Behavioral science consultation to interrogation and debriefing operations: Ethical considerations.

Dunivin, Debra Lina; Banks, Leon; Staal, Mark A.; Stephenson, James A.

doi:10.1037/12342-005

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although operational psychology expanded its reach into numerous areas of national security following these attacks, two events accelerated the dialogue and scholarship among operational psychologists. First, the number of psychologists recruited to support the expanding role of interrogation and debriefing activities increased, making it necessary to develop formal training programs to prepare nonoperationally trained psychologists to support these activities (Dunivin, Banks, Staal, & Stephenson, 2010). Second, a controversy arose around misinformation regarding the roles psychologists played in their operational support.…”

Section: A Brief History Of Operational Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, a handful of specific coursework has emerged in response to the requirement for more operationally capable psychologists. The Army's Behavioral Science Consultation Team training course (support to interrogation and detention operations) at Fort Huachuca, AZ is one such example (Dunivin, Banks, Staal, & Stephenson, 2010). The Joint Personnel Recovery Agency's SERE psychology training curriculum is another (Doran, Hoyt, & Morgan, 2006).…”

Section: A Need For Practice Guidelines Training and Empirical Resementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Operational Psychology Post-9/11: A Decade of Evolution

Staal

Stephenson

2013

Military Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Operational psychology continues to expand at a rapid rate. Over the course of the last decade, it has emerged from relative obscurity and developed into an exciting, and somewhat controversial, professional subdiscipline within psychology. As the community of operational psychologists has increased and matured, it has reached a tipping point, creating the need for practice guidelines, training programs, and a greater emphasis on operationally relevant empirical research. The starting point for these developments is an integrative definition of operational psychology. In this article, we revisit previous definitions, relevant research literature, and recent developments in this specialty. We propose a definition that emphasizes consultation to an operational decision maker concerning issues of national security and defense.

show abstract

Section: A Brief History Of Operational Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Need For Practice Guidelines Training and Empirical Resementioning

confidence: 99%

Operational Psychology Post-9/11: A Decade of Evolution

Staal

Stephenson

2013

Military Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some might (though, to the best of our knowledge, none did) refuse to support unethical interrogations, and encourage the APA to change its policies. Some might seek guidance from other military psychologists, such as those who were closely involved with the development of the PENS report, including some who later were coauthors of a chapter on interrogations for an edited APA book on ethics for military psychologists (Dunivin, Banks, Staal, & Stephenson, 2011). Based on the guidance they later offered in that book, those psychologists might have advised resolving cognitive dissonance by choosing the legal definition of torture put forward by the Department of Justice (DOJ).…”

Section: Pens Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a chapter called “Behavioral Science Consultation to Interrogation and Debriefing Operations: Ethical Considerations” (Dunivin et al, 2011) in an APA book on ethics for military and intelligence settings entitled Ethical Practice in Operational Psychology , still being sold by APA as of June 2016, the definition of torture endorsed by APA’s military psychologists is still the permissive definition issued by the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (Kennedy & Williams, 2011). They cite this definition even though the chapter authors, two of whom (Dunivin and Banks) were closely involved with the development of the PENS report, acknowledge that this definition flies in the face of most international definitions of torture, even international treaties to which the United States is a signatory: Much of the controversy surrounding interrogation and other national security activities has centered on how torture is defined, what constitutes humiliating and degrading treatment, and what rights are afforded detained individuals.…”

Section: Why Did Psychologists Fail To Disobey Unethical Orders?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Enabling torture: APA, clinical psychology training and the failure to disobey.

LoCicero

Marlin

Jull-Patterson

et al. 2016

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The American Psychological Association (APA) has historically had close ties with the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). Recent revelations describe problematic outcomes of those ties, as some in the APA colluded with the DOD to allow psychologists to participate, with expectation of impunity, in harsh interrogations that amounted to torture of Guantanamo detainees, during the Bush era. We now know that leaders in the APA purposely misled psychologists about the establishment of policies on psychologists' roles in interrogations. Still, the authors wondered why, when the resulting policies reflected a clear contradiction of the fundamental duty to do no harm, few psychologists, in or out of the military, protested the policies articulated in 2005 by the committee on Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS). Previous research suggested that U.S. graduate students in clinical psychology receive little or no training in the duties of psychologists in military settings or in the ethical guidance offered by international treaties. Thus psychologists might not have been well prepared to critique the PENS policies or to refuse to participate in interrogations. To further explore this issue, the authors surveyed Directors of Clinical Training of doctoral programs in clinical psychology, asking Editor's Note. Continue the conversation by submitting your comments and questions about this article/book review to PeacePsychology.org/ peaceconflict. (The Editor of PeacePsychology.org reserves the right to exclude material that fails to contribute to constructive discussion.) This article was published Online First August 8, 2016. ALICE LOCICERO holds a PhD. She is a 2016 -2017 Visiting Scholar at the Wright Institute in Berkeley, California. She also served as a core faculty member at the Center for Multicultural Training in Psychology from 2012-2015. Her recent research has focused on sociocultural factors affecting youth recruitment to groups using terrorism, and on how doctoral students are prepared for ethical dilemmas in an era where widespread fear challenges decision-making.ROBERT P. MARLIN holds PhD and MD. He is a staff physician in the

show abstract

Institutional ethical conflicts with illustrations from police and military psychology.

Kennedy¹

2012

APA Handbook of Ethics in Psychology, Vol 1: Moral Foundations and Common Themes.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral science consultation to interrogation and debriefing operations: Ethical considerations.

Cited by 5 publications

References 23 publications

Operational Psychology Post-9/11: A Decade of Evolution

Operational Psychology Post-9/11: A Decade of Evolution

Enabling torture: APA, clinical psychology training and the failure to disobey.

Institutional ethical conflicts with illustrations from police and military psychology.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About