The current role and contribution of ‘forensic clinical psychologists’ (FCPs) to criminal investigation in the United Kingdom

IF 2.1 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Criminal Psychology Pub Date : 2023-10-24 DOI:10.1108/jcp-07-2023-0043
Tinna Dögg Sigurdardóttir, Adrian West, Gisli Hannes Gudjonsson
{"title":"The current role and contribution of ‘forensic clinical psychologists’ (FCPs) to criminal investigation in the United Kingdom","authors":"Tinna Dögg Sigurdardóttir, Adrian West, Gisli Hannes Gudjonsson","doi":"10.1108/jcp-07-2023-0043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study aims to examine the scope and contribution of Forensic Clinical Psychology (FCP) advice from the National Crime Agency (NCA) to criminal investigations in the UK to address the gap in current knowledge and research. Design/methodology/approach The 36 FCP reports reviewed were written between 2017 and 2021. They were analysed using Toulmin’s (1958) application of pertinent arguments to the evaluation process. The potential utility of the reports was analysed in terms of the advice provided. Findings Most of the reports involved murder and equivocal death. The reports focused primarily on understanding the offender’s psychopathology, actions, motivation and risk to self and others using a practitioner model of case study methodology. Out of the 539 claims, grounds were provided for 99% of the claims, 91% had designated modality, 62% of the claims were potentially verifiable and 57% of the claims were supported by a warrant and/or backing. Most of the reports provided either moderate or high insight into the offence/offender (92%) and potential for new leads (64%). Practical implications The advice provided relied heavily on extensive forensic clinical and investigative experience of offenders, guided by theory and research and was often performed under considerable time pressure. Flexibility, impartiality, rigour and resilience are essential prerequisites for this type of work. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to systematically evaluate forensic clinical psychology reports from the NCA. It shows the pragmatic, dynamic and varied nature of FCP contributions to investigations and its potential utility.","PeriodicalId":44013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminal Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcp-07-2023-0043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine the scope and contribution of Forensic Clinical Psychology (FCP) advice from the National Crime Agency (NCA) to criminal investigations in the UK to address the gap in current knowledge and research. Design/methodology/approach The 36 FCP reports reviewed were written between 2017 and 2021. They were analysed using Toulmin’s (1958) application of pertinent arguments to the evaluation process. The potential utility of the reports was analysed in terms of the advice provided. Findings Most of the reports involved murder and equivocal death. The reports focused primarily on understanding the offender’s psychopathology, actions, motivation and risk to self and others using a practitioner model of case study methodology. Out of the 539 claims, grounds were provided for 99% of the claims, 91% had designated modality, 62% of the claims were potentially verifiable and 57% of the claims were supported by a warrant and/or backing. Most of the reports provided either moderate or high insight into the offence/offender (92%) and potential for new leads (64%). Practical implications The advice provided relied heavily on extensive forensic clinical and investigative experience of offenders, guided by theory and research and was often performed under considerable time pressure. Flexibility, impartiality, rigour and resilience are essential prerequisites for this type of work. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to systematically evaluate forensic clinical psychology reports from the NCA. It shows the pragmatic, dynamic and varied nature of FCP contributions to investigations and its potential utility.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“法医临床心理学家”(fcp)在英国刑事调查中的作用和贡献
目的本研究旨在研究法医临床心理学(FCP)建议的范围和贡献,从国家犯罪局(NCA)到英国的刑事调查,以解决当前知识和研究的差距。所审查的36份FCP报告撰写于2017年至2021年之间。使用Toulmin(1958)将相关论点应用于评估过程,对它们进行了分析。根据所提供的咨询意见分析了这些报告的潜在效用。大多数报告涉及谋杀和不明死亡。这些报告主要集中在了解罪犯的精神病理、行为、动机和对自己和他人的风险,使用案例研究方法的从业者模型。在539项索赔要求中,99%的索赔要求提供了理由,91%的索赔要求具有指定的方式,62%的索赔要求可能可核实,57%的索赔要求得到了手令和/或担保的支持。大多数报告对犯罪/罪犯提供了中等或高度的见解(92%)和潜在的新线索(64%)。所提供的咨询意见在很大程度上依赖于广泛的法医临床和罪犯调查经验,并以理论和研究为指导,往往在相当大的时间压力下进行。灵活性、公正性、严谨性和适应力是这类工作的基本先决条件。原创性/价值据作者所知,本研究是第一个系统地评估NCA法医临床心理学报告的研究。它显示了FCP对调查的贡献的实用性、动态性和多样性及其潜在的效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Criminal Psychology
Journal of Criminal Psychology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
Policing rape and serious sexual offences: officers’ insights on police specialism Sexual harassment, rape myths and paraphilias in the general population: a mediation analysis study Operation Soteria Bluestone: Rethinking RASSO investigations The effect of tailored reciprocity on information provision in an investigative interview Reconstructive psychological assessment (RPA) applied to the analysis of digital behavioral residues in forensic contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1