Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Forensic Psychology
- Part I Psychological Underpinnings
- Part II Psychology and Criminal Behaviour
- Part III Assessment
- Part IV Interventions
- Part V Civil Proceedings
- Part VI Professional Practices
- 6.1 Courtroom Testimony in Cases of Disputed Confessions
- 6.2 Evaluating Offending Behaviour Programmes in Prison and Probation
- 6.3 Working Effectively with Multicultural Offenders in a Clinical Context
- 6.4 Professional Training and Accreditation
- 6.5 Ethics
- 6.6 Forensic Case Formulation
- 6.7 Staff Supervision in Forensic Contexts
- Index
- References
6.1 - Courtroom Testimony in Cases of Disputed Confessions
from Part VI - Professional Practices
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Forensic Psychology
- Part I Psychological Underpinnings
- Part II Psychology and Criminal Behaviour
- Part III Assessment
- Part IV Interventions
- Part V Civil Proceedings
- Part VI Professional Practices
- 6.1 Courtroom Testimony in Cases of Disputed Confessions
- 6.2 Evaluating Offending Behaviour Programmes in Prison and Probation
- 6.3 Working Effectively with Multicultural Offenders in a Clinical Context
- 6.4 Professional Training and Accreditation
- 6.5 Ethics
- 6.6 Forensic Case Formulation
- 6.7 Staff Supervision in Forensic Contexts
- Index
- References
Summary
The early conceptualization of Hugo Münsterberg in1908 laid the foundation for understanding different types of false confession, but tangible theoretical developments, assessment methodology of cases of disputed confessions, and empirical evidence base did not emerge until the 1980s. The gradual emergence of the science of false confession began with real life cases of disputed confessions in the 1970s and 1980s and the lessons that the cases taught scientists and expert witnesses interested in false confessions and psychological vulnerabilities. Theoretical developments led to better understanding of different types of false confessions. The psychological evaluation of real-life cases raised pertinent research questions, led to the development of innovative methodology and validated psychometric tests, and the collection of evolving empirical databases relevant to the evaluation of new cases. There is now a substantial evidence base for the science of false confession. This chapter explains its origin, development, and challenges.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology , pp. 737 - 756Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Alison, L., & Rainbow, L. (Eds.). (2011). Professionalizing offender profiling: Forensic and investigative psychology in practice. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, R. (1996). What is forensic psychology? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 1, 3–16.Google Scholar
Castell, J. H. F. (1966). The court work of educational and clinical psychologists (EDPP). British Psychological Society.Google Scholar
Cattell, J.M. (1895). Measurements of the accuracy of recollection. Science, 2, 761–766.Google Scholar
Davies, G. M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2013). Psychologists in the witness box. The Psychologist, 26, 496–497.Google Scholar
DeClue, G. (2005). Interrogations and disputed confessions: A manual for forensic psychological practice. Professional Resource Press.Google Scholar
Ewing, C. P., & McCann, J. T. (2006). Minds on trial: Great cases in law and psychology. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahsing, I. A., Jakobsen, K. K., & Öhr, J. (2016). Investigative interviewing of suspects in Scandinavia. In Walsh, D., Oxburgh, G. E., Redlich, A. D., & Mykelburts, T. (Eds.), International developments and practice in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Vol. 2. Suspects (pp. 180–192). Routledge.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. (1993). Police interrogation: From art to science. Psychology of interrogations, confessions and testimony. A book review. Contemporary Psychology, 38, 1320–1321.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, E. (1987). Psychologists and the law of evidence: Admissibility and confidentiality. Psychological Evidence in Court, 39–48.Google Scholar
Frumkin, I. B. (2010). Evaluations of competency to waive Miranda rights and coerced or false confessions: Common pitfalls in expert testimony. In Lassiter, G. D. & Meissner, C. A. (Eds.), Police interrogations and false confessions. Current research, practice, and policy recommendations (pp. 191–209). American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Frumkin, I. B. (2016). The role of suggestibility in personal injury claims. Psychological Injury and Law, 9, 97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frumkin, I. B., Lally, S. J., and Sexton, J. E. (2012). A United States forensic sample for the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 30, 749–763.Google Scholar
Gallop, A. (2019). When the dogs don’t bark: A forensic scientist’s search for the truth. Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar
Garrett, B. L. (2011). Convicting the innocent: Where criminal convictions go wrong. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudjonsson, G., & Young, S. (2015). Forensic clinical psychology. In: David Pilgrim, John Hall, & Turbin, Graham (Eds.), Clinical psychology in Britain: Historical perspectives (pp. 309–322). The British Psychological Society.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Gunn, J. (1982). The competence and reliability of a witness in a criminal court. British Journal of Psychiatry, 141, 624627.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Haward, L. R. C. (1998). Forensic psychology: A guide to practice. Routledge.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Morello, L. (2003). The American law on confessions. In Gudjonsson, G. H. (Ed.), The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook (pp. 283–307). John Wiley.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1983). Suggestibility, intelligence, memory recall and personality: An experimental study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 142, 3537.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1984a). A new scale of interrogative suggestibility. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, 303314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1984b). The current status of the psychologist as an expert witness in criminal trials. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 37, 8082.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1985). Psychological evidence in court: Results from the BPS survey. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 38, 327330.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1987a). A parallel form of the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 26, 215221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1987b). The significance of depression in the mechanism of “compulsive” shoplifting. Medicine, Science and the Law, 27, 171176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1989). The effects of suspiciousness and anger on suggestibility. Medicine, Science and the Law, 29, 229–232.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1992). The psychology of interrogations, confessions, and testimony. John Wiley.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1995). Alleged false confession, voluntariness and “free will”: Testifying against the Israeli General Security Service (GSS). Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 5, 95–105.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1996a). Forensic psychology in England: one practitioner’s experience and viewpoint. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 1, 131–142.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1996b). Psychological evidence in Court: Results from the 1995 Survey. The Psychologist, 5, 213–217.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1997). The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales manual. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions. A handbook. John Wiley.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2006). Disputed confessions and miscarriages of justice in britain: Expert psychological and psychiatric evidence in Court of Appeal. The Manitoba Law Journal, 31, 489–521.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2010). Invited article. Psychological vulnerabilities during police interviews. Why are they important? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 161–175.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2012). False confessions and correcting injustices. New England Law Review, 46, 689–709.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2018). The psychology of false confessions: Forty years of science and practice. Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2021). The science-based pathways to understanding false confessions and wrongful convictions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 633936.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Clark, N. K. (1986). Suggestibility in police interrogation: A social psychological model. Social Behaviour, 1, 83–104.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., & MacKeith, J. A. C. (1982). False confessions. Psychological effects of interrogation. A discussion paper. In Trankell, A. (Ed.), Reconstructing the past: The role of psychologists in criminal trials (pp. 253–269). Kluwer.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sartory, G. (1983). Blood injury phobia: A “reasonable excuse” for failing to give a specimen in a case of suspected drunken driving. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 23, 197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudjonsson, G. H., Kopelman, M. D., & MacKeith, J. A. C. (1999). Unreliable admissions to homicide: A case of misdiagnosis of amnesia and misuse of abreaction technique. British Journal of Psychiatry, 174, 455–459.Google Scholar
Haward, L. R. C. (1971). Forensic psychology and road traffic accidents. International Journal of Forensic Psychology, 3, 4–11.Google Scholar
Haward, L. R. C. (1972). Forensic psychology in the Court of Criminal Appeal. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 25, 152A (Abstract).Google Scholar
Heaton-Armstrong, A. (2019, June). Book review: The psychology of false confessions. Counsel Magazine. www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/book-review-thepsychology-of-false-confessionsGoogle Scholar
Hildibrandsdóttir, A. H. (2001). Réttarsálfræðingurinn: Saga Gísla H. Guðjónssonar. Mál og Menning.Google Scholar
Hilgendorf, E.L., & Irving, B. (1981). A decision-model of confessions. In Loyd-Bostock, Sally M.A. (Ed.), Psychology in legal contexts. Applications and limitations (pp. 67–84). Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hill, A. M., & Griffiths, R. C. (1982). English law and the psychologist. In Shapland, J. (Ed.), Issues in criminological and legal psychology. British Psychological Society.Google Scholar
Irving, B. L., & McKenzie, I. K. (1989). Police interrogation: The effects of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Irving, B., & Hilgendorf, E. L. (1980). Police interrogation: The Psychological Approach (Research Study No. 1). HMSO.Google Scholar
Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1985). Confession evidence. In Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (Eds.), The psychology of evidence and trial procedures (pp. 67–94). Sage.Google Scholar
Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., and Redlich, A. P. (2010a). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 3–38.Google Scholar
Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., and Redlich, A. P. (2010b). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations: looking ahead. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 49–52.Google Scholar
Kassin, S.M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2004). The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 33–67.Google Scholar
Medford, S., Gudjonsson, G., & Pearse, J. (2000). The identification of persons at risk in police custody: The use of appropriate adults by the Metropolitan Police. Institute of Psychiatry and New Scotland Yard.Google Scholar
Münsterberg, H. (1908). On the witness stand: Essays on psychology and crime. Doubleday.Google Scholar
Pearse, J., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The identification and measurement of “oppressive” police interviewing tactics in Britain. In Gudjonsson, G. H. (Ed.), The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook (pp. 75–129). John Wiley.Google Scholar
Stern, W. (1939). The psychology of testimony. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 34, 3–20.Google Scholar
Walsh, D., Oxburgh, G. E., Redlich, A. D., & Myklebust, T. (Eds.). (2016). International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Vol. 2. Suspects. Routledge.Google Scholar
Williamson, T. (1994). Reflection on current practice. In Morgan, D. & Stephenson, G. (Eds.), Suspicion and silence: The right to silence in criminal investigation (pp. 107–116). Blackstone Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, T. (2006). Towards greater professionalism: Minimizing miscarriages of justice. In Williamson, T. (Ed.), Investigative interviewing: Rights, research, regulation (pp. 147–166). Willan.Google Scholar
Williamson, T., Milne, B., & Savage, S. P. (Eds.). (2009). International developments in investigative interviewing. Willan.Google Scholar