Legal and Criminological Psychology最新文献

The aim of this paper is to identify some of the urgent issues currently confronting criminal justice policymakers, researchers and practitioners. To this end a diverse group of researchers and clinicians have collaborated to identify pressing concerns in the field and to make some suggestions about how to proceed in the future. The authors represent individuals with varying combinations of criminal justice research, professional training (e.g. social work, criminal justice, criminology, social work, clinical psychology) and clinical orientation, and experience. The paper is comprised of 13 commentaries and a subsequent discussion based on these reflections. The commentaries are divided into the categories of explanation of criminal behaviour, clinical assessment and correctional intervention, and cover issues ranging from the role of clinical expertise in treatment, problems with risk assessment to the adverse effects of social oppression on minority groups. Following the commentaries, we summarize some of their key themes and briefly discuss a number of major issues likely to confront the field in the next 5–10 years.

Adaptability refers to cognitive, behavioural and emotional adjustments that assist in effectively responding to novel and uncertain situations. It is acknowledged as a key attribute of the successful management of dynamic interpersonal interactions. Yet, adaptability remains largely unstudied in the field of psychology and law. Here, we take the first steps to fill this research gap. In Study 1, university students (n = 30) acted as ‘agents’ that had to complete three ‘undercover missions’ that required an adaptive response. Adaptability was measured through a self-report scale. In Study 2, practitioners (n = 22), experienced with covert policing, watched recordings of the undercover missions from Experiment 1. The practitioners rated the adaptive responses of the agents, as well as their ability to attain the mission objectives. The findings showed that our experimental set-up successfully elicited adaptive behaviour. Practitioners’ ratings of adaptability were strongly related to their ratings of trustworthiness, rapport and belief in whether the agent would accomplish their missions, but not with actual mission success. The results highlight the potential importance of adaptability for law enforcement contexts.

The prevalence of cyber vigilantism during this COVID-19 pandemic is an imminent issue that warrants our attention. However, there is a dearth of research regarding cyber vigilantism, especially from a personality perspective. Therefore, the current study aims to address this gap by examining the impact of justice-related dispositions such as legal authoritarianism and observer sensitivity on support for cyber vigilantism. Additionally, perceived severity of transgression was examined as a potential mediator. A total of 647 Singaporean participants (M_age = 23.16 years, SD_age = 4.97) completed an anonymous online survey. Mediation analysis revealed an indirect effect: Perceived severity of transgression served as a mediator in the path between justice-related dispositions (i.e. legal authoritarianism and observer sensitivity) and support for cyber vigilantism, whereas there was no significant direct effect of justice-related dispositions on support for cyber vigilantism. The overall model predicted support for cyber vigilantism modestly, accounting for approximately three per cent of the variance. Findings of this study have theoretical implications that may be beneficial for both academics and law enforcement.

In their recent article, Bennell et al. (2021) address the ongoing series of critical incidents within law enforcement across the globe and the amplified public debate that ensured. The team of renowned international police scholars and practitioners intend to ‘provide insights into the fundamental issues related to police use of force’ (Bennell et al., 2021, p. 1) and work out what they perceive to be ‘urgent issues and prospects (p. 1)’. Since the author's proposal is likely to influence future debates, we feel warrants that foremost the issue on how the issue of urgency is handled in the paper at hand deserves scientific attention. While Bennell et al. (2021) emphasize the importance of evidence-based policing for the further professionalization of policing, we advocate for reflexivity in modern police practice and research. Reflexivity calls for the analysis on preconditions and consequences of scientific perspectives themselves, thus touching issues of evidence of evidence.