PSYCH 3CC3 TEXTBOOK NOTES

CHAPTER 1
-media portrays forensic psychology inaccurately frequently
 Forensic psychologists interested in understanding mechanisms that underlie people’s
thoughts, feelings and actions
 Forensic psychology = how people function within legal context
-brief history of forensic psychology
 Short history from late 19th century
 Early days = not referred to as forensic psychology; not identified as such yet
 Early contributions formed building blocks of field of forensic psychology
-early research on testimony and suggestibility
 Field stated w/ research in USA and Europe that had serious implications for legal
system
 First experiment = James Cattell (Columbia) = eye witness testimony to assist in courts
o Recall things in everyday lives
o Student’s answers often inaccurate; relation b/w participant’s accuracy and
confidence far from perfect
 Around same time: studying testimony and suggestibility
o Binet: children susceptible to suggestive questioning techniques
o Present children w/ series of objects for short time; told to write down
everything they saw
o Direct, mildly leading and highly misleading questions
o Direct (simple recall) = most accurate answers; misleading = least accurate
 Stern on suggestibility of witnesses (reality experiment)
o P’s (participants) exposed to staged events and asked to provide info on event
o Ex. 2 students arguing, one draws revolver  recall inaccurate especially for
worst portion of event (revolver being drawn)
o Conclude emotional arousal has negative impact of accuracy of testimony
-court cases in Europe
 Psychologists start to appear as experts in court w/ start of research being conducted
 Schrenk-Notzing: effect of pretrial publicity on memory
o Case w/ 3 sexual murders = lots of attention from press
o Extensive pretrial press coverage influenced testimony of people – called
retroactive memory falsification
o People confused actual memories of events w/ events described by media
 Varendonck: study showed children prone to suggestion
o Murder of young girl Cecile = asked group of children to describe person who
had supposedly approached him in front of children earlier than morning
o Person did not exist, but children easily led by suggestive questioning
-Advocates for forensic psychology in North America
 Munsterberg (student of Wundt): reviewed interrogation records and discovered false
confession of man convicted for raping and murdering woman  guilty and executed
 o Union boss confessed to killing many people  acquitted in second trial
o Munsterberg’s contribution ignored in cases; press objected to his involvement
 “new scientific fad for cheating justice”
o Wrote book on how psychology helps w/ issues involving eyewitness testimony,
crime detection, false confessions, suggestibility, hypnotism and crime
prevention
 Led to more criticism from legal community
 Wigmore (law professor) sued Munsterberg for claiming more than he
could offer; he was found guilty due to lack of research to back claims
 caused little progress in forensic until early 1900s
o first clinic for juvenile delinquents in 1909
o developing labs to conduct pretrial assessments in 1916
o established psychological testing for law enforcement selection purposes in 1917
o mid 1900s: developed theories of crime
-Theories of crime
 Biological theories
o Sheldon’s constitutional theory 1949
 Crime based on individual’s body type (somatotype) which is linked to
temperament
 Endomorphs (obese) = jolly; ectomorphs (thin) = introverted,
mesomorphs (muscular) = bold
 Mesomorphs most likely associated w/ crime due to aggressive nature
o Jacobs chromosomal theory 1965
 Chromosomal irregularity linked to criminal behaviour
 Men with 2 Y chromosomes = more aggressive/ masculine = increased
chance of committing violent crimes
o Nevins’ theory of lead exposure 2000
 Lead exposure at childhood impacts brain development including regions
for emotional regulation and impulsive control
 Leads to anti-social behaviour; at risk for committing crimes
 Sociological theories
o Mertons’s strain theory 1938
 Lower class feel strain (restricted access to means of achieving valued
goals of success)
 Some happy w/ lesser goals that are achievable; others will turn to
illegitimate means (crime) to achieve valued goals
o Sutherland’s differential association theory 1939
 Criminal behaviour learned through social interactions; people exposed
to values favourable to violations of law more likely to commit crimes
o Becker’s labelling theory 1963
 Society labelling individual as criminal causes deviance due to individual
self-fulfilling prophecy
 Psychological theories
o Eysenck’s biosocial theory of crime 1964
  Individuals (extraverts and neurotics) born w/ nervous systems that
influence ability to learn from consequences of their behaviour, esp.
negative consequences experienced in childhood as part of socialization
and conscience-building process
 Poor conditionability = develop strong antisocial inclinations
o Aker’s social learning theory 1973
 Crime learned by interacting w/ individuals who favour antisocial
attitudes; higher risk of committing crime if learn from role models who
exhibit antisocial behaviour/ when one received more reward for
antisocial behaviour
o Gottfredson’s general theory of crime 1990
 Low self-control, internalized early in life, in presence of criminal
opportunities explains individual’s propensity to commit crimes
-Landmark court cases in USA
 Expert witness first time in Stave v. Driver (1921); rejected due to calling girl moron
 People v. Hawthorne (1940): psychologist permitted to provide opinion about mental
state of defendant at time of offense
 Strongly reinforced in Jenkins v. USA (1962) = reason of insanity
o First trial = judge believes psychologists incompetent, disregards testimony
o Appeal = APA proves their competence
 Today: able to testify on fitness to stand trial, criminal responsibility, risk assessment,
treatment of traumatic brain injury, factors affecting eyewitness memory, jury decision
making, impact of hostile work environments, etc.
-Progress in Canada
 Advances from research on eyewitness testimony and jury decision making
 Most significant contributions = area of corrections (constructing better risk assessment
tools and effective treatment approaches by Dr. Wormith)
 Canadian courts slower than US to allowing psychologists to act as experts
 USA uses psychologists (mid-1900s) while Canada relied on physicians (psychiatrists)
o Related to educational standards b/c psychologists in Canada need Masters
while USA psychologists require doctoral level training
 
-Legitimate field of psychology
 Many textbook exist; journals speak to psychologists conducting research
 Professional associations developed to represent interests of forensics and promote
research and practice in the area
o AP-LS (1968-1969) = canadian forensic psychologists play crucial role
o Criminal justice section of CPA (founded 1985)
 Training opportunities at under- and grad level in North America; training programs
exist in Canada
 APA formally recognized forensic psych as speciality discipline 2001 (recertified 208)
-Canadian researcher profile: Dr. Stephen Wormith
 Fell into field of correctional psychology by accident b/c not yet developed into strong
speciality field
 Work on child development criminal behaviour w/ Andrews  apply principles of
reinforcement, behaviour analysis, social learning theory (Bandura) to offenders
 Ottawa PhD = designed, delivered, studied offender treatment program
o Offenders have intellectual and social skills but no motivation to change = the
will and the skill perspective of offender rehab
 Work w/ Andrew and Bonta to update and extend risk assessment tool: Level of service
inventory-revised (1995) for Ontario ministry of correctional services and then Level of
service/case management inventory (2004) for more general group of users
o Latter considered strength, responsibility, static and dynamic risk = forged link
b/w offender assessment, case planning and service delivery
-Forensic psychology today
 Debate continues on how forensic psych should be defined in modern times; no
accepted definition of field (narrow vs broad definition debate)
 Narrow: focus on certain aspects while ignoring other potentially important aspects
o i.e. clinical practice > forensic research as forensic psychologists
o solely focus on application
 broad: application + research required to inform applied practice of forensic psych
o application must be based on research
-Roles of forensic psychologists
 Forensic psychologist as clinician
o Concerned w/ mental health issues as they pertain to legal system
o Work in variety settings i.e. private practices, prisons, hospitals
o Tasks i.e. assessment of offender regarding release to community from prison
 Conducting divorce and child custody mediation
 Providing expert testimony on questions of psychological nature
 Carrying out personnel selection (i.e. law enforcement agencies)
 Running critical incident stress debriefings w/ police officers
 Facilitating treatment programs for offenders
o Canada: licensed clinical psychologists, specialized in forensic area
 Masters and PhD requirements
o Forensic specialization = supervised practice pre/post completion of required
degree w/ experienced clinical supervisor
o Last step of licensing = comprehensive exam w/ oral component
o Psychologist and psychiatrist both trained to asses/treat individual experiencing
MH problems who come into contact w/ law
 Psychiatrists = medical doctors; able to prescribe medication
 As researcher
o Experimental forensic psychologists (same goal as clinical)
o Research anything related to law/ legal system
 Examining effectiveness of risk-assessment strategies
  Determing what factors influence jury decision making
 Developing and testing better ways to conduct eyewitness lineups
 Evaluating offender and victim treatment programs
 Studying effect of stress management interventions on police officers
o PhD, no internship, graduate programs of various domains w/ forensics interest
 Training more varied than clinical training
 As legal scholar
o SFU psych and law program = 1991
o SFU mental health, law and policy institute = 1991
-Other forensic disciplines
 Forensic anthropology = examine remains of decreased individuals to help determine
identity and how they might have died
 Biology = life sciences to legal investigations applied
o i.e. bugs on decomposing body determine time of death
 odontology = dental aspects of criminal activity i.e. offender by teeth marks
 pathology = coroners, examine injuries/remains of dead bodies in attempt to determine
time and cause of death through physical autopsy
 toxicology = effects of drugs and chemicals in terms of law
-Relation b/w psychology and law
 Psychology and law: use of psych to examine operation of legal system
o Psych as separate discipline to law, examining and analysing various parts of law
o Examines assumptions made by law/legal system i.e. are eyewitnesses accurate?
 Psychology in law: use of psych in legal system as that system operates
o i.e. provide expert testimony concerning some issue of relevance to specific case
 How certain factors influence accuracy of identification from cop lineup
o Help police develop effective strategy for interrogating suspect
 Psychology of law: use of psych to examine law itself
o Ex. Does law reduce amount of crime in our society?
o Address questions from set of skills from multiple disciplines = key!
-influential court cases in field of forensic psychology
 R v. Hubbert 1975
o Ontario court of appeal states jurors presumed to be impartial and numerous
safeguard in judifical system to ensure this
 R v Sophonow 1986
o Murder convinction overturned b/c errors in law (problems w/ eyewitness proof)
 R. v. Lavallee 1990
o Supreme court Canada sets guidelines for when and how expert testimony
should be used in cases involving battered women syndrome (increase since)
 Wenden v. Trikha 1991
o MH professionals have duty to warn 3rd party if client intends to hurt individual
 R. v. Swain 1991
o Changes to insanity defense including name, when it can be raised, how long
insanity acquittees can be detained
  R. v. Levogiannis 1993
o SCC rules children allowed to testify in court behind screens preventing accused
from seeing them
 R. v. Mohan 1994
o SCC = formal criteria = when expert testimony should be admitted to court
 R. v. Williams 1998
o SCC acknowledge jurors can be biased by many sources i.e. relation to accused
 R. v. Gladue 1999
o SCC rules prison sentences being relied on too often by judges as way of dealing
w/ criminal behaviour (esp. Aboriginals) thus other options should be considered
 R. v. Oickle 2000
o SCC rules police interrogation techniques acceptable and confessions extracted
through their use admissible in court (despite psychological coercion)
 R. V. L.T.H 2008
o SCC rules prosecution does not have to prove young person understood their
legal rights as explained by cops when determining admissibility of statement
made by them to cops BUT they do have to prove these rights were explained to
young person using language appropriate to their age and understanding
-modern-day debates: psychological experts in court
 More knowledge of law to increase contribution to judicial system
 Need to be more aware of role of expert witness, how psych and law differ, criteria
courts consider when determining whether psychological testimony admissible
-function of expert witness
 Expert witness: witness who provides court w/ info (often opinion) that assists court in
understanding issue of relevance to case
 Role to provide assistance to triers of fact (judge/jury) in form of opinion based on some
type of specialized knowledge, education, training
o Testimony must be deemed reliable and helpful to court
o Appear as educator to judge and jury NOT as advocate for defense/prosecution
 Other witnesses = direct observations
-challenges of providing expert testimony
 Only know so much about own testimony and their role in court proceedings
 Differences b/w law and psychology
o Epistemology = psych assume possible to uncover truth; truth in law subjective
and based on most convincing story consistent w/ law
o Nature of law = psych describes how and why people behave specific ways; law
tells people how they should behave and provides punishments
o Knowledge = psych as empirical, nomothetic (group-based) data collection using
various methodologies; law info from idiographic analysis of court cases and
rational application of logic to establish facts of case and connections to other
cases that have set legal precedent
o Methodology = psych nomothetic, experimental w/ control for confounding
variables and replicating results; law = case-by-case w/ focus on constructing
 compelling narratives that cover details of specific case while being consistent
with law
o Criterion = psych cautious w/ willingness to accept truth (use statistical sign.);
law uses various criteria to determine guilt (i.e. beyond reasonable doubt)
o Principles = psych takes exploratory approach encouraging many explanations;
law more conservative, explanation based on coherence with the facts
o Latitude of courtroom behaviour = psych behaviour as expert witness limited by
court (i.e. testimony restricted by rules of evidence); law imposes fewer
restrictions on behaviours of lawyers
 Differences b/w 2 = why courts reluctant to admit testimony by psych experts
-criteria for accepting expert testimony
 USA criteria since early 20th century (based on decision Frye v. USA 1923)
 Procedure for scientific evidence must be generally accepted by scientific community
 general acceptance test: standard for accepting expert testimony, which states expert
testimony will be admissible in court if basis of testimony generally accepted within
relevant scientific community
o criticism of “general acceptance” vagueness
o address by 1998 court decisions (Daubert vs Merrell Dow Pharma)
 Daubert criteria: American standard for accepting expert testimony, which states
scientific evidence is valid if research on which it is based has been peer reviewed, is
testable, has recognized rate of error and adheres to professional standard
 Mohan criteria: Canadian standard for accepting expert testimony, which states expert
testimony admissible in court if testimony relevant, necessary for assisting trier of fact,
does not violate exclusionary rules and is provided by qualified expert
o Addition that experts must be independent and impartial (2015 case)
o Make decision of admissibility easier but do not eliminate possible problems b/c
assessment of each criterion relies on judge
-challenges of applying Mohan criteria: case of R. v. D.D. (2000)
 Delay in reporting sexual assault = girl lying?
 Expert testimony on reasons for delay; case later appealed b/c should not have
admitted testimony due to not following Mohan criteria
 Disagreement b/w SCC and judge’s interpretation of Mohan criteria
-Myths associated w/ field of forensic psychology
 Forensic psychologists and scientists perform same tasks
 Forensic psychologists spend much of their time helping police w/ criminal
investigations
 To become researcher in forensic psychology, one must earn grad degree in forensic
psychology
 For you to be admitted as expert witness in court, you require law degree
-Summary

CHAPTER 3 (PG. 58-78)

-Police interrogations
 Police interrogation: process whereby police interview suspect for purpose of gathering
evidence and obtaining a confession
o Go to great lengths to secure confession evidence; NA = requires confession
backed up with other evidence
o Those who confess still more likely to be convicted
o Coercive tactics previously physical to extract confessions i.e. whipping mid 20 th
century, torture tactics by Chicago police 1970-80s
  Replaced w/ psychologically based interrogations i.e. lying about evidence
 Require psychological coercion to secure confessions
-The Mr. Big Technique
 Occurs outside interrogation room; noncustodial procedure
 Undercover police posing as members of criminal organization trying to lure suspects
into gang; commit small crimes and rewarded then asked to confess one big crime
 75% success rate, 95% conviction rate = very effective
 Canadian courts permit method
-Reid model of interrogation
 England, Wales use less coercive interrogation techniques to prevent false confessions
 North America = Reid model by John. E. Reid in Chicago
 3-part process
o Gather evidence related to crime and interview witnesses/victims
o Conduct non-accusatorial interview of suspect to assess evidence of deception
o Conduct accusatorial evidence of suspect perceived to be guilty; 9 steps
 Confront suspect with guilt; may falsely imply evidence exists
 Psychological themes to allow suspect to rationalize/ excuse crime
 Interrupt any denial
 Overcome suspect’s objections to charges
 Is suspect withdrawn, ensure they have their attention i.e. reduce
psychological distance (move closer to suspect)
 Exhibit sympathy/understanding and urge suspect to come clean
 Offer explanations for crime making self-incrimination easier to achieve
 Once they agree w/ alternative explanation, develop into full confession
 Get suspect to write and sign full confession
 Have plainly decorated room to avoid distractions; have suspect alone prior to entering
room; enter with evidence folder in hand
 Based on idea people make choices they think will maximize their well-being given
constraints they face
o Psychological tactics to reverse fear of confessing to anxiety associated w/
deception ratio
 Minimization techniques: soft sell tactis used by police interrogators that are designed
to lull suspect into false sense of security
 Maximization: scare tactics used by police interrogators that are designed to intimidate
suspect believed to be guilty
-Use of Reid model in actual interrogation
 Hard to say how often it is used
 631 police investigators interviewed (2007) = rate how often they used diff types of
interrogation techniques (self-reported behaviour = may be biased)
o Reid model techniques used very often; frequency varied across techniques
o Many isolate suspects; few use confronting suspects of guilt directly
 King 2009 = 44 videotaped interrogations by Canadian cops
o Few coercive techniques used; but when used = better outcome
-Potential problems with Reid model
 Problems w/ detecting deception, falsely believing suspect guilty, coercive/suggestive
nature of interrogation practices may lead to false confessions
 Detecting deception
o Stage 3 depends on judgment of deception in stage 2 in Reid model
o No support that anyone can detect deception w/ any degree of accuracy 
technique trains to focus on objective cues of deception (but cues = weak!)
o More promising approach = increase behavioural differences b/w liars and truth-
tellers so deception cues become more pronounced
 Safeguards to protect individual during transition to interrogation phase of Reid model
o Miranda rights (USA), Charter of rights and freedoms (Canada)
o Statements only used against them when suspects waive their rights (research
shows Miranda rights do not actually protect in ways they are said to protect)
 Many do not understand their rights when they are presented to them
 Eastwood 2010  present rights (silence + legal counsel) and ask undergrads to explain
what they mean + rate how confident they are w/ their answer
o Low understanding but presenting cautions in written form, one element at a
time, allowed for greater degree of comprehension
o Canadians in interrogation may not understand their rights; resulting in non-
admissible confession evidence
o Similar with Youth waivers = hard to understand orally; written w/ hard words
 Investigator Bias
o Investigator bias: bias that can result when police officers enter interrogation
setting already believing suspect is guilty
 Mock interrogation study; told of guilt, told to devise interrogation strategy; results:
o w/ guilty expectations (GE) = ask more questions indicating their belief of guilt
o w/ GE = higher frequency of interrogation techniques
o judged more suspects to be guilty, regardless of actual guilt
o indicated they exerted more pressure on suspects to confess when suspect was
innocent, but they did not know this
o suspects had fairly accurate perceptions of interrogate behaviour (i.e. innocent
suspects believed their interrogators were exerting more pressure)
o neutral observers said biased interrogators were more coercive, esp. against
innocent suspects and they viewed suspects in GE condition as more defensive
-Myths about police interrogations
 Police officers often use physically coercive interrogation tactics that you see in good
detective shows on TV
 By law, police officers aren’t allowed to use trickery in their interrogations for purpose
of extracting a confession
 There is no need for people to worry about being interrogated by police; individuals in
Canada must be real their legal rights and this provides all the protection they need
 If someone confesses to a crime, that indicates the person did commit the crime
o False confessions account for 30% of wrongful conviction cases
-Canadian researcher profile: Dr. Joseph Eastwood
 Research = interrogation right by interviewees
o Adult interrogation rights written very complexly; struggle to understand
o Similarly seen with teen interrogation rights
 Research = enhance ability of interviewers to gather accurate and complete accounts
from eyewitness
o Measuring effectiveness of sketch procedures to complement verbal recall
 Research = examining role of alibis within criminal justice system
o Examine factors police attend to when deciding truth of alibi
-Interrogation practices and the courts
 Admissibility depends on trial judge = Confession made voluntarily? Was defendant
competent?
 Psychological coercion techniques less subtle = may still be admissible
-Alternative to Reid Model
 Reduce oppressive interrogation practices = PEACE model
 Planning and preparation, engage, explain, account , closure, evaluation
o Based on conversation management, encourages info gathering more than
securing a confession
 England/Wales police agencies prefer investigative interviewing term > interrogation
o Reduction of coercive techniques = no decrease in confessions (remains 50%)
 Snook 2012 = questioning techniques to maximize info collection
o 80 police officer interviews = do not follow these techniques
-Admissibility of confession evidence: Court rulings in R.v. Oickle (2000) and R.v. Chapple (2012)
 R.v. Oickle (2000) = confession voluntarily given, admissible
 SCC rules for voluntary confession
o Police made no threats/promises, no atmosphere of oppression, suspect in
operating mind/aware of what they said, no high degree of police trickery
 R.v. Chapple (2012) = judgment inadmissible; her free will was compromised
-false confessions
 False confession: confession that is either intenti0onally fabricated or is not based on
actual knowledge or the facts that form its content
 Retracted confession: confession that confessor later declares to be false
 Disputed confession: confession that is later disputed at trials
o Legal technicalities i.e. suspect disputes confession was ever made
-frequency of false confessions
 Frequency unknown, hard to determine when false confession made
o Large range in different studies; from 0.6-12%
 Examine causes of wrongful conviction to estimate rate
o Ex. Study of 241 cases = 24.48% contained false confessions
o Enough cases to treat issue very seriously
-different type of false confessions
 Voluntary false confession: false confession provided w/o any elicitation from police
 o Due to desire for notoriety, inability to distinguish fact from fantasy, need to
makeup pathological feelings of guilt by receiving punishment, desire to protect
somebody else from harm (particularly prevalent among juveniles)
 Coerced-compliant false confessions: confession that results from desire to escape
coercive interrogation environment or gain a benefit promised by police
o Escape further interrogation, gain promise benefit, avoid threatened punishment
 Coerced-internalized false confession: confession that results from suggestive
interrogation techniques, whereby confessor actually comes to believe they committed
the crime
o History of substance abuse/other interferences w/ brain function; inability of
people to detect discrepancies b/w that they observed and what has been
suggested to them; mental state factors i.e. anxiety, confusion, guilt feelings
-studying false confessions in lab
 Ethical constraints; prevent risk to participants i.e. believing they committed crime
 Kassin 1996 = test false confessions to crime
o Vulnerable (fast letter reading) vs non-vulnerable; false evidence vs none
o Real suspects have something to lose vs simulated experiment
o All P’s innocent but not all real suspects innocent
o Real suspects aren’t usually confused by their involvement
 Compliance: tendency to go along w/ demands, made by people perceived to be in
authority, even though person may not agree with them
o Ex. Signed confession = mainly vulnerable w/ false evidence
 Internalization: acceptance of guilt for act, even if person did not commit act
 Confabulation: reporting of events that never actually occurred
 Shaw 2015 = CAN convince students of committing crime during teen years = 71%
develop false memory (often w/ concrete and vivid details)
-consequences of falsely confessing
 Jury may still convict w/ false confession (more likely w/ confession than no confession)
o Do not believe sane person will admit to crime if they didn’t commit it
o Deception detection issues
o False confession similar to true confessions in form and content
 False confessions may lead to false evidence collection
 False confessions = false trail; wasting police-force time

CHAPTER 4 (PG. 96-116)

-Types of polygraph tests
 Polygraph = lie detector, associated w/ physiological states of liars
 Comparison question test (CQT): polygraph test including irrelevant questions unrelated
to crime, relevant questions concerning crime being investigated and comparison
questions concerning person’s honesty & past history prior to event being investigated
o Questions repeated 3-5 times in diff order; physiological response to questions
measured and examiner scores responses
o Test end with post-test interview in which test results are discussed
 o Pre-test allows development of comparison questions, also learns about
background of suspect and convinces them of accuracy of test
o Detect deception by comparing reactions to relevant and comparison questions
o Guilty react more to relevant questions (innocent = comparison)
o Previously used global scoring; now score charts numerically to ensure decisions
based on physiological responses
o 3 results: deceptive. truthful, inconclusive
o If deceptive, try to get confession during post-test interview
 Concealed info test (CIT): test designed to determine if person knows about crime
o Does not assess deception, looks to see is suspect know details of crime they
would know only if guilty
o Ask question with 4 choices; guilty answer should display larger physio response
o Will only work if suspect remembers details of crime; react more to know info
o Most common response = palmar sweating (i.e. skin conductance response)
o Cannot be used if details of crime in media; perpetrator must be sole to know
-Validity of polygraph techniques
 Types of studies = lab and field studies to assess validity of polygraph techniques
 lab studies = volunteers similar criminal behaviour (mock crime)
o experimenter knows ground truth (who is guilty/innocent)
o can compare relative merits of diff types of tests and control for variables such
as time b/w crime and polygraph exam
o ethically, guilty cannot be given strong incentives to beat polygraph and both
guilty/innocent have little to fear if they fail polygraph exam
 field studies = real-life situations, actual criminal suspects w/ actual exams
o compare accuracy of original examiner to blind evaluator
o original = see extra polygraph cues (visual); taught to ignore but bias exists
o hard to establish ground truth; rely on confessions (failed exams)
 this inflates polygraph accuracy rates
 polygraph tests: accurate or not? = debatable!
o Problems w/ relying on mock crimes to estimate real life accuracy
 CQT research = 84-92% correctly guilty, 55-78% correctly innocent, many inconclusive
o 9-24% falsely guilty (innocent react more to relevant, CQT not for everyone)
 Mock crimes indicate CIT very effective to identify innocent (95%); guilty (76-85%)
o Meta-analysis = correct outcomes better if studies included motives to succeed,
verbal responses to alternative, 5+ questions, in lab mock-crime studies
o Isarel 1990 = 98% innocent correct, 42% guilty correctly
o 1992 = 94% innocent correct, 76% guilty correct
o CIT vulnerable to false negative errors (false innocent) while CQT false-positive
errors (false guilty)
-can guilty learn to beat the polygraph?
 Countermeasures: techniques used to try to conceal guilt in polygraph tests
 30 min training sufficient for community volunteers to learn how to escape detection in
mock-crime study
  Physical (biting tongue), mental (count back by 7 from 200) = 50% beat test
 Anti-anxiety meds had no effect on accuracy of CIT; 90% taking drugs identified
-Seeing through face of deception
 Thermal imaging to detect deceit
 Correctly classify 75% guilty, 92% innocent; similar to polygraph exam
 69% liars, 64% truthers (skin temperature); 77% liars, 74% truthers (interview)
o Unlikely thermal imaging used effectively at airports
-scientific opinion: what do experts say?
 Public and scientific community not very supportive of polygraph tests and using results
in court
 27% experts believe CQT accurate vs 75% public
 Still used as tool despite expert’s negative view of it
-admissibility of polygraph evidence
 First submitted in USA in 1923 Frye vs USA = denied admissibility
 Ruling led to requirement that technique must obtain general acceptance by scientific
community before it can be admitted as evidence
-brain-based deception research
 Event-related brain potentials (ERP): brain activity measured by placing electrodes on
scalp and recording electrical patterns related to presentation of stimulus
o ERP promising = P300; occurs in response to significant stimuli that occur
infrequently; resistant to manipulation
o Guilty would respond to crime-relevant events with large P300 response
 Experiment = mock meet with spy and exposed to 6 critical details
o 18/20 correctly guilty, 17/20 correctly innocent
 Experiment = asked about details of minor offences they committed in everyday lives
o 4/4 correctly guilty, 3/4 correctly innocent
 Limitations = review details right before CIT, no consequences linked; small sample size
 2006 p300-CIT correct identification from 74-80%
 P300-MERMER longer ERP wave form = more accurate measure of concealed knowledge
in complex tasks i.e. actual criminal cases
 fMRI measure cerebral blood flow (neurological activity) in diff areas of brain
o measure emotional arousal = 90% accuracy
o used to determine deception associated brain areas
o no countermeasures = 100% effective, w/ countermeasures = 33% effective
o limitations = no consequences, no MH issues, averaged fMRI data used
 brain imaging evidence = makes jurors think it is more valid
o if include expert testimony of validity issue of fMRI lie detection = guilty verdicts
reduced to similar levels as in other conditions
-Brain fingerprinting: is this admissible in court? Harrington v. State (2003)
 use P300 for appeal; ended up acquitted due to other evidence however
-verbal and nonverbal behaviour cues to lying
 Better at detecting deception when told to focus attention on P’s tone of voice
 Better when saw deception video of bodies vs faces
  If people attempting to conceal emotion, true emotion may manifest as microfacial
expression
 We should listen to verbal cues as well as pay attention to facial expressions
 Liars keep stories simple; feel more anxiety when fabricating stories
 Liars = more speech disturbances, slower speech
 Different difficulty of lies associated w/ different patterns of speech disturbances


-myths and realities: detection of deception
 Only antisocial people tell lies
 Shift eyes, avoidance of eye contact or eyes looking to left are signs of lying
 It is easy to detect who is lying
 Liars fidget more
 Women are better at catching lies than men
-verbal cues to lying
 Liars provided less details, less compelling accounts, less likely to make sense, less
fluent, less engaging, less cooperative, more nervous and tense
 Truthers more likely to correct and admit to lacking memories
 Deception from killer making 911 call = provide irrelevant details, polite and patient,
state victim is dead, etc.
-are some people better at detecting deception?
 Ability to distinguish lies from truth only slightly better than chance
 Professional lie catchers = 55.5% accuracy rate; 54.2%
 No differences b/w non- and experts in accuracy
 o People tend to rely on behaviours that lack predictive validity
o Believe in stereotypes about liars i.e. avoiding eye contact
o Truth-bias: tendency to judge more messages as truthful than deceptive
 Research = only US secret service agents perform better compared to other experts
 High-stake liars easier to detect
 Familiar setting and type of individual interrogated = easier to detect deception
 Deception judgments depend more on liar than judge
 Training can help improve accuracy (from 40 to 76.7% in previous research)
 Teach truthfulness cues as well to counteract tendency for professionals to judge people
as deceptive
-quest for love: truth and deception in online dating
 Enhance profiles (youth/attractiveness = females, jobs/earnings = males)
 More accurate about relationship info; less self-reported accuracy about other info
 81% inaccurate about height, weight, age
 Rated unattractive = more likely to lie and enhance their photos
-In the media: TV and lie detection
 Lie to me, Lie detector, Moment of truth = shows about detecting deception
 Uses physiological, linguistic or behavioural cues to detect deception
-Detecting high stakes lies
 Grief face muscles more identified in genuine pleaders about missing relatives
-Canadian researcher profile: Dr. Leanne ten Brinke
 Examined behavioural consequences of emotional high-stakes deception
 Missing relatives experiment
 Examined effect of inappropriate emotions in corporate apologies
 Examined indirect deception detection
 US senators w/ psychopathic personality traits = poor leaders, unable to elicit support
once they ascended to powerful positions
----------------------------------------------------MIDTERM 1-----------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 8: ROLE OF MENTAL ILLNESS IN COURT
-presumptions in Canada’s legal system
 Actus reus: wrongful dead
 Means rea: criminal intent
 Both must be found beyond reasonable doubt
-fitness to stand trial
 Need to have understanding of charges and proceedings and be able to help in
preparing their defence
 Unfit to stand trial: Refers to an inability to conduct a defence at any stage of the
proceedings on account of a person’s mental disorder.
 Any unfit person could not be sentenced (R v. Balliram 2003)
 Once found NCR = moved to Review board (5 members w/ judge + psychiatrist)
 Case law used to determine criteria needed to be met (R v. Pritchard 1836)
o Whether the defendant is mute of malice (i.e., intentionality)
o Whether the defendant can plead to the indictment
o Whether the defendant has sufficient cognitive capacity to understand the trial proceedings
 Changes w/ bill C-30 (no longer confined indefinitely)
o Length of time defendant held
o “best interest rule” too strict as criterion
-myths and realities: mental illness and the court
 Those with mental illness commit the most crime
 All defendants that commit very violent crime use the insanity defense to excuse their
behaviour
 Those w/ mental illness and who commit violent crime should never be released from
prison
 Once someone mentally ill has committed a crime, they can never be cured
 If you are mentally ill and kill someone, you should go to jail rather than a mental health
facility
-raising the issue of fitness
 Defense or crown may raise issue of unfitness
-how many defendants are referred for fitness evaluations?
 5,000 evaluations annually in Canada
 61% from remand facility in BC; 24% held for assessment
 USA: 2-8% of felony defendants
-who can assess fitness?
 Canada excludes psychologists = only medical practitioners (do not require psychiatry
background)
 Unlike USA, Australia
-fitness instruments
 Many used to help evaluators quickly screen out competent defendants
 FIT-R = semi-structured interview
o 3 goals, 3 stages for final decision
 CST = complete sentences
  CAI = semi-structured interview w/ comprehensive competency evaluation
 IFI = semi-structured interview measuring areas of competency i.e. functional memory
 MacCAT-CA = structured interview via hypothetical scenarios
-distinguishing between fit and unfit defendants
 Incompetent = more diagnosed w/ psychotic disorder (8x), unemployed, unmarried
o Earlier psychiatric hospitalization = 2x likely to be found unfit
 Competent more likely to have current violent criminal charge
 Only marital status significant
 Unfit = older females, minority group, single
 Incompetent = less likely to maintain job, more serious mental illness, African-American
 Unfit more likely to be charged w/ property and miscellaneous > violent crimes
-how is fitness restored?
 When found unfit = criminal justice system tries to get defendant fit
o Medication (can be imposed by court)
o Can refuse in Canada, not in other countries/provinces
-what happens after finding of unfitness?
 Limit time defendant can be held as unfit
 Detain in hospital, reassessment after 45 days
 Unfit post 90 days = Review board assessment
 Prima facie case: Case in which the Crown prosecutor must prove there is sufficient
evidence to bring the case to trial
o Every 2 years and any time defendant requests proceeding
o Court determines sufficient evidence no longer available = not guilty
 May become unfit again = stop proceeding
-mental state at time of offence
 Insanity removes responsibility for performing specific act b/c of uncontrollable
impulses or delusions i.e. hearing voices
 Insanity: Impairment of mental or emotional functioning that affects perceptions,
beliefs, and motivations at the time of the offence
 Criminal Lunatic Act (1800)  McNaughton standard 1843
o Not know consequences/ nature of act (wrong or right), suffer from disorder
 Bill C-30 (1992) changes
o Insanity = nor criminally responsible (NCRMD)
o Review boards created = legal bodies mandated to oversee the care and
disposition of defendants found unfit and/or not criminally responsible on
account of a mental disorder
-raising issue of insanity
 Few defendants use insanity defense (1% of US felony cases)
 25% of defendants who use insanity defense succeed
-assessing insanity
 R-CRAS (5 scales) = standardized evaluations instead of cut off score
-what happens to defendant found NCRMD
  Absolute discharge: The defendant is released into the community without restrictions
to his or her behaviour
 Conditional discharge: A defendant is released; however, release carries certain
conditions (e.g., not to possess firearms) that the defendant must meet. Failure to meet
the conditions imposed with a conditional discharge may result in the defendant being
incarcerated or sent to a psychiatric facility
 Review board/ court may order defendant be sent to psychiatric facility
o Consider many variables i.e. risk assessment, clinical history, etc.
 Capping: Notion introduced through Bill C-30 where there is a maximum period of time
a person with a mental illness could be affected by his or her disposition
o i.e. 10 years for violent offense (same as prison term) = released once time up
 deciding on disposition = 4 main criteria:
o public safety, mental state of defendant, reintegration of defendant into society,
other needs of defendant
o Bill C-54 deals w/ changes on how NCRMD dealt with (those at risk of re-offense)
-automatism
 Two forms: insane (due to mental disorder) and noninsane (external factor = not guilty)
 Automatism: Unconscious, involuntary behaviour such that the person committing the
act is not aware of what he or she is doing
 Determine b/w two types; dissociative states = insanity defense
-how do NCRMD and automatism differ?
 Differences in verdicts = NCRMD verdict, sent to psychiatric facility
 Automatism = not guilty, released w/o conditions
-intoxication as a defence
 Previously, “black out” drunk used as automatism defense
o Appeal = self-induced intoxication, hence cannot use defense
 Bill C-72 = intoxication cannot be recognized as defense for violent crimes
-defendants with mental disorders
 Large % (60-90%) of prisoners have psychotic or mental disorders
 Males = psychotic, anxiety, drug dependency
 Females = anxiety, personality, substance abuse-related disorders
 Mainly drug abuse disorders seen in mentally ill offenders
-what to do with mentally ill offenders?
 Issues with isolation in prison for mentally ill offenders = need proper help
 Isolation due to self-harm and potentially feared harm to others
 Implement computerized mental health screening at intake
 Adding and improving services for mentally ill in corrections system
-why are there such high rates of mental illness in offender populations?
 Individuals likely to be arrested more
 Less adept at committing crime more likely to get caught
 More likely to plead guilty b/c of inability to access good representation OR understand
consequences of their plea
-dealing with offenders who are mentally ill
  Police have 2 options = bring to hospital for assessment/ treatment OR charge and
arrest individual
o Mental health services obtained through criminal justice system
-bias against mentally ill offenders
 Similar criteria: age, type of crime committed, history of criminal activity
o Look at conditional release patterns in 2 similar groups (mental vs not)
o Mental disorder more likely to be conditionally released due to mandatory
supervision, others due to parole
o Offenders w/ mental disorders more likely to have release suspended
o w/o MD = more likely to be re-admitted for new offense
o w/ MD = 2x more likely to re-enter criminal justice system
o number of factors can be related to rates of re-arrest (i.e. comorbid disorders)
-are people with mental illnesses violent?
 55% who met criteria for psychiatric diagnosis committed violent acts
 Two diagnoses met (APD, alcoholism) = 80-93% committed violent acts
 Substance abuse increases risk of engaging in violence
o More likely in severely mental ill
o Peak in 15-24 age group, decline 40 and up
 Within five years of the initial diagnosis, 10.7% of men and 2.7% of women committed a
violent offence; odds of conviction for a violent offence were higher in patients with
schizophrenia and related disorders than the general population
 Prior diagnoses AND prior violence and substance abuse predicts future violence
-types of offences committed by people with mental illnesses
 Not distinguished by offense type = all types of offenses (mild to severe)
-recidivism rates and people with mental illnesses
 3 years: 17% following index verdict, 20% conditional, 22% absolute discharge
 Best predictors: age on admission, # days hospitalized, # previous offenses
 Alcohol problem = more likely to recidivate earlier, arrested earlier for violence
-treatment of offenders with mental disorders
 Goals dependent on what offender dealt with through MH and criminal justice systems
 treatment goals identified for offenders with mental disorders = symptom reduction,
decreased length of stay in the facility, and no need to be re-admitted to hospital
 many types of facilities where offenders can receive treatment
 active psychotic symptoms = medication (symptoms), behaviour therapy (ensure they
take medication)
 willingness to participate + availability of treatments varies
 Community treatment order: Sentence that allows the mentally ill offender to live in
the community, with the stipulation that the person will agree to treatment or
detention in the event that his or her condition deteriorates
 Diversion: A decision not to prosecute, but rather have an offender undergo an
educational or community-service program. Also, an option for the courts dealing with
offenders with mental illnesses who are facing minor charges. The court can divert the
 offender directly into a treatment program rather than have him or her go through the
court process
 Treatment critical for certain disorders i.e. schizophrenia
-new court for mentally ill: mental health courts
 4 main objectives: divert accused and offer alternative, facilitate evaluation of fitness,
ensure treatment, decrease repeated offense cycle
 Help make release plan (i.e. treatment options, find housing)
-perceptions of mental health courts
 Majority positive attitudes towards courts
 Approx. 80% of the general public and 70% of the professional group members reported
supporting government funding for a mental health court in their community, with 58%
and 57%, respectively, agreeing to such a court even if it would mean a tax increase
 predicted by # factors i.e. being older, having prior exposure to mental health
coursework, displaying psychological openness, positive help-seeking attitudes, and
positive attitudes toward mental illness
 Educating participants on effectiveness of courts = increased positive perceptions
-are mental health courts effective
 Little research conducted = variability across courts
 Courts differ by how defendants referred, criteria for eligibility, type and # services
 Offenders who have gone through the mental health system also report more
satisfaction with the process and perceptions of higher levels of fair- ness, lower levels
of coercion, and increased confidence with the administration of justice
 medium effect size for improving mental health outcomes, such as increasing access to
mental health services, reducing recidivism, and decreasing the length of incarceration
 those who completed the program had a reduction in both recidivism risk and
criminogenic needs  better recovery compared to partial completion of program
 women more likely to be admitted as number of violent offenses increased
o admission for men stable regardless of # violent offenses committed

CHAPTER 10
-Risk assessment
 Risk as range now; vary in degree of dangerousness
 Probabilities change over time, interaction with traits, background, etc.
 Includes prediction and management component
 Civil contexts
o Civil commitment, child protection, immigration laws, school and labour
regulations, duty to warn (psychologist on patient’s expectancy to commit)
 Criminal settings
o Pretrial, sentencing, release
o Disclosure of info = solicitor-client privilege, extended to experts by lawyers
-type of prediction outcomes
  True positive: A correct prediction that occurs when a person who is predicted to
engage in some type of behaviour (e.g., a violent act) does so
 True negative: A correct prediction that occurs when a person who is predicted not to
engage in some type of behaviour (e.g., a violent act) does not
 False positive: An incorrect prediction that occurs when a person is predicted to engage
in some type of behaviour (e.g., a violent act) but does not
 False negative: An incorrect prediction that occurs when a person is predicted not to
engage in some type of behaviour (e.g., a violent act) but does

-base rate problem

 Problem with attempting to predict violence = determining base rates
 Base rate: Represents the percentage of people within a given population who commit
a criminal or violent act
 Difficult to make accurate predictions when base rate too low/high
 Easier to predict frequent > infrequent events
-history of risk assessment
 Baxstrom and Dixon studies
o Base rate violence low
o False positive very high = bad judgments of who is mentally ill
 US supreme court = psychiatrist not very good at predicting violence/risk
-methodological issues
 3 weaknesses: limited number of risk factors studied, how criterion variable measured
and defined
-judgment error and biases
 Use heuristics (shortcuts) to make decisions; often inaccurate
 Illusory correlation: Belief that a correlation exists between two events that in reality
are either not correlated or correlated to a much lesser degree
 People tend to be overconfident in their judgments ≠ accuracy
-approaches to assessment of risk
 3 methods of risk assessment
 Unstructured clinical judgment: Decisions characterized by a substantial amount of
professional discretion and lack of guidelines
 Actuarial prediction: Decisions are based on risk factors that are selected and combined
based on their empirical or statistical association with a specific outcome
 Structured professional judgment: Decisions are guided by a predetermined list of risk
factors that have been selected from the research and professional literature. Judgment
of risk level is based on the evaluator’s professional judgment
 4 components: (a) identifying empirically valid risk factors, (b) deter- mining a method
for measuring (or ‘scoring’) these risk factors, (c) establishing a procedure for combining
scores on the risk factors, and (d) producing an estimate of violence risk
 Level of service/case management inventory includes all 4; HCR-20 does not
-types of risk factors
 Risk factor as measurable trait of individual that predicts behaviour of interest
 o Divided into static and dynamic
 Static risk factor: Risk factors that do not fluctuate over time and are not amenable to change (e.g., criminal history)
 Dynamic risk factor: Risk factors that fluctuate over time and are amenable to change (e.g., antisocial attitude)
 Start to conceptualize risk factors as continuous construct (static at one end; acute
dynamic at other end i.e. intoxication; stable dynamic at middle i.e. coping ability)
 Changes in dynamic related to occurrence of violent behaviours
-important risk factors
 Factors associated w/ future violence (since 1980s)
 Historical risk factors: Risk factors that refer to events that have been experienced in
the past (e.g., age at first arrest). Also known as static risk factors
 Static risk factors: Risk factors that do not fluctuate over time and are not changed by
treatment (e.g., age at first arrest). Also known as historical risk factors
 Dispositional risk factors: Risk factors that reflect the individual’s traits, tendencies, or
styles
(e.g., negative attitudes)
 Clinical risk factors: Types and symptoms of mental disorders (e.g., substance abuse)
 Contextual risk factors: Risk factors that refer to aspects of the current environment
(e.g., access to victims or weapons). Sometimes called situational risk factors
 Situational risk factors: Risk factors that refer to aspects of the current environment
(e.g., access to victims or weapons). Sometimes called contextual risk factors
 Two key findings have emerged. First, factors that predict general recidivism also predict
violent or sexual recidivism. Second, predictors of recidivism in offenders with mental
disorders overlap considerably with predictors found among offenders who do not have
a mental disorder.
 Some only for assessment; others for management and assessment
o Vary in terms of how much they are subject to change (some fixed)
-dispositional factors
 Younger at first offense = more likely to re-offend (before age 14)
 Males engage in more violent crimes
 Impulsiveness + psychopathy as 2 main personality traits
 Terrorism – depend on factors i.e. age, gender (male), social class (low SES)
 Several studies have found that the combination of psychopathy and deviant sexual
arousal predicts sexual recidivism
 Deviant sexual arousal = to inappropriate stimuli
-historical factors
 Past behaviour (first in 1960s-70s)
 Age of onset (earlier = more chronic)
 Childhood history of maltreatment
-clinical factors
 Substance use (more seen in men)
 Mental disorder (psychosis increases violence by
-contextual factors
 Lack of social support
  Access to weapons or victims
-risk assessment myths
 Commonly used risk assessment tools are applicable across all offender populations
 Risk statements provide objective information on an offender’s risk to reoffend.
 There is clear consensus amongst researchers as to which type of risk assessment
should be utilized.
 Unstructured professional judgement is no longer used by clinicians to assess risk.

-risk-assessment instruments
 Static-99 = predict sexual recidivism (10-items) = 4 risk categories
 HCR-20 = predict violent behaviour (historical, clinical, risk management)
o Past, present, future
-current issues: where is the theory?
 Prediction = actuarial methods
 Less attention on why risk factors linked to violence
 Coping relapse model of criminal recidivism
o Environmental trigger first  emotional and cognitive appraisal of event
o Negative event = deal w/ unpleasant feelings, unable to cope = worsened cycle
o Influences of factors i.e. personality traits, criminal history
o Response mechanisms = individual perceptions
-unique sub-populations of offenders
 Women engage in less crime, reoffend less
 Only commit prostitution more than males (engage in different crime)
 Women more likely to target family, young children
 Women more likely to have serious mental illness
 Drug abuse more related to recidivism in females
 Aboriginals = 25% of incarcerated population
o Culturally relevant risk factors needed for accurate estimated risk
-protective factors
 Factors that mitigate or reduce likelihood of negative outcome i.e. aggression
 EX: prosocial involvement, strong social support, intelligence
-risk assessment: risky business?
 No way to actually determine specific risk level
 Structured interviews require professional judgment = low, moderate, high risk
-are psychologist and decision makers using the scientific research?
 Most do not use instruments = gap in integrating science w/ clinical practice
 Use of risk assessment tools recently found to be more common
o PCL-R, HCR_20, MMPI-II, WASI-III, Static-99, VRAG
o Use parts of tool = question validity?
o Review board decisions not related to VRAG scores
-who do some individuals stop committing crimes?
 Decline seen in early adulthood = 70% of offenders
 Desistance: The process of ceasing to engage in criminal behaviour
  Poorly understood why desistance occurs
 Age as strong correlation = one relation to cessation = maturation

CHAPTER 11
-psychopathy
 Psychopathy: personality disorder defined by a collection of interpersonal, affective,
and behavioural characteristics, including manipulation, lack of remorse or empathy,
impulsivity, and antisocial behaviours
 Alaska Inuit = kulangeta
-assessment of psychopathy
 PCL-R  Hare = 20 item, semi-structured interview and review of file
o Change from 2 to 4 factors
 Self-report questionnaires = measure emotions/ attitude not able to observe
o Easy to administer, no inter-rater reliability
o PPI-R, SRP
-psychopathy and APD
 APD: personality disorder characterized by history of behaviour in which rights of others
are violated
 Sociopathy: A label used to describe a person whose psychopathic traits are assumed to
be due to environmental factors
 proposed that sociopaths manifest similar traits as psychopaths but develop these traits
as a result of poor parenting and other environmental factors, whereas psychopaths are
genetically predisposed to a temperament that makes them difficult to socialize

-forensic use of psychopathy

 adversarial allegiance = bias towards side that hired them
-psychopathy and violence
 psychopaths as versatile, high density offenders
 related to reactive and instrumental violence
 earlier release for nonpsychopathic offenders
-psychopathy myths

 Myth 1. Psychopaths are born, not made.

 Myth 2. Once a psychopath, always a psychopath
 Myth 3. All psychopaths are violent
 Myth 4. You either are or are not a psychopath.
 Myth 5. There are no female psychopaths.
 Myth 6. Psychopathy and APD are different labels for the same construct.
 Myth 7. Psychopaths are all intelligent.
 Myth 8. Psychopaths are untreatable.
 Myth 9. Psychopathic traits cannot be measured via self-report instruments
 Myth 10. Psychopaths do not know the difference between right and wrong.

-psychopaths in the community

  0.6% psychopath; 70% no psychopathic traits
 More conflict w/ psychopathic manager = bullying culture
-psychopathy and sexual violence
 Not as strongly related as w/ violence
 Show deviant sexual arousal = more likely to engage in sexual reoffending
 Sexual sadism: People who are sexually aroused by fantasies, urges, or acts of inflicting
pain, suffering, or humiliation on another person
 Sexual homicide: homicide that has sexual component
-psychopathy and treatment
 Drop out = more likely to reoffend
 Stay = positive treatment gains, less likely to violently reoffend
-psychopathy in youth
 Several measured to identify traits early in development
 Antisocial Process Screening Device: Observer rating scale to assess psychopathic traits
in children
 Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version: Scale designed to measure psychopathic
traits in adolescents
 Negative connotations w/ label = potential for stigma
 Adult association w/ violence viewed as stable trait; resistant to intervention
 Moderate level stability in teens
 CU trait = fail to attend to eyes of parents, problems w/ development of empathy and
conscience; reject attention from mothers and have low levels of eye contact
-nature vs nurture
 Strong genetic component (29-59% MZ)
-does family matter?
 Lower level parental care reported
 Low income, disrupted family, physical neglect
-psychopaths and law enforcement
 Difficult to interrogate; get suspect to confess differently (cannot use empathy)
 Manipulative of system = avoid getting caught with distractors
 Become confrontational when approached w/ emotion
-what makes them tick: cognitive and affective models of psychopathy

 Response Modulation Deficit Theory: A theory that suggests that psychopaths fail to
use contextual cues that are peripheral to a dominant response set to modulate their
behaviour
 Fail to learn to avoid punishment
 Deficit in emotions that aid prosocial behaviour and inhibit deviance
 Brain waves do not differ b/w emotional and neutral words
 Amygdala dysfunction theory
o Others argue attention deficit