ABSTRACT
Background:Investigators often use maps in forensic interviews to verify a route that was taken by a suspect to obtain additional information, and to assess credibility.Method: We examined the effects of the level of map richness on the elicitation of information and cues to deceit. A total of 112 participants completed a mock secret mission and were asked to tell the truth (to a friendly agent) or to lie (to a hostile agent) about it in an interview. In phase 1 of the interview, all participants provided a verbal free recall of the mission. In phase 2, half of the participants were given a detailed map that included all street names and landmarks of the city where they completed the mission (zoomed in to 80%), and the other half were given a less detailed map that included the names of only major streets and landmarks (zoomed in to 60%). All participants were asked to verbally describe the mission and the route taken while sketching on the map. Results: Compared to lie tellers, truth tellers provided more location, action, temporal, and object details and complications in phase 1, and new person, location, action, and object details and complications in phase 2. Map richness did not have an effect on the amount of information elicited and had an equal effect on truth tellers and lie tellers. Conclusions: This initial experiment in this research area suggests that investigators do not have to worry about the exact level of map detailedness when introducing maps in interviews.
Antecedentes: Los investigadores utilizan a menudo mapas en las entrevistas forenses para verificar el camino seguido por un sospechoso para obtener más información y para valorar la credibilidad. Método: Analizamos los efectos del nivel de riqueza del mapa en la obtención de información e indicios de engaño. Un total de 112 participantes simularon participar en una misión secreta, pidiéndoseles que, en una entrevista, dijeran la verdad (a un agente amistoso) o mintieran (a un agente hostil) sobre la misión. En la fase 1 de la entrevista se recabó de los participantes un recuerdo libre de la misión y en la fase 2 se facilitó a la mitad un mapa detallado con los nombres de las calles y puntos de referencia de la ciudad en la que habían llevado a cabo la misión (ampliado hasta el 80%) y a la otra mitad se les dio un mapa menos detallado solo con los nombres de las calles y puntos de referencia principales (ampliado hasta el 60%). Se pidió a los participantes que describieran verbalmente la misión y el camino seguido al tiempo que la proyectaban en el mapa. Resultados: En comparación con los participantes instruidos para mentir, los instruidos para contar la verdad daban más detalles sobre ubicación, acciones, tiempo y objetos y complicaciones en la fase 1 y detalles nuevos sobre personas, ubicaciones, acciones y objetos y complicaciones en la fase 2. La riqueza del mapa no influía en el volumen de información producida y tenía el mismo efecto, tanto en los instruidos para contar la verdad como una mentira. Conclusiones: Este primer experimento en esta área de investigación sugiere que los investigadores no deben preocuparse por el nivel exacto de detalle del mapa cuando introduzcan estos en las entrevistas.
Subject(s)
Humans , Health Sciences , Forensic Psychology/instrumentation , Forensic Psychology/methods , Lie Detection/psychology , Interview, Psychological/methodsABSTRACT
La evaluación psicológica forense del maltrato y del abuso sexual ha sido abordada prioritariamente desde una perspectiva técnico-metodológica. La consideración de los aspectos ético-deontológicos implicados ha resultado más incipiente y comienzan gradualmente a integrarse como una dimensión relevante de la práctica profesional. El presente artículo explora las principales tensiones y desafíos para los psicólogos que realizan evaluaciones forenses en esta materia. Se revisan cómo los principios rectores de la bioética se adaptan a la realidad de las evaluaciones forenses que permiten orientar el desarrollo de buenas prácticas en el área
The forensic psychological evaluation of mistreatment and sexual abuse has been addressed primarily from a technical-methodological perspective. Considerations of the ethical-deontological aspects involved has been more incipient, and gradually beginning to be integrated as a relevant dimension of professional practice. This article explores the main tensions and challenges for psychologists who perform forensic evaluations in this area. We review how the guiding principles of bioethics adapt to the reality of forensic evaluations that allow to guide the development of good practices in the área
L'avaluació psicològica forense del maltractament I abús sexual ha estat abordada prioritàriament des d'una perspectiva tècnico-metodològica. La consideració dels aspectes ètico-deontològics implicats ha resultat més incipient I comencen gradualment a integrar-se com una dimensió rellevant de la pràctica professional. El present article explora les principals tensions I desafiaments per als psicòlegs que realitzen avaluacions forenses en aquesta matèria. Es revisen com els principis que regeixen la bioètica s'adapten a la realitat de les avaluacions forenses que permeten orientar el desenvolupament de bones pràctiques al sector
Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Adolescent , Forensic Psychology/ethics , Child Abuse/ethics , Ethical Theory , Child Abuse, Sexual/ethics , Forensic Psychology/instrumentation , Child Abuse/psychology , Child Abuse, Sexual/psychologyABSTRACT
The Attitudes to Sexual Offenders scale (ATS; Hogue, 1993) is one of the most widely used measurement instruments for assessing views about sexual offenders. The ATS has been used in a variety of contexts, most commonly in comparing forensic professionals and nonprofessionals in relation to their views about this population. This article offers a review of the methods used to examine attitudes toward sexual offenders currently available, before systematically outlining the validation of a 21-item shortened version of the ATS measure (the ATS-21). First, we analyzed the ATS with regards to its underlying factor structure using a general community sample (Study 1; n = 188). This identified three factors: trust, intent, and social distance. We subsequently supported this structure through confirmatory factor analysis in a new community sample (Study 2; n = 335) and Hogue's (1993) original ATS development data (Study 3; n = 170) in order to provide further evidence of its reliability. We also offer preliminary evidence of the ATS-21's test-retest reliability, consistency across multiple testing contexts, resistance to social desirability, and independence from related measures (Study 4; n = 59). We close by recommending the use of the ATS-21 for researchers examining attitudes toward sexual offenders and offer suggestions for a new unified research design to incorporate the ATS-21 into emerging research into the psychological underpinnings of attitudes and responses to sexual offenders. We offer open data at https://osf.io/ymhsw/ and open scoring resources for the ATS-21 at https://osf.io/34hsx/. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Subject(s)
Attitude , Criminals/psychology , Forensic Psychology/instrumentation , Sex Offenses/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Adult , Erotica/psychology , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Female , Humans , Intention , Male , Middle Aged , Psychological Distance , Reproducibility of Results , Students , Trust , United Kingdom , Universities , Young AdultABSTRACT
Risk assessment instruments (RAIs) are generally thought to be more accurate and less susceptible to bias than the type of seat-of-the-pants risk assessment in which judges and parole boards have traditionally engaged. But RAIs bring with them their own set of controversies. This article will discuss three principles - the fit principle, the validity principle, and the fairness principle - that might govern use of RAIs. After providing examples of RAIs, it elaborates on how these principles would affect sentencing, parole and pretrial detention. In the course of doing so, this article also introduces the contributions in this Special Issue of Behavioral Sciences & the Law on "Risk factors and criminal justice."
