Kaitlynn Richardson is a 3rd-year student at the University of Illinois at Chicago. She presented her presentation at the APLS Access Path to Psychology and Law Experience Program. Congratulations, Kaitlynn!

Christina Perez is a second-year Experimental Psychology Ph.D. student at the University of Toledo. She presented her poster titled Cognitive and Social Predictors of Memory and Suggestibility Among School-Aged Children at the 2017 Annual Conference in Seattle, WA. Congratulations, Christina!

Abstract: 

​Why are some children more suggestible than others? We examined recall and recognition memory regarding a staged event among 59 4- to 9-year-olds. An event was staged for children, and several days later, they were interviewed with misleading questions. After a week delay, they were interviewed with recall and yes-no questions. A battery of cognitive (IQ, standardized memory) and social (compliance, anxiety) measures was administrated. Several of the standardized memory scales were associated with children’s correct free recall but were not associated with suggestibility. Suggestibility was positively associated with anxiety and compliance.

Noelle Mathew, a 4th-year clinical psychology PhD student at Palo Alto University, presented a paper at the 2017 American Psychology-Law Society Conference in Seattle, WA titled Examining Childhood Maltreatment Rates and Psychometric Properties of the CTQ-SF in an Ethnically Diverse College Sample. Congratulations on a wonderful presentation, Noelle!​

Abstract:

​The Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form is a reliable and valid screening measure for childhood maltreatment in adults (Bernstein et al., 2003); however, research to date includes samples of limited diversity.  The current study seeks to estimate rates of childhood maltreatment and examine the psychometric properties of the CTQ-SF in a sample of 233 ethnically diverse college students.  While, a chi-squared test of model fit revealed that the data did not adequately fit the five-factor model structure (𝝌²(265, N = 233) = 394.66, p≤.001), the RMSEA and CFI indicate a good model fit (RMSEA = .05, CFI = .97).  Results indicated the estimated maltreatment rates significantly differ across ethnic groups and internal consistency is good or acceptable for all subscales except the Physical Neglect subscale. Asian participants reported significantly higher rates of emotional abuse compared to both Hispanic and Caucasian participants. Hispanic and Asian participants reported significantly higher rates of emotional and physical neglect compared to Caucasians, but did not differ from each other.  Differences in reported maltreatment rates may be due to higher rates of maltreatment in certain ethnic groups; however it is also possible that different groups may interpret and endorse items differently.  Results suggest CTQ-SF has a similar structure in an ethnically diverse sample, and demonstrates acceptable internal consistency for all scales but physical neglect, consistent with prior research with primarily Caucasian samples (Pavio & Cramer, 2004).  Limitations include limited generalizability beyond college student population, use of broad ethnic categories, and reliance on a single self-report assessment of childhood maltreatment.

​The vast majority of psychology graduate students think that a career in academia is the only way to continue to produce and publish research. However, many other career paths can offer this opportunity, particularly for research focused on applied outcomes such as psychology and law. The criminal justice system is realizing more and more that their departments and legal personnel require exactly the kinds of skills that graduate students acquire during their studies—analytical thinking, the ability to critique and apply research in efficient ways, and explaining complex experimental findings and statistics in a way that is easy to digest. In fact, psychology students are particularly well suited for the criminal justice field. All our research is on different aspects of individuals, their relationships with others, and their environments.
 
I am certainly not an expert in career advice for graduate students, nor do I have any experience working in industry or law enforcement as a psychologist. The purpose of this blog post is not to impart my (non-existent) wisdom. Rather, the purpose is to provide other students like me with some resources and places to start looking if you think that this kind of career path might be right for you. In other words, I will do some grunt work on this topic so that you don’t have to.
 
So, what does a career in psychology and law outside of academia look like? The truth is, that this area of work can be extremely varied. The breadth of expertise a psychologist is expected to demonstrate in both psychology and the law can be very different depending on the area of the criminal justice system and the role the psychologist is expected to play. Also, how much research and what kind of research a psychologist might get the opportunity to be involved in throughout their career will vary considerably.
 
Before embarking on a career in forensic psychology, it is important to introspect about the importance of different aspects of the psychological discipline to you. In all forensic psychological professions though, your broad role will be to assess and critique systems and procedures in the real world, and the behavior of offenders and other legal actors, in an attempt to improve the outcomes of the criminal justice system. 
 
To give people a taste of the kinds of jobs out there for psychology graduates in the area of psychology and law, I have provided brief explanations of some career directions. I have tried to focus on some careers that are may be less well-known, or misunderstood due to inaccuracies in the media.
 
Forensic Psychiatry or Forensic Clinical Psychology (Evaluation)
 
Typically, a forensic psychiatrist or clinician’s responsibility is to present written assessment of a criminal offender, and potentially deliver their findings at trial as expert testimony (for other clinical roles, see the section on correctional psychology below). Some assessments that may be conducted in criminal cases include assessments of a person’s danger to society or themselves, an assessment of their likelihood of recidivism, or whether they should be found criminally responsible in this case. They can also be conducted in a civil setting, for example psychological assessments are common in negligence cases, personal injury claims, or child and family court issues. The most common assessment requested is an assessment of competency to stand trial. In the USA, a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to a competency evaluation before a trial if the issue is raised by any actor at any point in the proceeding including pre-trial, during the trial, pre-sentencing, and pre-execution. Clear standards are set by the SCOTUS on what competency means (Dusky v. United States, 1960).  Of course, this role within forensic psychology requires specialized doctoral degrees in a clinical field.
 
Jury and Trial Consultants
 
Jury or trial consulting from social psychologists is extremely useful to attorneys, for criminal and civil suits. Social psychologists can offer specialized advice on how to select members of the jury. Lawyers want the jury to be sympathetic to their side of the argument, and social psychologists can help to select persons who might be more sympathetic to the issues in the case or the background and experiences of the plaintiff or defendant. In addition, social psychologists can help prepare witnesses for court and teach them how to communicate clearly and make the best impression on a jury. The advice that consultants give in this capacity can be supported by evidence-based methods, such as attitude surveys on the issues in the case for the locality in which the trial will take place, or arranging focus groups or mock juries to help the witness and attorneys to practice delivering their testimony and arguments. Finally, social psychologists might also have some expertise that would help to bolster the arguments or communication strategies for the lawyers themselves. Many trial consultants still hold academic positions and perform these duties on the side. However, there are also firms that are dedicated purely to trial consulting all over the United States, as well as conferences and societies for those in this field (http://www.astcweb.org).
 
Government-based Policy Advisors
 
There is a place for psychological expertise in the formation of government policy—at a county level, state level, or federal level. In fact, world-wide, there is growing recognition of what psychology can offer in a political setting that economists and other experts cannot (https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/applying-psychology-to-public-policy). Psychologists can help to conduct surveys to discover what people want concerning a particular issue or whether a solution implement to fix a problem has been successful. Psychologists can conduct research, in the laboratory and in the field, to discover ways to make it easier for people act in a desirable way.
 
For example, if a government body wants to improve the environmental impact on their area, they need to figure out the best ways to get people to take part. How far apart should trash cans be if we want people to use them rather than throwing their garbage on the ground? What kind of system will successfully encourage people to recycle products more often? Would a rewards system help? What kind of rewards system will produce the desired results in an efficient way? These are all questions that psychologists are well placed to research and answer, as they are all about how people behave, what their motivations are, and why people do or do not perform tasks. For more information on how psychology can help shape environmental policy, refer to https://www.humansandnature.org/can-psychology-help-save-the-world.
 
Other examples include formulating strategies to prevent behavior that is bad for the individual and society as a whole. Take, for instance, underage drinking and drug use. Simply making drinking illegal below a certain age has clearly not been successful at deterring underage persons from drinking, both moderately and heavily.  Psychologists already have a wealth of knowledge on adolescent development and this research can extend to the more applied question of how an underage person becomes a drinker, why they decide to become a drinker, and form strategies to deter adolescents from taking part in these behaviors. For example, when there are safe areas and activities that adolescents can take part in, that are also entertaining and social, maybe some adolescents will be tempted to drink less. If adolescents are taught to use alcohol responsibly early on, and enjoy it in a moderate fashion, maybe this will reduce problematic teen binge drinking even though it does not remove the illegal behavior (for research based summary of work relating to these issues, refer to https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh26-1/5-14.htm).
 
Corrections
 
The United States, as well as many other countries, has growing prison populations that are already over-loaded. This has caused governments to seek better strategies for keeping individuals out of prison and prevent offenders from re-offending once they are released. The question of how to do this is two-fold. Which types of offenders need more attention from corrections and which offenders could be punished in another, less punitive way? What are the best strategies for rehabilitation with the aim of reducing recidivism? Some psychologists who work in corrections study criminal behavior with the goal of developing profiles of behavior and linking these to types of crimes. Others study offenders who have been released from prison and assess factors that predict success after release and those that predict bad outcomes or recidivism. Psychologists also develop rehabilitation programs and study the outcomes of different types of offenders after a rehabilitative intervention.
 
This type of work is not always easy, as it typically involves a lot of exposure to violent offenders and barriers within the corrections system. However, the work is also rewarding when someone’s life is changed or rehabilitation techniques prove to make a difference. A concrete example of psychologists working in corrections is the development of risk assessments prior to releasing offenders from prison. Psychologists have studied the characteristics of offenders that predict reconviction using longitudinal studies in an attempt to classify offenders as low, moderate, or high risk. Some things that can reduce the risk of recidivism include rehabilitation or therapeutic programs, development of an understanding of their patterns of behavior, and the creation of detailed plans for post-release (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44087.pdf).
 
Again, I would like to stress that these are only a few ways that a PhD in psychology could be applicable in a non-academic setting. But for those of you who are unsure about what you would like to do with your psychology education, hopefully this has helped you to see that there are plenty of options out there.
 
 

Yaritza Diaz is a student at Montclair State University in their five-year BA/MA program in General Psychology. She presented her poster titled "The Impact of Evidence Strength and Initial Charge on Plea Deal Decision-Making" at the AP-LS Conference in Seattle, Washington this year. Congratulations, Yaritza! 

Abstract: 
Plea bargaining is a critical component of our criminal justice system and, at the same me, is the subject of significant controversy regarding the power imbalance that exists between prosecutors and defendants in plea negotiations. For example, it has been argued that prosecutors may use their power to overcharge defendants in order to induce them to plead guilty to lesser charges and that defendants o en lack access to material or exculpatory evidence pre-plea. Using brief vignettes, we examined the effects of trial penalty (high/low) and evidence strength (strong/moderate/weak) on the plea bargaining decisions of participants who were asked to imagine themselves charged with assault a er a bar fight where they were responsible, not responsible or indirectly responsible for the injury of another patron. Results show that as the level of criminal responsibility increases so does the percentage of mock defendants that accept a plea bargain. We also learned that innocent and guilty defendants differ in what factors are most important to their decision making. Innocent participants care more than other participants about their level of criminal responsibility, whereas guilty participants care more about the sentence if they go to trial. 

Sarah E. Malik is a first year doctoral student in Social Psychology at the University of Kentucky. She presented her paper, "Perceptions of Male Rape Victims as a Function of Victim Sexual Orientation and Gender,” at the AP-LS conference this year. Congratulations, Sarah!

Abstract:
​We investigated perceptions of male rape victims as a function of victim sexual orientation and gender. Participants read a trial summary about a homosexual, heterosexual, or ambiguous male or a heterosexual female victim. Participants rendered a verdict and rated the victim and perpetrator on a variety of characteristics. Primary results indicated that (1) women had more pro-victim/anti-defendant judgments than men overall; (2) all participants were more pro- victim/anti-defendant in the case of a female victim compared to a male victim; and (3) participants were more pro-victim/anti-defendant in a case of a heterosexual victims than a homosexual or ambiguous victim.