Psychology & Law Exam 1 Study Guide
Psychology & Law Exam 1 Study Guide PSYCH 3860
Popular in Law & Psychological Science
Popular in Psychology (PSYC)
verified elite notetaker
This 14 page Study Guide was uploaded by Lindsay Smith on Monday September 26, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PSYCH 3860 at University of Missouri - Columbia taught by Denis McCarthy in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 30 views. For similar materials see Law & Psychological Science in Psychology (PSYC) at University of Missouri - Columbia.
Reviews for Psychology & Law Exam 1 Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/26/16
Lindsay Smith Psych & Law Study Guide Exam 1 Study Guide Before class exam review: 47-48 Q’s – all multiple choice, 3 open-ended questions Has implemented joke questions* No curving Need to know: Ch. 3 Theories of Crime EX) Biological – gene x environment interactions, neuropsychological abnormalities*, autonomic nervous system differences, physiological differences. Psychological – personality traits, psychopathy Theories what causes psychopathy? Containment theory, multiple component theory, differential association reinforcement, social learning theory, social labeling perspective Ch. 4 Police Screening procedures*, typical traits of police officers, how police spend their time, D.D.* MMPI (who they should not select as a police officer)—don’t need to know scales just basic def. and why it’s used. INWALD System and estimator variables Anxiety memory? Ryan Ferguson case: Movie My exam review: Ch. 1 Lecture Reasons for Law: Human Creations Conflict Avoidance & Resolution Protect the Public The Evolution of Laws Scientific Approaches to Law Anthropological Sociological Philosophical Psychological Four Choices: Individual Rights v. Common Good Equality v. Discretion Truth v. Conflict Resolution Science v. The Law Roles of Psychologists in the Law: Basic Scientist Applied Scientist Policy Evaluator Forensic Evaluator Consultant Psychological Methods: Experimental Method (control and manipulation) Quasi-Experimental Designs (outside lab setting) Survey Research (sampling to achieve representation of pop.) Validity: whether it measures what it claims to measure. Reliability: whether method would yield same results across time or examiners. Cases: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins – Hopkins (female) not made partner, but had similar work credentials to others made partner. The rationale given was interpersonal, that she wasn’t great with customers, etc. Susan Fiske testified on stereotyping research with reference to the case. Stereotyping is more likely when a member of a small group or in a non-traditional role. Result was the burden of proof on the employer to show that people like Hopkins would have been treated the same. Tarasoff – (confidentiality and duty to warn) Psychologists’ duty to clients v. to society Confidentiality stands with: Priests Psychologist Lawyer Good Sam. v. Duty to assist laws Every state has good Sam. laws now that say you won’t get in trouble for honestly trying to help someone in need. Duty to assist says there are penalties for failing to assist or report for those in need. Textbook Objectives: 1. Why do we have laws, and what is the psychological approach to studying law? 2. What choices are reflected in the psychological approach to law? 3. How do laws reflect the contrast between due process and crime control in the criminal justice system? 4. What are five roles that psychologist may play in the legal system, and what does each entail? Vocab: Forensic Psychologist – professionals who generate and communicate info. to answer specific legal questions or to help resolve legal disputes. Due Process Model – places primary value on the protection of citizens, including criminal suspects, from possible abuses by the police and system in general. Crime-control Model – seeks the apprehension and punishment of law- breakers. Discretion – considering the circumstances of certain offenders and offenses to determine the appropriate consequences. Equality – all people who commit the same crime should receive the same consequences. Principle of Proportionality – the punishment should be consistently related to the magnitude of the crime. Sentencing Disparity – tendency for judges to administer a variety of penalties for the same crime. Racial Bias – law enforcement use an individuals race as a basis for judgments of his or her behavior. Determinate Sentencing – offense determines the sentence and judges and parole commissions have little discretion. Procedural Justice – Idea of fairness in the processes that resolve disputes and allocates resources. Settlement Negotiation – pretrial process of give and take, offer and demand, that ends when a plaintiff agrees to accept what a defendant is willing to offer to end their legal disagreement. Amicus Curiae Brief – provides the courts with info. from psych. science and practice relevant to the issues in a particular case. Precedents – Rulings in previous cases. Case Law – law made by judges ruling in individual cases. Stare Decisis (let the decision stand) – abiding by previous decision. Basic Scientist – pursues knowledge for its own sake. Applied Scientist – dedicated to applying knowledge to solve real-life problems. Expert Witness – someone who possesses specialized knowledge about a subject. Policy Evaluator – provides data to answer questions. Forensic Evaluator – court appointed or hired by one of the parties involved in the litigation. Forensic Mental Health Assessment – tool and research study used in legal system to assess the suspect mentally. Trial Consulting – jury selection, community attitude surveys, or introduce findings in court, provide guidance to attorneys, and prepare witnesses to testify. Ch. 2 Lecture Vocab: Adversial System (each side presents their own evidence; higher customer satisfaction) Inquisitorial Approach (Judge questions the witnesses, lower customer satisfaction) Distributive Justice v. Procedural Justice D: rewards or outcomes are just or defined by some reasonable criterion P: process by which disputes are resolved Need to know: Court System: State courts – judges appointed or elected, deals with state laws, with multiple tiers like lower courts, trial courts, court of appeals, and state supreme court. Fed courts – judges appointed by pres, confirmed by senate. Consists of U.S. district courts, intermediate appellate courts (court of appeals- 13 of them with 3 judge panels), and U.S. Supreme Court (accepts few cases). Intention: committing an act deliberately, willfully, instead of via accident or carelessness. Attribution Theory: Differences in how people assign intention. Internal – External (due to external factors, or an internal problem) Stable – Unstable (consistency, how often it occurs) Global – Specific (circumstantial to situations or not) Ex) internal, stable, global = stronger intent *tend to make internal, stable about others and external, unstable about ourselves. Textbook Objectives: 1. What is the difference between the adversarial and inquisitorial models of trials? 2. How do notions of morality and legality differ? 3. How do different models of justice explain people’s level of satisfaction with the legal system? 4. What is commonsense justice? 5. How are judges selected and how do their demographic characteristics and attitudes influence their decisions? 6. How does the experience of law school affect its students? 7. What is known about lawyers’ professional satisfaction? 8. What factors explain lawyers’ overconfidence and how can it be remedied? Vocab: Adversarial – exhibits, evidence, and witnesses are assembled by representation of both sides to try to convince the judge/jury that their side is the truthful one. Inquisitorial – the judge has more control over the proceedings in regards to evidence, arguments and witnesses. (European) Legality – looked at in terms of black-letter-law. Morality – based on sympathy, compassion, often times euthanasia. Distributive Justice – a person will be more accepting of decisions and resolutions if the outcomes seem just. Procedural Justice – if individuals view the procedures of dispute resolution or decision-making as fair, then they will view the outcome as just, regardless if it favors them or not. Commonsense Justice – ordinary citizens’ basic notions of what is just and fair. Diversion – Problem-solving courts deal with the underlying reasons st that individuals commit crimes in the 1 place rather than focus on the punishment for the crime. Legal Formalism – perspective that judges apply legal rulings to the facts of a case in a careful, rational, mechanical way, and pay little need to political or social influences on their judgments. Legal Realism – judges’ decisions are influence by a variety of psychosocial and political factors, and judges do indeed concern over real-world ramifications of their decisions. Intuitive processes – occur spontaneously without careful thought or effort. Deliberative Processes – involve mental effort, concentration, motivation and the application of learned rules. Self-determination theory of optimal motivation – describes situational and personality factors that cause positive and negative motivation and also changes in subjective well-being. Intrinsic Motivation – engaging in an activity because it is interesting and enjoyable. Extrinsic Motivation – pursuing goals that would please and impress others. Therapeutic Jurisprudence – notion that the law can serve therapeutic purposes, with traditional legal structures and procedures. Illusion of Control – lawyers may discount the strengths of their adversaries, whims of judges, their own weaknesses, and make predictions of personal success than are higher that maybe warranted by reality. Ch. 3 Lecture Need to know: Approaches to Crime: Legal Approach (prescriptive) Sociological (why crime happens) Bio/Psycho. (why does an individual commit a crime?) Socio/Psycho. (Integrates person and environment) Sociological: societal, structural and subcultural explanations of crime. Biological: Genetic approaches Low MAOA with maltreatment Differences in PFC and subcortical areas (amygdala) Low ANS activity Passive avoidance deficits High testosterone, insulin but low serotonin Psychological: criminal-thinking patterns (High irritability, low agreeableness, low empathy, and low frustration tolerance) Socio/Psycho: Control Theories Psychopathy – Cleckley NOT neurotic or psychotic, alcohol/drug abuse connection, cyclical behavior patterns, history of family problems and parental deficits. Characteristics: glib, charming, knowledgeable, selfish, non- empathetic, emotionally flat, and deceitful. Hare Same characteristics as Cleckley Neuropsychological factors critical Under-aroused nervous system, difficulty learning, difficulty with executive functions Has the PCL-R to measure adult psychopathy (interpersonal and emotional components and deviant behaviors/lifestyle) Anti-social Personality Disorder 1. Impairment in self-functioning (personal gain) 2. Impairments in interpersonal/gratification Control Theories - Reckless containment theory: society places clear limits on behavior Learning Theories - Differential association reinforcement theory: combo of O.C. and Modeling - Social Learning Theory: emphasis on vicarious learning (models: family, culture, etc.) Multiple Component Learning Model: (learning and individual differences – largely biological) Social Labeling Perspective: “self-fulfilling prophecy” Primary Deviance – criminal’s behavior Secondary Deviance – societies’ reactions Integrative Theories - Antecedent conditions - Early indicators (hyperactivity, impulsivity, inattention, and misconduct) - Developmental issues - Maintenance factors (social labeling, iatrogenic effects of jail) Textbook Objectives: 1. Theories of crime can be grouped into four categories, what are they? 2. Among sociological explanations of crime, how does the subcultural explanation differ from the structural explanation? 3. What is emphasized in biological theories of crime? 4. What psychological factors have been advanced to explain crime? 5. How do socio/psycho theories view crime? Theories of Crime: - Sociological - Biological - Psychological - Socio/Psycho. Structural v. Subcultural Structural: emphasize that dysfunctional social arrangements halt people’s efforts towards legitimate attainments resulting in breaking the law. Subcultural: holds that crimes originate when various groups of people endorse cultural values that clash with the dominant, conventional rules of society. Biological – Twin/adoption studies Low MAOA with maltreatment Increased rates of abnormal EEG patterns related to prison pop. Amygdala, hippocampus, thalamus and midbrain related to neg. emotions Low IQ related to conduct disorder ANS-low arousal and physiological response related to criminality Increased testosterone, increased insulin, decreased serotonin, related to aggression Psychological – Criminal Thinking patterns Personality-based explanations Psychopathy/Anti-social personality disorder Socio/Psycho- Control theories Learning theory Conditioning Differential association Reinforcement theory Social learning theory Social labeling theory Ch. 4 Lecture History: 1910’s – Terman & Thurstone* (tested existing police, found below avg. IQ, 1 recommendations for screening popo) 1965 – 27% of agencies had some testing 1973 – NAC called for all officers to be screened 1980’s – 50% screened Now – almost all screened Need to know: Characteristics of Police: Incorruptible Well-adjusted Dedicated Disciplined People or service oriented Ability to control emotions Logical reasoning skills Issues*: criterion questionable, restriction of range, impression management Criteria to rule-out certain people: Health Education Level Felony Convictions Emotional Fitness Testing: Interview (structured interviews best) Situational Testing (overly specific and expensive*) Psych Testing IQ (avg. – above avg. only) Personality Tests (MMPI, CPI, 16PF, Inwald – 26 scales for relevant police behavior) Special Issues: Mentally Ill Diversion Programs Domestic Disturbances Hostage incidents Takeover of prison Terrorism What do officers do? Enforcing law – 10% Maintaining order – 30% Providing Services – 60% Police Stress Physical/Psychological threats Burnout Lack of control & appreciation & support Team policing Therapy Cases: Tennessee v. Garner – 1985 Once an officer has indicated intent to arrest a suspect, if they resist or flee, the officer can use all means necessary to capture. *Ed Garner ran after being told to stop and was shot and killed Results: Lther courts agreed with statute but Supreme Court shot it down. 4 amendment against unreasonable search and seizure Deadly force must be reasonable, and only is on 2 conditions – 1. Required to effect the arrest 2. There is reason to believe the person is a threat *Garner only met 1 condition Scrivner Study –profiles of officers prone to excessive force Personality disorders Previous job-related experiences Problems in early career, impulsive Heavy-handed patrol style Anxiety-producing personal problems Textbook Objectives: 1. What is the role of the police in our society? 2. What procedures are used to select police? 3. How has the training of police officers expanded into new areas? 4. Describe the different activities of the police. Is law enforcement central? 5. What stressors do the police face? 6. What is the relationship between the police and the communities they serve? Role of Police – Protect the people Keep peace Procedures for Selecting Police Then: Training no test/interview Now: Training test psych eval. With @ least 80 IQ interviews Expanded Training Situational tests Psych tests (MMPI) Fitness Eval. Training for Crisis’ Police Activities Enforce the law Maintain order Providing services (central focus) Stressors Physical/Psychological Evaluation systems (court or media) Organizational problems (lack of support in field) Relationship between police & communities: - Critical: Concerns: police brutality & racial profiling Ch. 5 Lecture Need to know: Power of eyewitness testimony: - Quality often determines outcome - Most people believe inaccuracy of observation and memory - Research: eyewitness testimony at least partially unreliable Human Perception: - Sensory input organized meaningfully - Processors in cerebral cortex - Interpretive yet non-conscious - End product selective, incomplete Memory: Encoding – Stress Individual differences in stress response (anxiety) Storage Retrieval Memory is malleable New experiences affect memory Misleading new info distorts memory Weapon Focus Effect - Novelty not anxiety - Strong support - Familiarity with weapons may lessen effect Witness Confidence Low correlation with accuracy, but accuracy and confidence are positively related; on the other hand, high confidence means likely inaccurate. Wells: post-id feedback effect increased confidence, NOT accuracy. Expectations & Prejudices Other race effect: Other races don’t often identify other races well in a suspect lineup; they’re better at identifying their own races. Reforms: Cognitive interview – contextual & emotional info increase detail Lineup Instructions – “suspect may not be here.” & better filler people Sequential Presentation Lineup – reduces mis-id by 22% but correct ID by 8% Safeguards for trial - Attorney, judge and jury should know factors affecting witnesses - Limit eyewitness testimony - Allow expert testimony about witnesses - Judges instructions Children Recall less detail, but can still be accurate Bad at lineups if perp. is not present Nature of questioning very significant (open v. suggestive) Communication Modality (CCTV- based on <10 and mental status) - Violates the confrontation clause of 6 amendment - Could protect child victims - Allowed by supreme court (Maryland v. Craig) - Children provide more details on CCTV - May bias against child and in favor of defendant - Videotape more credible than written Hypnosis – for lost mems - Some evidence for hyper amnesia - Some added not-true info (confabulation) - Memory hardening: people become surer of all info. - More susceptible to biases and leading questions Admissibility varies - Pre-1980: jurors can weight how important/accurate it is State v. Hurd (1981): sets standards for when it is allowed State v. Mack: not accepted by science, not allowed Rock v. Arkansas: U.S. Supremes overturn state law disallowing (Only holds for defendant, due to defendants rights, not clear about others) Repression – unconscious forgetting of traumatic events Clinician authored report emphasized the repression interpretation Researcher authored report challenges validity of repressed memory Geraerts (2007): sought to corroborate 45% never forgotten abuse was abuse corroborated 37% that were forgotten and recalled out of therapy 0% that were recalled in therapy *Psychologists are capable of inputting false mems into people’s brains. Experiments: Wells – looking through photo ID books, victims said culprit was present 54%, 21% said not there Culprit removed only 32% said not there (Evidence for relative judgment) Trials: McMartin (1980s): sexual abuse in the day care trial after accusations made my preschoolers Ryan Ferguson case – movie in class! Vocab: Unconscious transference: seeing someone 2x in 2 different line-up books, can transfer memory as if it were true, in this case a suspect. System Variables: controllable by the justice system. Ex): how lineup is conducted Estimator Variables: factors that affect eyewitness that needs to be estimated in determining accuracy. Ex): lighting conditions, etc. Dissociation: memory irretrievable for some time, Textbook Objectives: 1. What psychological factors contribute to the risk of mistaken IDs in the legal system? 2. What are the defining features of estimator, system, and post diction variables in the study of eyewitness testimony? 3. How do jurors evaluate the testimony of eyewitnesses, and how can psychological research help jurors understand the potential problems of eyewitness testimony? 4. Can children accurately report on their experiences of victimization? What factors affect the accuracy of their reports? Are they likely to disclose abuse? 5. Can memories for trauma be repressed, and if so, can these memories be recovered accurately? Psych factors that are risks for mistaken IDs – - False memories - Environmental circumstances - Investigation mistakes - Encoding issues - Retention interval - Post-event info/questioning - Retrieval issues - Unconscious transference Features that define estimator & post diction variables – - Estimators can only be estimated, NOT controlled - System variables are under control by legal system - Post diction correlates with accuracy of IDs. Psych research helps jurors to understand eyewitness testimony problems by –* - Jurors taking it accurately and truthfully without a grain of salt - Psych research helps them to better understand eyewitness reliability in terms of memory from a post-traumatic event. Children’s accuracy with victimization – Can be accurate unless repressed, but don’t often discuss abuse. Helps if questions are open-ended and they are interviewed multiple times. Memory repression & recovery – Memories can be repressed after traumatic events but recovery depends on the time and age of the person when they were abused. They can be recovered best with interviewing techniques but they’re not usually accurate. (Also, recall therapy can cause legal issues)
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'