Forensic psychology

Forensic psychology is the practice of psychology applied to the law. Forensic psychology is the
application of scientific knowledge and methods to help answer legal questions arising in
criminal, civil, contractual, or other judicial proceedings.[1][2][3] 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.[4] The American Psychological
Association's Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists reference several psychology
subdisciplines, such as social, clinical, experimental, counseling, and neuropsychology.[5]
History

Front cover of an early edition of

Hugo Muensterberg's "On the Witness
Stand" book

As early as the 19th century, criminal profiling began to emerge, with the Jack the Ripper case
being the first instance of criminal profiling, by forensic doctor and surgeon Thomas Bond.[6] In
the first decade of the 20th century, Hugo Münsterberg, the first director of Harvard's
psychological laboratory and a student of Wilhelm Wundt, one of the first experimental
psychologists,[2][7] authored On the Witness Stand.[2][8] In the publication, Münsterberg attempted
to demonstrate how psychological research could be applied in legal proceedings.[9] Sigmund
Freud also discussed how psychopathological processes play a role in criminal behavior.[2] Other
significant early figures in forensic psychology include Lightner Witmer, and William Healy.[10]

In 1917, the lie detector was invented by the psychologist William Marston.[11][12] Six years after
its invention, Marston brought his lie detector to court in the case of Frye v. United States at the
request of James A. Frye's attorneys, who hoped Marston's device would prove their client's
innocence. The results were not deemed admissible, due to lie detection not being widely
accepted in the scientific community. This led to the creation of the Frye standard, which states
scientific evidence is only admissible when it has prominent standing within the scientific
community.[13]
The 1954 case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,[14] was the first where the Supreme
Court of the United States referenced expert opinions by psychologists.[15] After this, the
preponderance of psychological mechanisms within courtrooms began to be considered
beneficial.[15] Several years after the Brown ruling, Justice David Bazelon of the D.C. Circuit Court
of Appeals ruled that psychologists had the legal authority to testify as medical experts about
mental illness.[3][15][16]

In 1969, the American Psychology–Law Society was founded, later being converted into Division
41 of the APA in 1980.[15] As the field continued to grow, more organizations supported the
application of psychology to the law. In 1976, the American Board of Forensic Psychology was
chartered, eventually becoming part of the American Board of Professional Psychology in
1985.[15] Organizations and conferences later aided in solidifying the development of forensic
psychology, such as the American Academy of Forensic Psychology and the National Invitational
Conference on Education and Training in Forensic Psychology.[15][17] By 2001, forensic
psychology was recognized as a professional specialty by the American Psychological
Association.[15]

In 1993, the case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical[18] introduced the standard of
admissibility when an expert witness is on the stand. The case started after the parents of
Jason Daubert and Eric Schuller, sued Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals after their children were
born with serious birth defects due to a drug called Bendectin.[19] After moving the case to
federal court, then Merrell Dow moved for summary judgement when they submitted documents
show that there was no published scientific study demonstrating any links between the drug
Bendectin and birth defects. Then Daubert and Schuller submitted expert evidence as well,
showing that Bendectin did cause birth defects, based on in vitro and in vivo animal studies,
pharmacological studies and reanalysis of other published studies. At the time of the case these
methodologies of evidence were not considered to be acceptable. The summary judgement was
granted to Merrell Dow, the parents appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit had only
granted summary judgment because the plantiffs' proffered evidence that were accepted as a
reliable technique by scientist. The reason it was granted to Merrell Dow was because at the
time of the case the Frye standard was considered the correct standard of evidence.[20] This
Daubert standard eventually became the standard used by the U.S. Supreme Court. The standard
is considered to be a part of the Federal Rules of Evidence, this also includes the admissibility of
evidence as well. The Supreme Court reversed, and remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit Court
of Appeals. Through the remand, the court was able to analyze the evidence presented under the
new standard and decided to uphold the district court's original grant of summary judgement for
the defendant.[21] Because of this case ruling the Daubert standard was considered by the U.S.
Supreme Court, the old Frye standard while being used more by most states, has been slowly
overturned and no longer referencing to it.

Modern forensic psychological research applies psychological methodology to legal contexts. In

the 1980s, Saul Kassin, a psychology professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in
New York, published a series of papers on false confessions. One of Kassin's articles was
instrumental in overturning the convictions of five boys who had been falsely convicted of the
rape of a jogger. [22] At the University of Liverpool, David V. Canter is credited with the creation of
the term investigative psychology, a sub-specialization of forensic psychology that pertains to of
criminal behavior and the investigative process.[11] Through the psychological profiling of the
Railway Rapists, Canter assisted in the capture of the killers.[23] The 20th-century psychologist
William Stern, conducted numerous experiments on eyewitness testimony, credibility,
consistency, and the influence of leading questions in court.[24][25]

Recently, forensic psychology has grown in popularity in the media. For example, many recent
docuseries on Netflix feature forensic psychological content, including Making a Murderer and
Sins of our Mother. Other TV shows and movies such as Criminal Minds, Manhunter, Mindhunter,
and Silence of The Lambs have widely popularized the practice of criminal profiling, particularly
within the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU).[26] One example
of a highly-publicised case that used forensic psychology was Ted Bundy's sentencing.[27] In
1980, he went to trial and was evaluated by multiple psychology professionals to determine his
ability to stand before the court.[28] The results from the multiple psychologist evaluations
determined that Ted Bundy was fit to stand before the court.[28]

Training and education

Forensic psychology involves both elements of basic as well as applied work. Forensic
psychologists may hold a Ph.D. or Psy.D. in clinical psychology, counseling psychology, social
psychology, organizational psychology, school psychology, or experimental psychology under
accredited institutions.[29] Additionally, two years of supervised experience in their field is
necessary.[29] There are no specific license requirements in the United States to be a forensic
psychologist, although U.S. states, territories, and the District of Columbia require licensure for
psychologists in the state they intend to practice.[2] Certification specifically in forensic
psychology is also available.[2]
There are 65 forensic psychology degree programs offered in the US. Average tuition cost is
$9,475 in-state and $25,856 out-of-state.[30]

There is a wide range of pay for individuals in the forensic psychology field.[31] In the United
States, the median annual income of clinical-forensic psychologists is $125,000 - $149,999, and
the pay can range from $50,000 (entry-level) a year to more than $350,000 a year.[32]

As of 2022, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, has seen a 6% rise in psychologist and there has
been 196,000 new jobs for psychologist.[33]

Practice and research in

forensic psychology
Forensic psychology may be utilized in five major areas (police and public safety, law, crime and
delinquency, victimology and victim services, and corrections) and two sub-areas (family and
schools).[11]

Practice/direct service
Forensic psychologists complete evaluations and assessments to assess a person's
psychological state for legal purposes.[34][35] Reasons for completing these evaluations can
involve acquiring information for criminal court (such as insanity or incompetence), for criminal
sentencing or parole hearings (often regarding a potential intellectual disability that prevents
sentencing or one's risk of recidivism), for family court (including child custody or parental
termination cases), or civil court (involving, for example, personal injury, competence to manage
one's financial affairs, and psychological autopsies especially as related to testamentary
capacity).[36][37] Additional assessments that these professionals can perform include school
threats.[29] Forensic psychologists also usually have to participate in court as a witness and
assist judges, attorneys, or other court personnel in legal matters. This gives them the
opportunity to help out as much as they can.[38] There is great debate about whether these
Forensic Psychological evaluations constitute as health care treatment, with most arguments
claiming they do not.[39] It is important to note that while a forensic psychologist is responsible
for assessing and reporting results of an evaluation, they do not make decisions on "ultimate
issues" such as competence to stand trial or service-connected disability for U.S. military
veterans.[40][41] Instead, the information provided by the expert evaluator is analyzed and is ruled
on by the court which ordered the evaluation to take place.[41]

Treatment
Forensic psychologists may be asked to administer psychological interventions to those
requiring or requesting services in both criminal and civil cases. Regarding criminal cases,
forensic psychologists can work with individuals who have already been sentenced to reduce the
likelihood of repeating their offense. Other treatments are frequently put together in these case,
especially for substance use disorder, sex offenders, mental illness, or anger management.[36]
As for civil proceedings, forensic psychology treats families going through divorce cases,
custody cases, and psychological injuries due to trauma. Treatment often occurs in forensic and
state psychiatric hospitals, mental health centers, and private practices.[42]

Consultations
Providing consultations allows forensic psychologists to apply psychological expertise and
research to help law enforcement, attorneys, and other legal professionals or proceedings better
understand human behavior (e.g. criminal, witness, victim, jury), civil processes, effects of
trauma or other life events, and so on. If working as a consultant, a forensic psychologist can be
involved in legal proceedings through responsibilities such as reviewing court records (such as a
defendant's psychosocial history or assessing mitigating or aggravating factors in a case),
serving as a jury consultant (organizing focus groups, shadow juries, mock juries, or helping with
the voir dire proceedings), and assessment without testimony (in which results of a defendant's
evaluation are not disclosed to the prosecution team, allowing the defense team to develop a
defense strategy), among others. Essentially, consultations can take many forms, including the
common ones below:
1. Law enforcement consultations may
take the form of assisting with
criminal profiling, developing hiring
procedures and methods,
determining the psychological fitness
of returning officers, or simply lending
expertise on certain criminal
behaviors.[26][43] There are several
methods and approaches related to
criminal profiling, but there is a lot of
skepticism and criticism about the
efficiency and accuracy of criminal
profiling in general.[43][44] A couple
common approaches are the
scientific approach, which includes
the FBI's Crime Scene Analysis and
 Canter's Investigative Psychology,
and the intuitive approach, which
includes Tukey's Behavioral Evidence
Analysis.[36][45][46][47]
2. Trial consultants are psychologists
who work with legal professionals,
such as attorneys, to aid in case
preparation. This includes jury
selection, development of case
strategy, and witness
preparation.[48][49] Forensic
psychologists working as trial
consultants rely on research to best
advise the individuals they are
working with. Because trial
consultants are often hired by one
specific side in a trial, these
psychologists face many ethical
issues. It is the psychologist's
responsibility to remain neutral when
consulting. In other words, the
consultant must not choose a side to
support and consequentially omit or
create information that would be
beneficial to one side or another.
Before accepting a case to work on,
the forensic psychologist weighs the
responsibilities of consulting on that
case with the ethical guidelines put in
place for the field of forensic
psychology.[5]
Expert testimony about matters relating to psychology is also an area in which forensic
psychologists play an active role.[50][36] Unlike fact witnesses, who are limited to testifying about
what they know or have observed, expert witnesses can express further knowledge of a situation
or topic because, as their name suggests, they are presumed to be "experts" in a certain topic
and possess specialized knowledge about it.[51] The requirements that must be met for forensic
psychologists to be considered expert witnesses include clinical psychology expertise and
knowledge of the laws that have jurisdiction over the court they are to testify.[52] Procedural and
legal rules guide expert testimony, including that the evidence must be relevant to the case, the
method the expert used must be valid and reliable, and that the evidence will help the trier of
fact.[50] An expert can be deposed by opposing counsel to discover what they plan to say in
court. Attorneys have the opportunity to raise a challenge to the admissibility of the expert's
testimony if there are questions about its relevance, or its validity and reliability (in the United
States - the rules vary by country and jurisdiction).[50] Regardless of who calls in the expert, it is
the judge who determines whether or not the expert witness will be accepted through a voir dire
process of qualification.[43]

Research
Forensic psychology researchers make scientific discoveries relevant to psychology and the law
and sometimes provide expert witness testimony.[36][3] These professionals usually have an
advanced degree in psychology (most likely a Ph.D.). These professionals may be employed in
various settings, which include colleges and universities, research institutes, government or
private agencies, and mental health agencies.[53] 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.[53] 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.

Education
Academic forensic psychologists teach, research, train, and supervise students, among other
education-related activities. These professionals also have an advanced degree in psychology
(most likely a Ph.D.) and are most often employed at colleges and universities. In addition to
holding professorships, forensic psychologists may engage in education by presenting research,
hosting talks about a particular subject, or engaging with and educating the community about a
relevant forensic psychology topic.[36]

Advocacy
Through advocacy, forensic psychologists can use psychological research to influence laws and
policies. These may be related to certain movements, such as Black Lives Matter or the Me Too
movement, or may even be related to certain civil rights that are being overlooked.[54]
Forensic psychological
evaluations

Common types of evaluations

Forensic assessments of competencies

Competence, in a legal setting, refers to the defendant's ability to appreciate and understand the
charges against them and what is happening in the legal proceedings, as well as their ability to
help the lawyer understand and defend their case.[43] Though it is the psychologist's
responsibility to assess for competence, it is ultimately up to the judge to decide whether the
defendant is competent or not. If the defendant is found incompetent to stand trial, the
psychologist must then give a recommendation on whether or not the defendant can be restored
to competence through treatment or if the charges should be dropped completely due to
incompetence. Potential causes of incompetence include brain damage, the occurrence of a
psychotic episode, a mental disorder, or a developmental disability.[55][40][56]

Multiple cases have helped define competence. In Dusky v. United States (1960), the case
upheld the Youtsey v. United States ruling and set specific criteria for competence. These
include having a rational and factual understanding of court proceedings and being able to
consult with an attorney in a rational manner.[57]

Forensic assessment of insanity

Insanity, as opposed to competence, refers to an individual's mental state at the time of the
crime rather than at the time of the trial.[36][43] According to legal principles of insanity, it is only
acceptable to judge, find someone criminally responsible, and punish a defendant if that
individual was sane at the time of the crime. In order to be considered sane, the defendant must
have exhibited both mens rea and actus reus. Mens rea, translated to "guilty mind", indicates that
the individual exhibited free will and some intent to do harm at the time of the crime. Actus reus
refers to the voluntary committing of an unlawful act.

The insanity defense acknowledges that, while an unlawful act did occur, the individual displayed
a lack of mens rea.[57] The burden of proof in determining if a defendant is insane lies with the
defense team. A notable case relating to this type of assessment is that of Ford v. Wainwright, in
which it was decided that forensic psychologists must be appointed to assess the competency
of an inmate to be executed in death penalty cases.[58][59]

There are various definitions of insanity acknowledged within the legal system.[36] The
M'Naghten/McNaugton rule (1843) defines insanity as the individual not understanding the
nature and quality of his or her acts or that these acts were wrong due to a mental disease or
defect. This is also referred to as the cognitive capacity test. Meanwhile, the Durham Test
(established in Durham v. United States, 1954) states that one can be declared insane if the
actions were caused by a mental disorder. The vague nature of this description causes this
definition to only be used in one state (New Hampshire). The final definition acknowledged
within the courts is the Brawner Rule (U.S. v. Brawner, 1972), also referred to as the American
Law Institute Standard. This definition posits that, due to a mental disease or defect, an
individual is considered insane if unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of an act and are unable
to conform their behavior to the dictates of the law.[57]

Evaluating insanity involves using crime scene analysis to determine the mental state at the time
of the crime, establishing a diagnosis, interviewing the defendant and any other relevant
witnesses, and verifying impressions of the defendant.[54]

Criteria for insanity can vary by state. State standards for the insanity defense
https://psycholegalassessments.com/areas-of-expertise/criminal-responsibility-or-sanity-at-the-
time-of-the-offense/

Violence risk assessment

Violence risk assessment evaluates how dangerous an individual is and the risk of them re-
offending, also referred to as recidivism.[60] Risk assessments are used in sentencing and affect
the possibility of an inmate receiving parole or being released from prison.[60] Imposition of the
death penalty often requires a consideration of "future dangerousness," for which risk
assessment can play a vital role.[60]

Although there are many advocates for the use of risk assessment in sentencing, there are
others who question whether risk assessments are accurate enough to be relied upon when
making these consequential legal decisions.[60] Risk assessment, as with any attempt to
understand future behavior, is very difficult, especially because "risk" isn't always defined the
same way in different legal settings. There is a wide research literature on risk assessment, but
the information is varied and sometimes contradictory, and bias can play a role in risk
assessment.[60]

Types of violence risk assessments.

There are several different methods of
risk assessment, the main five of which
are unstructured clinical assessment,
anamnestic assessment, structured
professional judgment, actuarial
assessment, and adjusted actuarial
assessment.[60]
Unstructured clinical assessment is
a form of risk assessment in which
the forensic examiner or clinician
decides both what information to
use and how to use it to determine
risk based on their clinical
judgment.[60] The information used
in these types of assessments
tends to come from in-depth
interviews with the examinee, as
well as collateral interviews with
known personal contacts, the
results of psychological testing, and
historical records.[60] Because these
assessments rely heavily on the
individual clinician's judgment, the
interrater reliability for this method
of assessing risk tends to be low.
According to most research on
predictive validity, unstructured
clinical assessment is less accurate
at predicting risk than other, more
structured methods[61] (though
there have been some issues raised
with the evidence supporting this
claim[62]).
Anamnestic assessment is another
type, which is a form of clinical risk
assessment that is focused on risk
factors specific to the individual
being examined.[60] This type of risk
assessment tends to be used for
assessing violence risk, and relies
heavily on an examinee's past
history of violent behavior to
identify risk factors for that
individual behaving aggressively
again, rather than risk factors for
violence in general.[60] Because
these risk assessments are based
on clinical interviews and tailored to
the individual in question, they can
be useful for determining ways to
reduce an individual's violence risk,
but they suffer from the same
limitations as general unstructured
clinical assessment in terms of
interrater reliability.[60]
Structured professional judgement
(SPJ) is similar to unstructured
clinical assessment in that the
examiner still makes the final
decision about risk, but it is more
structured because these tools give
the examiner specific, empirically-
based factors to focus on when
assessing risk.[60] Because of the
more structured nature of these
assessments, the interrater
reliability of risk assessments done
using these tools tends to be higher
than that of those done using
completely unstructured clinical
assessment,[60] and some argue the
accuracy is higher than other types
of assessment including actuarial
methods, but there are questions
about the legitimacy of these
claims.[63] Additionally, because
most actuarial risk assessment
tools are based on static (or
unchanging) risk factors, SPJ tools
tend to be better at identifying
dynamic risk factors (which can be
changed), and thus can be more
useful in treatment settings than
actuarial assessments.[60]
Actuarial risk assessment is a more
objective method of risk
assessment that involves
structured tools and algorithms that
combine certain risk factors to
produce a risk score or rating.[60]
The algorithm tells evaluators both
which factors to pay attention to
and how to weigh and combine
them to produce the risk score.[60]
The risk factors included in
actuarial tools are empirically linked
to violence or recidivism risk and
tend to be more static (permanent,
unchanging) than dynamic
(changeable).[60] Because actuarial
risk assessment tools provide the
most guidance and involve the least
amount of clinician judgment, they
tend to have higher interrater
reliability and to be more accurate
than unstructured clinical
assessment.[60] Two example
actuarial tools for assessing
violence risk are the Violence Risk
Appraisal Guide (VRAG)[64] and the
Classification of Violence Risk
(COVR).[65][60] An example actuarial
tool for assessing sexual recidivism
risk is the Static-99 Revised (Static-
99R).[66][60]
Adjusted actuarial risk assessment
is a combination of unstructured
clinical assessment and actuarial
risk assessment.[60] In adjusted
actuarial assessment, evaluators
use an actuarial method to
determine risk, and then adjust the
score produced by the algorithm
based on their own clinical
judgment.[60] This type of risk
assessment is meant to make
actuarial instruments more flexible
and adaptable to the facts of a
specific case; however, supporters
of the actuarial technique tend to
criticize this method as forgoing the
main benefit of actuarial risk
assessment—the lack of
 subjectivity—by reintroducing
clinician judgment after a risk
assessment score has been
calculated.[60]

Other types of evaluations

While insanity and competency assessments are among the most common criminal
assessments administered within the legal system, there are several other types implemented.
Some of these include death penalty case assessments, assessments of child sexual abuse,
assessments for child custody or divorce cases, civil court assessments, and
immigration/asylum cases.[55][67]

Immigration/asylum evaluations. In
removal proceedings, the judge or
parties may request the assistance of a
forensic psychologist for those
individuals eligible to apply for various
forms of immigration benefits.[68] There
are eight grounds for an individual to
apply for which are hardship, risk for
torture, asylum, domestic violence,
ANAC (abused, neglected, or abandoned
children), discretionary determinations,
risk assessment, and competence to
proceed.[57] Each removal proceeding is
as unique as the individual on trial which
is where mental health professionals
play a crucial role in helping document
their experiences as many individuals
may or may not have proof to support
their stories.[57] In the case that an
individual does apply for
relief/protection from removal, a
psychological evaluation is conducted
by a forensic psychologist to help the
court determine if the individual meets
 the requirements for the type of relief for
which they are applying. Immigration
evaluations are often done through a
series of interviews with the individual
and their family members that delve into
their life of what led up to the migration,
medical information such as history and
physical examinations, social
background information, and their
current level of cognitive and
psychological functioning.[57][69][70]

Distinction between forensic and

therapeutic evaluation
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.[57]
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.[71]
Importance of client's perspective. A
clinician places primary importance on
understanding the client's unique point
of view, while a 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. While
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 they 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.[5]
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 places great
time constraints on the evaluation
without opportunities for revaluation.
The forensic examiner focuses on the
importance of accuracy and the finality
of legal dispositions.

Ethics in forensic psychology

The ethical recommendations and expectations outlined for forensic psychology specifically are
listed in the APA's Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology.[5] 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.[36] This final conflict of interest
also relates to the ethical guidelines relating to having multiple relationships with clients.[5] 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.[54][55][72] 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.[73]

Consent
Consent plays a large role in Forensic Psychology. Informed consent is required for
psychologists, and when services are required by law or another authority, psychologists must
inform the individual of the nature of the anticipated services, including whether the services are
court ordered or mandated and any limits of confidentiality, before proceeding, according to the
APA ethics code 3.10(c). [74] Additionally, standard 3.10(d) stipulates that consent needs to be
well documented.[74] Both the individual in question and the council that is representing them
must provide their approval.[73] If the person is legally unable to give their own consent then legal
counsel for that individual must be sought. The person must be informed by the Forensic
Psychologist of all the various guidelines pertaining to the expected services, including the
extent of confidentiality.[73]
Confidentiality in Forensic
psychology
A forensic psychologist's primary responsibility is to safeguard their clients anonymity by taking
appropriate measures and communicating any limitations, the client is trusting them to keep all
topics discussed with them confidential.[73] Only the clients or legally authorized person's
consent may be disclosed; without the clients consent, disclosure may only occur when required
by law, when the psychologist utilizes the information for the clients protection or consultation,
or both.[73]

Notable research in forensic

psychology

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 reported that
participants who originally reported an
event did not happen changed their
mind after imagining the scenario.[75]
Research by Tess Neal found that while
there are a lot of psychometric
measuring tools that are used by
psychologists in legal cases, there are
little challenges to the result they
present.[76]
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.[77]

See also

Applied psychology
Forensic psychiatry
Settled insanity
Competency evaluation (law)
List of United States Supreme Court
cases involving mental health
Media psychology
Medical jurisprudence
Notes

References

1. Devonis, David C.; Thomas, Roger K.; Lee,

David D.; Mattson, Mark E.; Lee, David D.;
Takooshian, Harold; Caffrey, Thomas A.;
Bryson, Dennis R.; Hoff, Tory; Elhammoumi,
Mohamed; Devonis, David C.; Kaufman,
Jake; Rieber, Robert W.; Duchan, Judith
Felson (2012). "Forensic Psychology".
Encyclopedia of the History of
Psychological Theories. pp. 447–451.
doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0463-8_12 (http
s://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-1-4419-0463-8_
12) . ISBN 978-1-4419-0425-6.
 OCLC 650290070 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/oclc/650290070) .
2. Brown, Jennifer; Campbell, Elizabeth
(2010). The Cambridge Handbook of
Forensic Psychology. United States of
America, New York: Cambridge University
Press. pp. 1–4. ISBN 978-0-511-72967-6.
3. Neal, Tess M. S. (July 2018). "Forensic
psychology and correctional psychology:
Distinct but related subfields of
psychological science and practice" (http
s://psyarxiv.com/73dzp/) . American
Psychologist. 73 (5): 651–662.
doi:10.1037/amp0000227 (https://doi.org/
10.1037%2Famp0000227) .
hdl:2286/R.I.50913 (https://hdl.handle.net/
2286%2FR.I.50913) . PMID 29431456 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29431456) .
S2CID 46817929 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:46817929) .
4. Najdowski, Cynthia J.; Stevenson, Margaret
C. (December 2022). "A call to dismantle
systemic racism in criminal legal systems"
(https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/
cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=
psychology_fac_scholar) . Law and Human
Behavior. 46 (6): 398–414.
doi:10.1037/lhb0000510 (https://doi.org/1
0.1037%2Flhb0000510) . PMID 36521112
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3652111
2) . S2CID 254778723 (https://api.semantic
scholar.org/CorpusID:254778723) . "In its
recent resolution [APA] recommended
psychologists and partners engage in
efforts to (a) develop rigorous methods to
measure and identify disparities; (b)
advocate for data-driven changes to
 policies, laws, and practices to dismantle
institutional racism and reduce structural
racism ..."
5. American Psychological Association
(2013). "Specialty guidelines for forensic
psychology". American Psychologist. 68
(1): 7–19. doi:10.1037/a0029889 (https://d
oi.org/10.1037%2Fa0029889) .
PMID 23025747 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/23025747) .
6. Begg, Paul; Fido, Martin; Skinner, Keith
(2015). The complete Jack the Ripper A to
Z (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/9059041
91) . London: Jake Blake. ISBN 978-1-
78418-279-3. OCLC 905904191 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/905904191) .
7. Kim, Alan (2016), "Wilhelm Maximilian
Wundt" (https://plato.stanford.edu/archive
s/fall2016/entries/wilhelm-wundt/) , in
Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2016 ed.),
Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford
University, retrieved 2022-11-17
8. Münsterberg, Hugo (1908). On the witness
stand: essays on psychology and crime.
New York: The McClure company.
OL 6996503M (https://openlibrary.org/book
s/OL6996503M) .
 9. Vaccaro, Thomas P.; Hogan, John D. (2004).
"The Origins of Forensic Psychology in
America: Hugo Münsterberg on the Witness
Stand". NYS Psychologist. 16 (3): 14–17.
ProQuest 620406902 (https://search.proqu
est.com/docview/620406902) .
10. Huss, Matthew T. (2013). Forensic
Psychology. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-
1-118-55413-5. OCLC 945681861 (https://w
ww.worldcat.org/oclc/945681861) .
11. Bartol, Curt; Bartol, Anne (19 December
2020). Introduction to forensic psychology :
research and application (http://worldcat.or
g/oclc/1342595371) . SAGE Publications.
ISBN 978-1-0718-1531-1.
OCLC 1342595371 (https://www.worldcat.o
rg/oclc/1342595371) .
12. Alder, Ken (2002-11-01). "A Social History of
Untruth: Lie Detection and Trust in
Twentieth-Century America" (https://online.
ucpress.edu/representations/article/80/1/
1/81775/A-Social-History-of-Untruth-Lie-Det
ection-and) . Representations. 80 (1): 1–
33. doi:10.1525/rep.2002.80.1.1 (https://do
i.org/10.1525%2Frep.2002.80.1.1) .
ISSN 0734-6018 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0734-6018) .
13. Weiss, K.J.; Watson, C.; Xuan, Y. (2014).
"Frye's backstory: A tale of murder, a
retracted confession, and scientific hubris".
Journal of the American Academy of
Psychiatry and the Law Online. 42 (2): 226–
233. PMID 24986350 (https://pubmed.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/24986350) .
14. "Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,
347 U.S. 483 (1954)" (https://supreme.justi
a.com/cases/federal/us/347/483/) . Justia
Law. Retrieved 2022-11-19.
15. Varela, Jorge G.; Conroy, Mary Alice
(October 2012). "Professional
competencies in forensic psychology".
Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice. 43 (5): 410–421.
doi:10.1037/a0026776 (https://doi.org/10.
1037%2Fa0026776) .
16. "Jenkins v. United States" (https://www.ap
a.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/jenkins) .
www.apa.org.
17. Grisso, Thomas (1991). "A developmental
history of the American Psychology-Law
Society". Law and Human Behavior. 15 (3):
213–231. doi:10.1007/BF01061710 (http
s://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF01061710) .
S2CID 145608111 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:145608111) .
18. "Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)" (https://supreme.
justia.com/cases/federal/us/509/579/) .
Justia Law. Retrieved 2024-02-04.
19. "Pyridoxine/doxylamine" (https://en.wikiped
ia.org/w/index.php?title=Pyridoxine/doxyla
mine&oldid=1153885023) , Wikipedia,
2023-05-08, retrieved 2024-02-25
20. "Daubert standard" (https://en.wikipedia.or
g/w/index.php?title=Daubert_standard&oldi
d=1147326967) , Wikipedia, 2023-03-30,
retrieved 2024-02-04
21. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca
se?case=14286809434668137766) ,
vol. 43, March 22, 1994, p. 1311, retrieved
2024-02-25
22. "Award for Distinguished Contributions to
Research in Public Policy: Saul M. Kassin"
(http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.103
7/amp0000206) . American Psychologist.
72 (9): 948–950. December 2017.
doi:10.1037/amp0000206 (https://doi.org/
10.1037%2Famp0000206) . ISSN 1935-
990X (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1935-
990X) . PMID 29283645 (https://pubmed.n
cbi.nlm.nih.gov/29283645) .
23. "The "railway rapist" commits his first
murder - history" (https://www.history.com/
this-day-in-history/the-railway-rapist-commi
ts-his-first-murder) . HISTORY. 9 November
2009. Retrieved 28 February 2023.
24. Stern, W. (January 1939). "The psychology
of testimony" (http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cf
m?doi=10.1037/h0054144) . The Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 34 (1):
3–20. doi:10.1037/h0054144 (https://doi.or
g/10.1037%2Fh0054144) . ISSN 0096-
851X (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0096-
851X) .
25. Sporer, S.L.; Antonelli, M. (May 2022).
"Psychology of eyewitness testimony in
Germany in the 20th century" (http://doi.ap
a.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/hop000019
9) . History of Psychology. 25 (2): 143–
169. doi:10.1037/hop0000199 (https://doi.
org/10.1037%2Fhop0000199) . ISSN 1939-
0610 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1939-
0610) . PMID 34726443 (https://pubmed.n
cbi.nlm.nih.gov/34726443) .
S2CID 240189580 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:240189580) .
26. "Psychological sleuths--Criminal profiling:
the reality behind the myth" (https://www.ap
a.org/monitor/julaug04/criminal) . apa.org.
Retrieved 2020-05-04.
27. "Ted Bundy - Victims, Family & Death" (http
s://www.biography.com/crime/ted-bundy) .
Biography. 2021-09-15. Retrieved
2023-03-05.
28. Ramsland, Katherine (Fall 2013). "The many
sides of Ted Bundy". Forensic Examiner. 22
(3): 18–25. Gale A345172399 (https://go.g
ale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA345
172399) ProQuest 1439533531 (https://se
arch.proquest.com/docview/143953353
1) .
29. Ward, Jane (2013). "What is forensic
psychology" (https://www.apa.org/ed/prec
ollege/psn/2013/09/forensic-psychology) .
American Psychological Association.
30. "Schools Tuition For Forensic Psychology
Program" (https://www.collegetuitioncomp
are.com/majors/42.2812/forensic-psychol
ogy/) . College Tuition Compare. Retrieved
2023-02-15.
31. "Average Forensic Psychologist Salary
2021: Hourly and Annual Salaries" (https://
www.zippia.com/forensic-psychologist-job
s/salary/) . www.zippia.com. 2020-05-18.
Retrieved 2021-11-21.
32. Neal, Tess M.S.; Line, Emily N. (2022).
"Income, Demographics, and Life
Experiences of Clinical-Forensic
Psychologists in the United States" (https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9
302360) . Frontiers in Psychology. 13:
910672. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.910672 (h
ttps://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffpsyg.2022.9106
72) . PMC 9302360 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9302360) .
PMID 35874388 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/35874388) .
33. "Psychologists : Occupational Outlook
Handbook: : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics"
(https://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-
social-science/psychologists.htm) .
www.bls.gov. Retrieved 2024-02-25.
34. Neal, Tess M.S.; Mathers, Elizabeth; Frizzell,
Jason R. (2022). "Psychological
Assessments in Forensic Settings".
Comprehensive Clinical Psychology (http
s://psyarxiv.com/5g3mj/) . pp. 243–257.
doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818697-8.00150-3
(https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fb978-0-12-818
697-8.00150-3) . ISBN 978-0-12-822232-4.
S2CID 244328284 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:244328284) .
35. Neal, Tess M.S.; Mathers, Elizabeth; Frizzell,
Jason R. (2022). "Psychological
Assessments in Forensic Settings".
Comprehensive Clinical Psychology (http
s://psyarxiv.com/5g3mj/) . pp. 243–257.
doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818697-8.00150-3
(https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fb978-0-12-818
697-8.00150-3) . ISBN 978-0-12-822232-4.
S2CID 244328284 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:244328284) .
36. Fulero, Solomon M.; Wrightsman, Lawrence
S. (2009). Forensic psychology (3rd ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. ISBN 978-0-495-
50649-2. OCLC 181600770 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/181600770) .
37. Psychiatric Autopsy - Tool for Death
Investigation-by Shaijan C. George B.Sc.,
LL.M, 2018(5)KHC J-65
38. "What is Forensic Science? | American
Academy of Forensic Sciences" (https://ww
w.aafs.org/careers-forensic-science/what-f
orensic-science) . www.aafs.org. Retrieved
2023-09-26.
39. Borkosky, Bruce G.; Pellett, Jon M.; Thomas,
Mark S. (March 2014). "Are Forensic
Evaluations "Health Care" and Are They
Regulated by HIPAA?". Psychological Injury
and Law. 7 (1): 1–8. doi:10.1007/s12207-
013-9158-7 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs1
2207-013-9158-7) . S2CID 73268856 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:7326
8856) .
40. Darani, Shaheen (January 2006). "Behavior
of the Defendant in a Competency-to-Stand-
Trial Evaluation Becomes an Issue in
Sentencing" (https://web.archive.org/web/2
0071213220252/http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/c
ontent/full/34/1/126) . Journal of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the
Law Online. 34 (1). Journal of the American
Psychiatric Association: 126–128. Archived
from the original (http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/
content/full/34/1/126) on 2007-12-13.
Retrieved 2007-10-10.
41. Beltrani, Amanda, M.; Zapf, Patricia A.;
Brown, Jerrod (2015). "Competency to
Stand trial: What Forensic Psychologists
Need to Know" (https://www.csp.edu/wp-co
ntent/uploads/2021/02/Forensic-Scholars-
Today-1.2-Competency-to-Stand-Trial-What-
Forensic-Psychologists-Need-to-Know.pdf)
(PDF). Forensic Scholars Today. 1 (2): 1–4.

42. Cronin, Christopher (2009). Forensic

Psychology (2 ed.). Kendall Hunt Pub Co.
ISBN 978-0-7575-6174-0.
43. Louw, Dap (2015). "Forensic Psychology".
International Encyclopedia of the Social &
Behavioral Sciences. pp. 351–356.
doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.21074-x
(https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fb978-0-08-097
086-8.21074-x) . ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
44. Campbell, Francis. "Professors question
validity of RCMP psychological autopsy of
mass killer" (https://www.saltwire.com/atla
ntic-canada/news/professors-question-vali
dity-of-rcmp-psychological-autopsy-of-mas
s-killer-100756097/) . SaltWire. Retrieved
2022-09-21.
45. Holmes, Ronald (1990). Profiling Violent
Crimes: An Investigative Tool (https://archiv
e.org/details/profilingviolent0000holm) .
Newbury Park, CA: Sage. ISBN 0-8039-
3682-6.
46. Meloy, J. Reid (1998). The Psychology of
Stalking. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
ISBN 0-12-490560-9.
47. Ressler, Robert K. (1988). Sexual Homicide:
Patterns and Motives (https://archive.org/d
etails/sexualh_res_1988_00_3513) .
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. ISBN 0-
669-16559-X.
48. Wrightsman, L. & Fulero, S.M. (2005),
Forensic Psychology (2nd ed.), Belmont,
California: Thomson Wadsworth
49. Brodsky, S.L. (2009). Principles and
Practice of Trial Consultation. New York:
Guilford Press. ISBN 978-1-60623-390-0.
50. Line, Emily N.; McCowan, Kristin; Plantz,
Jake W.; Neal, Tess M.S. (2022). "Expert
Witness Testimony" (https://psyarxiv.com/p
ef3z/) . The Routledge Encyclopedia of
Psychology in the Real World Real World.
doi:10.4324/9780367198459-reprw5-1 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.4324%2F9780367198459-r
eprw5-1) . ISBN 978-0-367-19845-9.
OCLC 1330435171 (https://www.worldcat.o
rg/oclc/1330435171) .
51. Blau, Theodore (2 November 2001). The
Psychologist as Expert Witness (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=FnqGD8Ze6GQC
&pg=PA28) . Wiley and Sons. p. 26. ISBN 0-
471-11366-2. Retrieved 2008-01-23.
52. De Fabrique, Nathalie (2011). "Forensic
Psychology". Encyclopedia of Clinical
Neuropsychology. pp. 1069–1070.
doi:10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_2244 (http
s://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-0-387-79948-3_
2244) . ISBN 978-0-387-79947-6.
53. What are the Roles and Responsibilities of
a Forensic Psychologist (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20150402154037/http://www.cli
nicalforensicpsychology.org/what-are-the-r
oles-and-responsibilities-of-a-forensic-psyc
hologist/) , archived from the original (htt
p://www.clinicalforensicpsychology.org/wh
at-are-the-roles-and-responsibilities-of-a-for
ensic-psychologist/) on April 2, 2015,
retrieved March 12, 2013
54. Weiner, Irving B.; Otto, Randy K., eds.
(2013). The handbook of forensic
psychology (Fourth ed.). Hoboken, New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-
118-73483-4. OCLC 842307646 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/842307646) .
55. Goldwaser, Alberto M.; Goldwaser, Eric L.
(17 October 2018). The forensic
examination: a handbook for the mental
health professional. Cham, Switzerland.
ISBN 978-3-030-00163-6.
OCLC 1057471994 (https://www.worldcat.o
rg/oclc/1057471994) .
56. "Determining Criminal Competency: Vienna
Psychological Group" (https://www.viennap
sychologicalgroup.com/how-do-forensic-ps
ychologists-determine-criminal-competenc
y/) . www.viennapsychologicalgroup.com.
2021-09-28. Retrieved 2023-03-15.
57. Melton, G. B.; Petrila, J.; Poythress, N. G.;
Slobogin, C.; Otto, R. K.; Mossman, D.;
Condie, L. O. (2017). Psychological
evaluations for the courts: A handbook for
mental health professionals and lawyers (ht
tps://www.guilford.com/books/Psychologic
al-Evaluations-for-the-Courts/Melton-Petrila
-Poythress-Slobogin/9781462532667)
(4th ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
ISBN 978-1-4625-3553-8.
58. Executing the Mentally Ill: The Criminal
Justice System and the Case of Alvin Ford
(https://books.google.com/books?id=S-B-ik
y44zEC&pg=PA164) . Sage Books. 25 June
1993. ISBN 978-0-8039-5150-1. Retrieved
2007-10-03.
59. "Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399" (http://w
ww.apa.org/psyclaw/ford.html) . American
Psychological Association. January 1986.
Retrieved 2007-10-03.
60. Melton, Gary B.; Petrila, John; Poythress,
Norman Godfrey; Slobogin, Christopher;
Otto, Randy K.; Mossman, Douglas; Condie,
Lois Oberlander (2018). Psychological
evaluations for the courts, fourth edition : a
handbook for mental health professionals
and lawyers. New York. ISBN 978-1-4625-
3274-2. OCLC 1011497293 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/1011497293) .
61. Desmarais, Sarah; Zottola, Samantha (1
January 2020). "Violence Risk Assessment:
Current Status And Contemporary Issues"
(https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mul
r/vol103/iss3/6/) . Marquette Law Review.
103 (3): 793–817.
62. Viljoen, Jodi L.; Vargen, Lee M.; Cochrane,
Dana M.; Jonnson, Melissa R.; Goossens,
Ilvy; Monjazeb, Sanam (February 2021). "Do
structured risk assessments predict violent,
any, and sexual offending better than
unstructured judgment? An umbrella
review". Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.
27 (1): 79–97. doi:10.1037/law0000299 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.1037%2Flaw0000299) .
S2CID 234034314 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:234034314) .
63. Neal, Tess M.S.; Sellbom, Martin; de Ruiter,
Corine (4 March 2022). "Personality
Assessment in Legal Contexts: Introduction
to the Special Issue" (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F00223891.2022.2033248) . Journal of
Personality Assessment. 104 (2): 127–136.
doi:10.1080/00223891.2022.2033248 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F00223891.2022.203
3248) . PMID 35235475 (https://pubmed.n
cbi.nlm.nih.gov/35235475) .
S2CID 247219451 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:247219451) .
64. Harris, Grant T.; Rice, Marnie E.; Quinsey,
Vernon L. (December 1993). "Violent
Recidivism of Mentally Disordered
Offenders: The Development of a Statistical
Prediction Instrument". Criminal Justice
and Behavior. 20 (4): 315–335.
doi:10.1177/0093854893020004001 (http
s://doi.org/10.1177%2F009385489302000
4001) . S2CID 144611009 (https://api.sem
anticscholar.org/CorpusID:144611009) .
65. Monahan, J., Steadman, H., Appelbaum, P.,
Grisso, T., Mulvey, E., Roth, L., et al. (2005).
COVR classification of violence risk. Lutz,
FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
66. Helmus, Leslie; Thornton, David; Hanson, R.
Karl; Babchishin, Kelly M. (February 2012).
"Improving the Predictive Accuracy of
Static-99 and Static-2002 With Older Sex
Offenders: Revised Age Weights". Sexual
Abuse. 24 (1): 64–101.
doi:10.1177/1079063211409951 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F1079063211409951) .
PMID 21844404 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/21844404) . S2CID 12687924 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1268
7924) .
67. Grigorenko, Elena L., ed. (2012). Handbook
of juvenile forensic psychology and
psychiatry. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-1-
4614-0905-2. OCLC 778077465 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/778077465) .
68. "Immigration Benefits in EOIR Removal
Proceedings | USCIS" (https://www.uscis.go
v/laws-and-policy/other-resources/immigra
tion-benefits-in-eoir-removal-proceedings) .
www.uscis.gov. 2020-08-05. Retrieved
2022-12-05.
69. Psy.D, Emin Gharibian (2019-01-15).
"Psychological Evaluations for Immigration
Court: The 7 Cases When You Might Need
an Evaluation" (https://verdugopsych.com/
psychological-evaluations-for-immigration-
court-the-7-cases-when-you-might-need-an-
evaluation/) . Verdugo Psychological
Associates. Retrieved 2022-12-05.
70. Ferdowsian, Hope; McKenzie, Katherine;
Zeidan, Amy (June 2019). "Asylum
Medicine" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p
mc/articles/PMC6586957) . Health and
Human Rights. 21 (1): 215–225.
PMC 6586957 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC6586957) .
PMID 31239628 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/31239628) .
71. Varela, Jorge G.; Conroy, Mary Alice
(October 2012). "Professional
competencies in forensic psychology".
Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice. 43 (5): 410–421.
doi:10.1037/a0026776 (https://doi.org/10.
1037%2Fa0026776) .
72. Neal, Tess M. S. (2017). "Identifying the
Forensic Psychologist Role". In Pirelli,
Gianni; Beattey, Robert A; Zapf, Patricia A
(eds.). The Ethical Practice of Forensic
Psychology: A Casebook (https://psyarxiv.c
om/wxqsh) . Oxford University Press.
pp. 1–31.
doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190258542.0
01.0001 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Facpro
f%3Aoso%2F9780190258542.001.0001) .
ISBN 978-0-19-025854-2.
73. Yadav, Praveen Kumar (2017-07-18).
"Ethical issues across different fields of
forensic science" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5514178) .
Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences. 7
(1): 10. doi:10.1186/s41935-017-0010-1 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.1186%2Fs41935-017-0010-
1) . ISSN 2090-5939 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/2090-5939) . PMC 5514178 (htt
ps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P
MC5514178) . PMID 28775903 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28775903) .
74. Rocchio, Lisa M. (2020-06-01). "Ethical and
Professional Considerations in the Forensic
Assessment of Complex Trauma and
Dissociation" (https://doi.org/10.1007/s122
07-020-09384-9) . Psychological Injury and
Law. 13 (2): 124–134. doi:10.1007/s12207-
020-09384-9 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs
12207-020-09384-9) . ISSN 1938-9728 (htt
ps://www.worldcat.org/issn/1938-9728) .
PMC 7278774 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC7278774) .
PMID 32837675 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/32837675) .
75. Garry, Maryanne; Manning, Charles G.;
Loftus, Elizabeth F.; Sherman, Steven J.
(1996-06-01). "Imagination inflation:
Imagining a childhood event inflates
confidence that it occurred" (https://doi.or
g/10.3758%2FBF03212420) . Psychonomic
Bulletin & Review. 3 (2): 208–214.
doi:10.3758/BF03212420 (https://doi.org/1
0.3758%2FBF03212420) . ISSN 1531-5320
(https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1531-532
0) . PMID 24213869 (https://pubmed.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/24213869) .
76. Neal, Tess M. S.; Slobogin, Christopher;
Saks, Michael J.; Faigman, David L.;
Geisinger, Kurt F. (December 2019).
"Psychological Assessments in Legal
Contexts: Are Courts Keeping "Junk
Science" Out of the Courtroom?" (https://pu
bmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32065036/) .
Psychological Science in the Public
Interest: A Journal of the American
Psychological Society. 20 (3): 135–164.
doi:10.1177/1529100619888860 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F1529100619888860) .
ISSN 2160-0031 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/2160-0031) . PMID 32065036 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32065036) .
S2CID 211136514 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:211136514) .
77. "The Milgram Shock Experiment: Summary,
Results, & Ethics" (https://www.simplypsyc
hology.org/milgram.html) . 2022-11-03.
Retrieved 2023-04-10.

Further reading

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, Ronald (February 1996).
"What is forensic psychology?". Legal
and Criminological Psychology. 1 (1): 3–
16. doi:10.1111/j.2044-
8333.1996.tb00304.x (https://doi.org/1
0.1111%2Fj.2044-8333.1996.tb00304.
x) .
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, Joshua D.; Shackelford, Todd K.
(September 2004). "Toward an
evolutionary forensic psychology".
Biodemography and Social Biology. 51
(3–4): 161–165.
doi:10.1080/19485565.2004.9989092
(https://doi.org/10.1080%2F19485565.2
004.9989092) . PMID 17019829 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1701982
9) . S2CID 19646654 (https://api.seman
ticscholar.org/CorpusID:19646654) .
Gudjonsson, Gisli (September 1991).
"Forensic psychology: The first century".
The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry. 2 (2):
129–131.
doi:10.1080/09585189108407641 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F0958518910840
7641) .
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.)
Jones, Lisa M.; Cross, Theodore P.;
Walsh, Wendy A.; Simone, Monique (July
2005). "Criminal Investigations of Child
Abuse: The Research Behind 'Best
Practices' ". Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. 6
(3): 254–268.
doi:10.1177/1524838005277440 (http
s://doi.org/10.1177%2F1524838005277
440) . PMID 16237158 (https://pubmed.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16237158) .
S2CID 33552221 (https://api.semantics
cholar.org/CorpusID:33552221) .
Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G.,
Otto, R. K., Mossman, D., & Condie, L. O.
(2017). Psychological evaluations for the
courts: A handbook for mental health
professionals and lawyers (4th ed.). New
York, NY: Guilford.
ISBN 9781462532667
Neal, Tess M.S.; Martire, Kristy A.;
Johan, Jennifer L.; Mathers, Elizabeth
M.; Otto, Randy K. (18 October 2022).
"The Law Meets Psychological
Expertise: Eight Best Practices to
Improve Forensic Psychological
Assessment" (https://psyarxiv.com/6vtf
2/) . Annual Review of Law and Social
Science. 18 (1): 169–192.
doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-050420-
010148 (https://doi.org/10.1146%2Fann
urev-lawsocsci-050420-010148) .
S2CID 250658922 (https://api.semantic
scholar.org/CorpusID:250658922) .
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
Ribner, N.G.(2002). California School of
Professional Psychology Handbook of
Juvenile Forensic Psychology. Jossey-
Bass. ISBN 0787959480
Roesch, R., & Zapf, P. A. (Eds.). (2012).
Forensic assessments in criminal and
civil law: A handbook for lawyers. NY:
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 9780199766857
 Rogers, R. (Ed.) (2008). Clinical
assessment of malingering and
deception (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
Guilford. ISBN 9781462507351

External links

American Academy of Forensic

Psychology (https://aafpforensic.org/)
Board-certified forensic experts,
continuing education.
American Board of Forensic Psychology
(http://www.abfp.com/) Board
certification and other information.
American Psychology – Law Society (htt
ps://www.ap-ls.org/)
 Australian and New Zealand Association
of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law (http
s://anzappl.org/)
European Association of Psychology
and Law (https://www.eapl.eu/)
European Association of Psychology
and Law Student Society (https://www.e
aplstudent.com/) – resources and fact
sheets on Forensic Psychology

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Forensic_psychology&oldid=1224058726"
This page was last edited on 16 May 2024, at
00:23 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.