An increasing number of criminal court cases have seen psychologists present their findings as evidence after conducting experiments and surveys to evaluate the credibility of witnesses' statements and suspects' false confessions. Courts, however, have not always welcomed psychological findings. As some courts have not affirmed the value of these findings in some well-known cases, some researchers suggest that courts have little trust in psychological findings. To consider the validity of this suggestion, we conducted a quantitative investigation of the courts' decision-making processes when presented with psychological findings in 50 criminal cases. The results showed that most of the courts' judgments involving psychological findings were negative, and that the reasoning for the judgments could be classified into nine categories. The most common reasons were related to the methodological flaws used to derive the psychological findings.
On December 16, 2017 the JASAL annual conference was held at Kanda University of International Studies (KUIS). There were 149 participants; teachers and students involved in the field of self-access learning. They were from all over Japan and some came from abroad. At the conference, we heard helpful and stimulating information from each participant’s research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.