Xinyi Zhu, Yuhan Gao, Ruiming Guo, Jian Fang, Zhonghang Gong, Lin Cheng, Wenjie Qian, An Li, Qun Yang, Eyal Aharoni
Purpose
Law-abiding volition is the capacity to make choices within a set of legal constraints. This capacity plays a crucial role in promoting compliance with laws among individuals. This is the first study to construct an instrument measuring Law-Abiding Volition for adult populations—the Law-Abiding Volition Scale (LAVS).
Method
A large-scale online survey was conducted (N = 13,806, 50.5% male, Mean age = 35.83 years). An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis identified a three-factor structure comprising (1) voluntary compliance, (2) resistance to breaking the law and (3) determination to obey the law. The scale demonstrates good internal consistency and satisfactory construct and convergent validity.
Results
Individuals with legal training show significantly higher levels of law-abiding volition than those with no such training, and the LAVS scores accounted for a greater proportion of the variance in daily law-abiding behaviour beyond several established predictors, including justice sensitivity, social norm espousal and psychopathic traits.
Conclusion
Taken together, the LAVS appears to be an appropriate tool for assessing individuals' volitional level in adherence to laws and may offer important insights into developing educational initiatives aimed at promoting adherence to laws and regulations.
{"title":"Measuring the will to obey the law: Development and validation of the law-abiding volition scale","authors":"Xinyi Zhu, Yuhan Gao, Ruiming Guo, Jian Fang, Zhonghang Gong, Lin Cheng, Wenjie Qian, An Li, Qun Yang, Eyal Aharoni","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.70002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.70002","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Law-abiding volition is the capacity to make choices within a set of legal constraints. This capacity plays a crucial role in promoting compliance with laws among individuals. This is the first study to construct an instrument measuring Law-Abiding Volition for adult populations—the Law-Abiding Volition Scale (LAVS).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A large-scale online survey was conducted (<i>N</i> = 13,806, 50.5% male, Mean age = 35.83 years). An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis identified a three-factor structure comprising (1) voluntary compliance, (2) resistance to breaking the law and (3) determination to obey the law. The scale demonstrates good internal consistency and satisfactory construct and convergent validity.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Individuals with legal training show significantly higher levels of law-abiding volition than those with no such training, and the LAVS scores accounted for a greater proportion of the variance in daily law-abiding behaviour beyond several established predictors, including justice sensitivity, social norm espousal and psychopathic traits.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Taken together, the LAVS appears to be an appropriate tool for assessing individuals' volitional level in adherence to laws and may offer important insights into developing educational initiatives aimed at promoting adherence to laws and regulations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"31 1","pages":"85-101"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145930940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Philip Minoudis, Bardana Singh, Chrissie Lane, Marvin Iroegbu, Caitriona Higgins, Clare Wellington, Stephen D. Hart, Kevin S. Douglas, Mark Freestone
Introduction
We evaluated a modified procedure for making more detailed ratings of the presence of risk factors for violence using the HCR-20 V3 in a field study.
Method
Participants were 225 offenders recruited from correctional and forensic mental health institutions who were assessed by trained clinicians. We examined the measurement precision and predictive validity of ratings made using the modified procedure compared to ratings made by the same clinician using the standard procedure.
Results
Ratings made using the modified procedure had equivalent or superior internal consistency to the original rating procedure and had equivalent predictive accuracy (validity) with respect to future violence according to logistic regression analyses.
Discussion and conclusion
These findings suggest that the modified procedure may increase the sensitivity of Presence ratings of the HCR-20 V3 risk factors.
{"title":"Evaluation of a modified procedure for rating the presence of HCR-20 V3 risk factors","authors":"Philip Minoudis, Bardana Singh, Chrissie Lane, Marvin Iroegbu, Caitriona Higgins, Clare Wellington, Stephen D. Hart, Kevin S. Douglas, Mark Freestone","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.70000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.70000","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We evaluated a modified procedure for making more detailed ratings of the presence of risk factors for violence using the HCR-20 V3 in a field study.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Participants were 225 offenders recruited from correctional and forensic mental health institutions who were assessed by trained clinicians. We examined the measurement precision and predictive validity of ratings made using the modified procedure compared to ratings made by the same clinician using the standard procedure.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Ratings made using the modified procedure had equivalent or superior internal consistency to the original rating procedure and had equivalent predictive accuracy (validity) with respect to future violence according to logistic regression analyses.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion and conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>These findings suggest that the modified procedure may increase the sensitivity of Presence ratings of the HCR-20 V3 risk factors.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"31 1","pages":"64-84"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145915851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dara Mojtahedi, Thomas Williams, Danny Hunt, Maria Ioannou, John Synnott, Calli Tzani, Jasper J. van der Kemp
Purpose
The current study examined the role of eyewitness metamemory in predicting participants’ memory accuracy and risk of misinformation acceptance when describing previously encountered faces.
Methods
In an online experiment, participants (N = 1036) observed the faces of a female and male target before completing the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale. Participants then encountered descriptions of the targets from previous participants which depending on the experimental condition, either contained misinformation about the target's features or did not include any misinformation. Participants were later asked to describe the targets’ facial appearances through free recall and closed questions.
Results
A misinformation acceptance effect was observed in closed questions and free recall memory reports of both targets, with a greater effect observed for additory misinformation. Weak predictive associations were observed between metamemory scores and misinformation acceptance, such that greater memory contentment was associated with misinformation acceptance. Additionally, data from the no-misinformation group suggested that metamemory was unable to predict general recall accuracy for faces.
Conclusions
Implications of the findings suggest that post-event information could potentially mislead witnesses and highlight the need for such risks to be detected during investigations.
{"title":"Can metamemory judgements predict the risk of memory contamination for facial descriptions?","authors":"Dara Mojtahedi, Thomas Williams, Danny Hunt, Maria Ioannou, John Synnott, Calli Tzani, Jasper J. van der Kemp","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12313","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The current study examined the role of eyewitness metamemory in predicting participants’ memory accuracy and risk of misinformation acceptance when describing previously encountered faces.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In an online experiment, participants (<i>N</i> = 1036) observed the faces of a female and male target before completing the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale. Participants then encountered descriptions of the targets from previous participants which depending on the experimental condition, either contained misinformation about the target's features or did not include any misinformation. Participants were later asked to describe the targets’ facial appearances through free recall and closed questions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A misinformation acceptance effect was observed in closed questions and free recall memory reports of both targets, with a greater effect observed for additory misinformation. Weak predictive associations were observed between metamemory scores and misinformation acceptance, such that greater memory contentment was associated with misinformation acceptance. Additionally, data from the no-misinformation group suggested that metamemory was unable to predict general recall accuracy for faces.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Implications of the findings suggest that post-event information could potentially mislead witnesses and highlight the need for such risks to be detected during investigations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"31 1","pages":"50-63"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12313","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145931068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This review examined reproducibility in verbal lie detection research, wherein studies typically involve coding statements to identify deception cues. Such coding is prone to analytic flexibility that can invite false positives. I focused on the cue called complications as a case study. The variable emerged in the literature simultaneously with the availability of open science resources—providing a reasonable expectation that the relevant materials would be archived in accessible repositories if not in the publication.
Methods
I reviewed 30 relevant publications to assess whether complications research is amenable to auditing.
Results
The findings indicated sufficient consistency in the definitions of complications and little ambiguity regarding what the variable denotes. Additionally, numerical estimates indicated that the extant results in the literature might be replicable—but with a significant caveat. Such replicability entirely depends on acquiring the coding protocols and anonymized raw data of published studies. However, that critical information is not publicly available. I discuss the ramifications of this barrier to reproducibility: it prevents the auditing of published findings, which allows explaining null findings away with post hoc explanations that depend on inaccessible information.
Conclusions
At a minimum, journal editors and reviewers must insist on the codebooks of coding protocols. Providing the corresponding anonymized raw data should also be a requirement unless specific obstructions like grant agreements prevent data sharing. The nature of verbal lie detection research necessitates this policy.
{"title":"Reproducibility in lie detection research: A case study of the cue called complications","authors":"David A. Neequaye","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12315","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This review examined reproducibility in verbal lie detection research, wherein studies typically involve coding statements to identify deception cues. Such coding is prone to analytic flexibility that can invite false positives. I focused on the cue called complications as a case study. The variable emerged in the literature simultaneously with the availability of open science resources—providing a reasonable expectation that the relevant materials would be archived in accessible repositories if not in the publication.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>I reviewed 30 relevant publications to assess whether complications research is amenable to auditing.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The findings indicated sufficient consistency in the definitions of complications and little ambiguity regarding what the variable denotes. Additionally, numerical estimates indicated that the extant results in the literature might be replicable—but with a significant caveat. Such replicability entirely depends on acquiring the coding protocols and anonymized raw data of published studies. However, that critical information is <i>not</i> publicly available. I discuss the ramifications of this barrier to reproducibility: it prevents the auditing of published findings, which allows explaining null findings away with post hoc explanations that depend on inaccessible information.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>At a minimum, journal editors and reviewers must insist on the codebooks of coding protocols. Providing the corresponding anonymized raw data should also be a requirement unless specific obstructions like grant agreements prevent data sharing. The nature of verbal lie detection research necessitates this policy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"31 1","pages":"20-49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12315","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145931228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study explored the victim-perpetrator nexus in the context of cognitive online radicalisation. Specifically, we examined if a person's age and whether they were exposed to extremist content/users incidentally or following active search shape perceptions of victimhood. We further assessed whether and how perceptions of victimhood shape support for distinct criminal justice responses.
Methods
We conducted a pre-registered two-factorial (age: young person, adult x exposure type: active selection, incidental exposure) between-subjects online experiment (N = 383), employing vignettes that depicted four scenarios of cognitive online radicalisation.
Results
The process by which a person was exposed to extremist materials/settings online had no significant effect on perceptions of victimhood. However, young people (as compared to adults) who were cognitively radicalised online were more readily considered victims. A higher level of perceived victimhood, in turn, was associated with increased endorsement of rehabilitation; levels of perceived victimhood were not associated with support for criminal charges. Exploratory analyses further highlighted that young people (rather than adults) who were radicalised online were more strongly perceived as victims, which predicted elevated support for rehabilitation interventions. Young people were also attributed lower responsibility for their engagement with extremist materials and users online, which was related to lower endorsement of criminal charges.
Conclusions
Taken together, the findings underscore that more than one issue frame was used to make meaning of the phenomenon of online radicalisation. A safeguarding frame was applied with respect to young people, reflecting the victim-perpetrator nexus; a criminalisation frame was, in turn, adopted when considering adults radicalised online.
{"title":"Perceptions of people radicalised online: Examining the victim-perpetrator nexus","authors":"Victoria Bowland, Sandy Schumann","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12317","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study explored the victim-perpetrator nexus in the context of cognitive online radicalisation. Specifically, we examined if a person's age and whether they were exposed to extremist content/users incidentally or following active search shape perceptions of victimhood. We further assessed whether and how perceptions of victimhood shape support for distinct criminal justice responses.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a pre-registered two-factorial (age: young person, adult x exposure type: active selection, incidental exposure) between-subjects online experiment (<i>N</i> = 383), employing vignettes that depicted four scenarios of cognitive online radicalisation.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The process by which a person was exposed to extremist materials/settings online had no significant effect on perceptions of victimhood. However, young people (as compared to adults) who were cognitively radicalised online were more readily considered victims. A higher level of perceived victimhood, in turn, was associated with increased endorsement of rehabilitation; levels of perceived victimhood were not associated with support for criminal charges. Exploratory analyses further highlighted that young people (rather than adults) who were radicalised online were more strongly perceived as victims, which predicted elevated support for rehabilitation interventions. Young people were also attributed lower responsibility for their engagement with extremist materials and users online, which was related to lower endorsement of criminal charges.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Taken together, the findings underscore that more than one issue frame was used to make meaning of the phenomenon of online radicalisation. A safeguarding frame was applied with respect to young people, reflecting the victim-perpetrator nexus; a criminalisation frame was, in turn, adopted when considering adults radicalised online.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"31 1","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12317","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145930872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Daniella K. Cash, Megan H. Papesh, Tiffany D. Russell, Alan T. Harrison
Purpose
Abundant research has explored the conditions under which eyewitnesses are likely to identify guilty versus innocent suspects. Research suggests there is a relationship between witness confidence and accuracy, such that confident witnesses tend to be accurate, and this relationship can persist even across delays between witnessed events and identification procedures. Emerging research suggests that witnesses' metacognitive evaluations made prior to identification procedures are also diagnostic of accuracy. These findings about eyewitness memory are valuable, but it is unclear how these factors are evaluated when assessing witness confidence and accuracy.
Method
Two studies using a mock-officer paradigm examined how perceptions of witness confidence and accuracy are affected by variations in confidence both before and after identifications (Experiments 1 and 2), and the delay between the crime and the identification (Experiment 2).
Results and Conclusion
Although high confidence at either time increased perceived confidence and accuracy, longer delays between the event and identification procedure lowered ratings of perceived confidence and accuracy.
{"title":"The effects of confidence consistency and delay on perceptions of eyewitness credibility","authors":"Daniella K. Cash, Megan H. Papesh, Tiffany D. Russell, Alan T. Harrison","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12316","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.12316","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Abundant research has explored the conditions under which eyewitnesses are likely to identify guilty versus innocent suspects. Research suggests there is a relationship between witness confidence and accuracy, such that confident witnesses tend to be accurate, and this relationship can persist even across delays between witnessed events and identification procedures. Emerging research suggests that witnesses' metacognitive evaluations made prior to identification procedures are also diagnostic of accuracy. These findings about eyewitness memory are valuable, but it is unclear how these factors are evaluated when assessing witness confidence and accuracy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Two studies using a mock-officer paradigm examined how perceptions of witness confidence and accuracy are affected by variations in confidence both before and after identifications (Experiments 1 and 2), and the delay between the crime and the identification (Experiment 2).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results and Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Although high confidence at either time increased perceived confidence and accuracy, longer delays between the event and identification procedure lowered ratings of perceived confidence and accuracy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":"335-348"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144832623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>In 1979, Kahneman and Tversky showed that human information processing is subject to bias. They identified a number of factors, such as the order in which information is presented, that systematically lead people to make decisions that are not rational. In 2020, an international group of researchers tested <i>N</i> = 4099 participants from 19 countries and 13 languages and found that 94% of Kahneman and Tversky's (<span>1979</span>) findings were replicated (Ruggeri et al., <span>2020</span>). This makes the evidence for human susceptibility to bias one of the most replicated findings in psychology, and one in urgent need of remedy.</p><p>Intuitively, the most effective way to avoid being biased by certain information is to not have that information. This technique is called masking (or blinding) and inspired the debiasing approach <i>Linear Sequencing Unmasking-Expanded</i> (LSU-E, Dror & Kukucka, <span>2021</span>). The LSU-E approach is based on empirically verified principles and has been applied to several forensic sciences, including the detection of deep-fake images (Casu et al., <span>2024</span>) or the identification of victims (Dahal et al., <span>2022</span>). Against this background, LSU-E is a promising approach for reducing bias in forensic psychological assessments. In an initial study, we tested whether a core factor, that is the sequencing of case information, was effective in reducing bias in criminal risk assessment as an exemplary area of forensic psychological assessment (Oberlader & Verschuere, <span>2024a</span>).</p><p>In their commentary on our article ‘Bias is persistent: Sequencing case information does not protect against contextual bias in criminal risk assessment’ (Oberlader & Verschuere, <span>2024a</span>), Kukucka and Quigley-McBride (<span>2025</span>) critically assessed the validity of our study. The authors warned that our results and interpretations may give an overly pessimistic picture of the effectiveness of the debiasing approach LSU-E (Dror & Kukucka, <span>2021</span>). Here, we first address what we consider to be their main criticisms of our study and then suggest future avenues for investigating the effectiveness of this promising debiasing method.</p><p>In a preregistered experimental study with 308 informed lay participants, we investigated whether the presentation of irrelevant case information biases criminal risk assessment based on an actuarial-empirical risk assessment tool. We supposed that participants' criminal risk assessment in a fictitious case would be closer to the result of an actuarial-empirical risk assessment tool, and thus less biased, if they were given only relevant case information than if they were additionally given irrelevant case information. Case information was defined as relevant if it was necessary for the application of the actuarial-empirical risk assessment tool, and as irrelevant if it was not.</p><p>Critically, we also tested whether this bias c
{"title":"Challenges and future directions in studying sequencing as a debiasing strategy in forensic psychological assessment: A commentary on Kukucka and Quigley-McBride (2025)","authors":"Verena Oberlader, Bruno Verschuere","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12314","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.12314","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 1979, Kahneman and Tversky showed that human information processing is subject to bias. They identified a number of factors, such as the order in which information is presented, that systematically lead people to make decisions that are not rational. In 2020, an international group of researchers tested <i>N</i> = 4099 participants from 19 countries and 13 languages and found that 94% of Kahneman and Tversky's (<span>1979</span>) findings were replicated (Ruggeri et al., <span>2020</span>). This makes the evidence for human susceptibility to bias one of the most replicated findings in psychology, and one in urgent need of remedy.</p><p>Intuitively, the most effective way to avoid being biased by certain information is to not have that information. This technique is called masking (or blinding) and inspired the debiasing approach <i>Linear Sequencing Unmasking-Expanded</i> (LSU-E, Dror & Kukucka, <span>2021</span>). The LSU-E approach is based on empirically verified principles and has been applied to several forensic sciences, including the detection of deep-fake images (Casu et al., <span>2024</span>) or the identification of victims (Dahal et al., <span>2022</span>). Against this background, LSU-E is a promising approach for reducing bias in forensic psychological assessments. In an initial study, we tested whether a core factor, that is the sequencing of case information, was effective in reducing bias in criminal risk assessment as an exemplary area of forensic psychological assessment (Oberlader & Verschuere, <span>2024a</span>).</p><p>In their commentary on our article ‘Bias is persistent: Sequencing case information does not protect against contextual bias in criminal risk assessment’ (Oberlader & Verschuere, <span>2024a</span>), Kukucka and Quigley-McBride (<span>2025</span>) critically assessed the validity of our study. The authors warned that our results and interpretations may give an overly pessimistic picture of the effectiveness of the debiasing approach LSU-E (Dror & Kukucka, <span>2021</span>). Here, we first address what we consider to be their main criticisms of our study and then suggest future avenues for investigating the effectiveness of this promising debiasing method.</p><p>In a preregistered experimental study with 308 informed lay participants, we investigated whether the presentation of irrelevant case information biases criminal risk assessment based on an actuarial-empirical risk assessment tool. We supposed that participants' criminal risk assessment in a fictitious case would be closer to the result of an actuarial-empirical risk assessment tool, and thus less biased, if they were given only relevant case information than if they were additionally given irrelevant case information. Case information was defined as relevant if it was necessary for the application of the actuarial-empirical risk assessment tool, and as irrelevant if it was not.</p><p>Critically, we also tested whether this bias c","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":"188-192"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12314","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144833349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
After 164 undergraduate participants watched a mock crime video, those in the SAI condition described the recalled objects and aspects of the video using the SAI. Meanwhile, in the control condition, participants did not describe the recalled objects or aspects but wrote about what they had learned in regular psychology classes. Afterwards, the participants made identifications and answered a few questions.
Results
The results showed that conducting the SAI did not alter the subsequent identification rates in the lineup, but the metacognition for description—participants' thoughts on how the description task affected identification—was more positive in the SAI condition than in the control condition. Moreover, when participants made a false identification in the target-present lineup, their confidence in the SAI condition was greater than that in the control condition.
Conclusions
The results suggest that the SAI can be used for witnesses with the potential to make identifications later because it does not interrupt identification itself. However, the confidence levels in identifications made by eyewitnesses answering questions in the SAI should be carefully assessed. This is because the SAI may distort the metacognition for description and increase false confidence levels in the identifications made by eyewitnesses.
Memory of childhood sexual abuse: Forgotten and recovered
Three cases of allegations of childhood sexual abuse committed by fathers on their daughters have been brought to the attention of the Israeli Supreme Court. The prosecution was based on recovered memories of traumatic experiences that had been completely forgotten by the plaintiffs for many years.
Amnesia accounted for in terms of repression
The expert witness for the prosecution accounted for the long amnesia in terms of unconscious repression of the traumatic memories.
Recovered memory: Veridical or false?
The repression hypothesis has encountered severe theoretical and methodological criticisms which have cast doubt on the very existence of this mechanism.
Proposal for a solution of the dilemma
This controversy, which has far-reaching legal implications, may be reconciled by adopting the notion of multiple “truths”, and by accepting recovered memory allegations only when corroborated by external evidence.
{"title":"Alternative “truths” of repressed memories: Views of judges of the Israeli supreme court","authors":"Israel Nachson","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12275","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.12275","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Memory of childhood sexual abuse: Forgotten and recovered</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Three cases of allegations of childhood sexual abuse committed by fathers on their daughters have been brought to the attention of the Israeli Supreme Court. The prosecution was based on recovered memories of traumatic experiences that had been completely forgotten by the plaintiffs for many years.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Amnesia accounted for in terms of repression</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The expert witness for the prosecution accounted for the long amnesia in terms of unconscious repression of the traumatic memories.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 <h3> Recovered memory: Veridical or false?</h3> \u0000 <p>The repression hypothesis has encountered severe theoretical and methodological criticisms which have cast doubt on the very existence of this mechanism.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Proposal for a solution of the dilemma</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This controversy, which has far-reaching legal implications, may be reconciled by adopting the notion of multiple “truths”, and by accepting recovered memory allegations only when corroborated by external evidence.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 S1","pages":"76-84"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12275","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143836428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Henry Otgaar, Mark L. Howe, Lawrence Patihis, Ivan Mangiulli, Olivier Dodier, Rafaële Huntjens, Elisa Krackow, Marko Jelicic, Steven Jay Lynn
Convertino et al. (2025) and Nachson (2025) both stated that biological substrates can be correlated to behaviour. Additionally, Convertino et al. noted that correlation does not imply causation. This issue concerning causation is imperative. Neuroscientific research cannot conclude whether detected neurological substrates have a causal link with dissociative amnesia/repressed memory (e.g. Taïb et al., 2023).
Nonetheless, Markowitsch and Staniloiu (2025) claimed that organic brain damage is not in opposition to dissociative amnesia. They proposed the two-hit hypothesis referring to ‘an additive or synergistic interaction between psychological and physical incidents’ (Staniloiu & Markowitsch, 2014, p. 231) to explain certain dissociative amnesia cases. According to them, ‘physical incidents provide psychological or biological grounds for the development and maintenance of dissociative amnesia’ (Staniloiu & Markowitsch, 2014, p. 232). By this view, being hit on the head during a robbery (biological cause) could lead to psychological trauma and combined produce dissociative amnesia.
We are sceptical that the two-hit hypothesis is a sound hypothesis. First, this hypothesis means that whatever the antecedent (physical, psychological), traumatic memory loss can almost always be labelled dissociative amnesia. This renders the concept of dissociative amnesia/repressed memory overgeneral and unfalsifiable. Second, the two-hit hypothesis does not delineate under which conditions such interactions can occur nor what mechanism is involved. Thus, it is not a hypothesis but merely a description of factors potentially underlying traumatic memory loss (Roberts et al., 2013). Proposing that two hits cause traumatic memory loss, while there is no causation, is a miss in this field.
Henry Otgaar: Conceptualization; formal analysis; methodology; project administration; visualization; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Mark L. Howe: Writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Lawrence Patihis: Writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Ivan Mangiulli: Formal analysis; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Olivier Dodier: Writing – review and editing. Rafaële Huntjens: Formal analysis; writing – review and editing. Elisa Krackow: Formal analysis; writing – review and editing. Marko Jelicic: Writing – review and editing. Steven Jay Lynn: Writing – review and editing.
{"title":"Two hits or two misses? A critical comment on a combined psychological and biological origin of dissociative amnesia and repressed memory","authors":"Henry Otgaar, Mark L. Howe, Lawrence Patihis, Ivan Mangiulli, Olivier Dodier, Rafaële Huntjens, Elisa Krackow, Marko Jelicic, Steven Jay Lynn","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.4_12272","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.4_12272","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Convertino et al. (<span>2025</span>) and Nachson (<span>2025</span>) both stated that biological substrates can be correlated to behaviour. Additionally, Convertino et al. noted that correlation does not imply causation. This issue concerning causation is imperative. Neuroscientific research cannot conclude whether detected neurological substrates have a causal link with dissociative amnesia/repressed memory (e.g. Taïb et al., <span>2023</span>).</p><p>Nonetheless, Markowitsch and Staniloiu (<span>2025</span>) claimed that organic brain damage is not in opposition to dissociative amnesia. They proposed the two-hit hypothesis referring to ‘an additive or synergistic interaction between psychological and physical incidents’ (Staniloiu & Markowitsch, <span>2014</span>, p. 231) to explain certain dissociative amnesia cases. According to them, ‘physical incidents provide psychological or biological grounds for the development and maintenance of dissociative amnesia’ (Staniloiu & Markowitsch, <span>2014</span>, p. 232). By this view, being hit on the head during a robbery (biological cause) could lead to psychological trauma and combined produce dissociative amnesia.</p><p>We are sceptical that the two-hit hypothesis is a sound hypothesis. First, this hypothesis means that whatever the antecedent (physical, psychological), traumatic memory loss can almost always be labelled dissociative amnesia. This renders the concept of dissociative amnesia/repressed memory overgeneral and unfalsifiable. Second, the two-hit hypothesis does not delineate under which conditions such interactions can occur nor what mechanism is involved. Thus, it is not a hypothesis but merely a description of factors potentially underlying traumatic memory loss (Roberts et al., <span>2013</span>). Proposing that two hits cause traumatic memory loss, while there is no causation, is a miss in this field.</p><p><b>Henry Otgaar:</b> Conceptualization; formal analysis; methodology; project administration; visualization; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. <b>Mark L. Howe:</b> Writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. <b>Lawrence Patihis:</b> Writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. <b>Ivan Mangiulli:</b> Formal analysis; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. <b>Olivier Dodier:</b> Writing – review and editing. <b>Rafaële Huntjens:</b> Formal analysis; writing – review and editing. <b>Elisa Krackow:</b> Formal analysis; writing – review and editing. <b>Marko Jelicic:</b> Writing – review and editing. <b>Steven Jay Lynn:</b> Writing – review and editing.</p>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 S1","pages":"52-53"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.4_12272","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143836426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号