science" Out of the Courtroom?". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 20 (3): 135–164. doi:10.1177/1529100619888860. ISSN 1529-1006.
{{cite journal}}: Check date values in:|date=(help)
Instructor Feedback. I have included suggested edits above as well as commentary. There are some citation formatting errors with the platform that require manual correction. You will need to click on the citation errors and fill in required information within the pop-up box. You have included at least two examples of peer-reviewed secondary literature - nice work! I would suggest you review the final assignment rubric as that will detail the areas I plan to assess for the final submission.
Feedback : I added comments to the talk page in response to each review! I also added some data in response to one of them that I detailed in the talk page…is that okay? Please let me know if I should move it to another location! Thank you!