Training in law and psychology: Models from the Villanova conference.

Bersoff, Donald N.; Goodman‐Delahunty, Jane; Grisso, J. Thomas; Hans, Valerie P.; Poythress, Norman G.; Roesch, Ronald

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.52.12.1301

Cited by 64 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the inception of the Nebraska program, researchers have proposed a number of training models to prepare students for careers in forensic psychology. In 1995, a national conference was held at Villanova University on issues related to training and education in psychology and law (Bersoff et al, 1997). One of the major goals of the conference was to put forward an agenda for future years at the undergraduate, graduate, and continuing professional education levels.…”

Section: Please Scroll Down For Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Until recently, published conference proceedings addressing graduate education in psychology and law focused exclusively on the doctorate as the entry-level degree for professional careers (Bersoff et al, 1997). In fact, an examination of the reviews exploring higher education in forensic psychology (Otto, Heilbrun, & Grisso, 1990;Roesch, Grisso, & Poythress, 1986;Tomkins & Ogloff, 1990) revealed only two sentences devoted to an assessment of training in the areas of forensic or legal psychology at a master's level (Grisso, Sales, & Bayless, 1982).…”

Section: Journal Of Forensic Psychology Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, an examination of the reviews exploring higher education in forensic psychology (Otto, Heilbrun, & Grisso, 1990;Roesch, Grisso, & Poythress, 1986;Tomkins & Ogloff, 1990) revealed only two sentences devoted to an assessment of training in the areas of forensic or legal psychology at a master's level (Grisso, Sales, & Bayless, 1982). Additionally, The Villanova Conference, which involved several days of comprehensive discussions of the full range of training programs noted above, included no mention of existing master's degree forensic psychology training programs or the potential for developing such programs in the future (Bersoff et al, 1997). The most recent review of training in the field (Packer & Borum, 2003) did not mention master's-level training.…”

Section: Journal Of Forensic Psychology Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Time Is Now: The Emerging Need for Master's-Level Training in Forensic Psychology

Zaitchik

Berman

Whitworth

et al. 2007

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Please Scroll Down For Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal Of Forensic Psychology Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal Of Forensic Psychology Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Time Is Now: The Emerging Need for Master's-Level Training in Forensic Psychology

Zaitchik

Berman

Whitworth

et al. 2007

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Also, as Bersoff et al (1997Bersoff et al ( , p. 1302 wryly noted, "New, often unvalidated 'psychological' syndromes seem to proliferate every day." Training of professionals is a complex issue.…”

Section: Brighammentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These issues have been covered in detail elsewhere (e.g., Bersoff et al, 1997;Ogloff, Tomkins, & Bersoff, 1996;Roesch, Grisso, & Poythress, 1986;Wexler, 1990) and will only be touched on briefly here. As of 1998 there were at least five joint degree programs in the United States: Ph.D./J.D.…”

Section: Where Do We Go From Here? Training Forensic Psychologistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is forensic psychology, anyway?

Brigham

1999

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issue of how "forensic psychology" is defined has taken on a new urgency in"What is forensic psychology, anyway?" I have heard this plaintive question many times over the past few years, asked by bewildered undergraduate students, graduate students, and fellow professionals. Indeed, I have asked myself the same question, and I have never been able to come up with an entirely satisfactory answer. This vexing question is not simply of arcane academic relevance. Recently the American Psychological Association (APA) opened the gates for the certification of new "specialties" in psychology, and "forensic psychology" is one specialty that will be considered. The specialty designation issue has engendered heated and lengthy debate among many members of the American Psychology-Law Society (AP-LS) about whether or not AP-LS should be an active participant in the specialty application process. Much of this debate has been centered around the basic question of what is, and is not, "forensic psychology." There seems to be general agreement

show abstract

Forensic Psychology

Brigham

Grisso

2003

Handbook of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forensic psychology can be viewed broadly, as the study of all aspects of behavior directly related to the legal process, or more narrowly as a subarea of clinical psychology involving evaluations of, and testimony about, individuals in reference to a legal question. This chapter traces the history of attempts to apply psychological concepts and data to the legal system, beginning with the evolution of the insanity defense in eighteenth‐ and nineteenth‐century England. As the field of psychology emerged at the beginning of the twentieth century, psychologists' early enthusiasm for applying psychological methods and knowledge to legal questions (e.g., Munsterberg and Freud) was not met with ready acceptance by the legal field. By the 1950s, attempts to inject relevant psychological knowledge into legal cases were becoming more widespread, both by means of clinical expert testimony and via amicus curaie (friend of the court) briefs. Involvement of research psychologists in the legal system was sporadic until the 1960s, when an increased emphasis on social relevance led many psychologists to focus their research efforts toward the legal system, studying factors such as eyewitness memory, pretrial publicity, civil rights, judicial instructions, and jury decision making. Paralleling this research emphasis was the founding of professional organizations such as the American Psychology‐Law Society in 1969, the initiation of several psychology‐law journals in the last three decades, and the development of training programs focused on forensic psychology; some of these were joint degree (JD/PhD) programs, while others were within existing clinical or social psychology programs. Several emerging roles for psychologists in the legal system are discussed: providing forensic clinical evaluations, delivering scientific expert witness testimony, creating “science translation” briefs, and working as a trial consultant. In recent years, research intended to provide courts with relevant and useful information has been especially prevalent in the areas of eyewitness memory, ways to improve clinical forensic evaluations, and issues involving children and adolescents. We conclude that the future of forensic psychology looks bright, as communication between leaders in law and forensic psychology appears to be increasing in both frequency and understanding.

show abstract

Training in law and psychology: Models from the Villanova conference.

Cited by 64 publications

References 42 publications

The Time Is Now: The Emerging Need for Master's-Level Training in Forensic Psychology

The Time Is Now: The Emerging Need for Master's-Level Training in Forensic Psychology

What is forensic psychology, anyway?

Forensic Psychology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About