Test 1: Class notes

Question 1

Ekman & O’Sullivan

Answer 1

Who can catch a liar?
Nurses see scene, told to tell truth or lie about it
Evaluated
No one was very good at detecting lies (except, maybe the secret service)

Question 2

McNaughten rule, 1843

Answer 2

If individual has no more capacity than a beast, they cannot be considered guilty
Very early form of forensic psychology

Question 3

Freud, 1906

Answer 3

If you watch someone and question them correctly, you can figure out if they are guilty

Question 4

Munsterberg

Answer 4

Father of applied psychology

Thought legal system should consult psychologists to gain insight on accused

Question 5

Munsterberg: Illusions

Answer 5

You can be deceived by illusions, making you see something different than there actually is

Question 6

Munsterberg: The Memory of the Witness

Answer 6

Conditions when memory is unreliable

ie. when you are robbed, hard to remember what exactly was taken

Question 7

Munsterberg: The Detection of Crime

Answer 7

Word association technique to determine if someone was lying

Critical item related to crime and measure RT

Question 8

Munsterberg: The Traces of Emotion

Answer 8

Use measurements of autonomic responses

Question 9

Munsterberg: Untrue Confessions

Answer 9

Criminal profiling
People falsely confess for notoriety
Want to protect public from actual criminal

Question 10

Munsterberg: Suggestions in Court

Answer 10

Research on suggestibility of questions

Question 11

Munsterberg: Hypnotism and Crime

Answer 11

Mesmerism
Techniques for suggestion
Perhaps hypnotize someone to do a crime for you

Question 12

Munsterberg: The Prevention of Crime

Answer 12

Broken window effect
Eugenics (able to look at people and use specific characteristics to determine if they are likely to commit crime)
Them (bad people) and us (good people)
Those who confess are good as they have remorse

Question 13

Yellow psychology

Answer 13

Moore, 1907

Does not necessarily have basis, biased

Question 14

Brown v. Board of Education, 1954

Answer 14

Anti-desegregation case that went to SC and cited psychological research

Question 15

Jenkins v. US, 1962

Answer 15

On appeal, court ordered that psychologists can render expert testimony on mental disorders
Before, not considered experts on mental illness in court

Question 16

Frye Criterion

Answer 16

For expert testimony to be used in court, precedent

General acceptance in particular field (up to judge)

Question 17

R v. Mohan, 1994

Answer 17

Evidence must be relevant and make facts of case more or less likely
Evidence must be necessary for assisting trier of fact
Evidence must not violate any rules of exclusion
Evidence must be provided by qualified expert (training, experience, research)

Question 18

R v. McIntosh and McCarthy, 1997

Answer 18

Issue of cross-race identification - people are worse at correctly identifying others of different race

Question 19

Tanford, 1990

How judges perceive the world

Answer 19

Judges are conservative and perceive social scientists as liberal
Self-confident, don’t think they need assistance from non-lawyers
Perceive science as threat to power

Question 20

Murrie et al. 2013

Are forensic experts biased by the side that retains them?

Answer 20

Gave experts 4 cases, varying sides, and told them to rate chance of reoffending
Clear bias towards side that hires them

Question 21

Mossman - damage to forensic psychology field

Answer 21

Went through cases
Found 45 cases where judges referred to expert witnesses as hired guns, whore, prostitute
Disagreed with their place in trial

Question 22

Dual role of psychologists

Answer 22

Two relationships with client
Doctor relationship, as well as reporting to parole board
Difficult because trying to help patient but also need to make honest report of hour patient is doing

Question 23

Trial consultants

Answer 23

Make lots of money
No licensing, no regulation, no fees - just need client
Identify psychological issues, prepare witness (to avoid perjury by lawyer, buffer), advise on response to opposing experts, advise on jury selection, give opinion on quality of psychological evidence

Question 24

Amicus curiae

Answer 24

Someone who is not a party to a case and is not solicited by a party, but who assists a court by offering information that bears on the case

Question 25

Clark and Clark, 1952

Answer 25

Gave kids from segregated and unsegregated communities a doll, asked questions Unsegregated communities were less likely to say that black doll looks nice, more likely to say it looks bad, and less likely to say it looks like them than in segregated communities Clark and Clark said that this is because children in segregated communities are so defeated that they couldn't use the defence that they aren't black Cannot determine if this is an advocacy brief or a science-translation brief - bias in explaining data

Question 26

Kinds of expert witness testimony (3)

Answer 26

1. Conduit - educator - best type of witness, ideal, ethical 2. Philosopher ruler - sure thing is right, regardless of evidence, biased 3. Hired gun - whore for defence

Question 27

Kassin et al. 1989

Answer 27

Surveyed 63 respondents (PhD, doctoral students, MD) Overall had 478 testimonies in court Agree to testify for prosecution more than the defence, but asked by defence more often Should testify if field knows something that triers do not know If something is common sense and research fails to support it

Question 28

Elliot Guidelines, 1993

Answer 28

Directly against Kassim, 1989 and Munsterberg Should check testimony for file drawer effects (research that was not completed that might be contradictory - should be discounted) and ecological validity (studies control for confounding variables, which are lesser variables in real life) If we are careful with what we say, forensic psychologists will be called on much less frequently, but will be more important - not considered whores