Transcript Multiples roles psychologists can play in the judiciary system

Teaching legal psychology
as an application of social
psychology
Michel Sabourin, Ph.D.
Dept. of Psychology
University of Montreal, CANADA
OUTLINE
Introduction
(1) Applying social psychology





Trial consultation
Jury selection
Pretrial attitudes and biases
Credibility asessment
Eyewitness testimony
2
OUTLINE



(cont’d)
Pretrial publicity
Jury deliberation
Psychological expertise
(2) Experiential learning
Conclusion
3
Introduction
During the past twenty years, I have been
teaching undergraduate classes and
graduate seminars in legal psychology,
assuming as well the training and
supervision of graduate students both in
research projects and in the numerous
applications of psychology to the legal
field .
4
Introduction

Two major influences on the core
curriculum of my lectures and on the
delivery method:
(1) the idea developped by Sharon Brehm and
Saul Kassin (in their Social Psychology textbook)
that legal psychology is one of the direct
applications of social psychology
(2) the need to rely on experiential activities to
promote learning
5
Applying Social Psychology


Theories and research findings of social
psychology allow us to increase our
understanding of settings and problems of
the real world
According to Brehm & Kassin (1990 and
the following editions), three major aplied
areas to social psychology: LAW,
BUSINESS and HEALTH
6
Applying social psychology

The applications to law include areas, like
(1) trial consultation, (2) jury selection,
(3) pretrial attitudes and biases,
(4)credibility assessment, (5)eyewitness
testimony, (6)pretrial publicity, (7) the
jury deliberation process and (8)
psychological expertise

Each of these areas is linked with specific
theories and research findings in social
psychology that students must review
7
Applying social psychology

The trial itself illustrates the profound
importance of social psychology at work in
the legal system



What kinds of people do lawyers select as
jurors and why ?
Can eyewitness accurately recall the details of
traumatic events ?
How do juries manage to reach unanimous
decisions, often afer days of deliberation ?
8
(1) Trial consultation

This involves assisting the attorney (in
criminal cases, the defence lawyer) in the
different aspects of trial preparation, like,
for example, evaluation of the evidence
and its presentation strategy, preparation
of the opening statements and closing
arguments, witness preparation and order
of appearance, etc…
9
(1) Trial consultation (cont’d)

These different areas link with the
following social psychology sub-areas :

Persuasion :social influences on attitude
How attitudes are measured
 The link between attitudes and behavior
 Methods of changing attitudes


Persuasion by means of communication
Two routes to persuasion
 The source, the message and the audience

10
(1) Trial consultation (cont’d)

Persuasion by our own actions
Role playing
 Cognitive dissonance theory
 Alternative routes to self-persuasion

Most important for the student to
master these basic areas to better
understand and apply them to trial
consultation
11
(2) Jury selection

Three stage process =



(1) Pool of eligible citizens
(2) Pretrial examination of prospective jurors
(3) Peremptory and for cause challenges
What guides the decision to accept
certain jurors, while rejecting others ?
12
(2) Jury selection (cont’d)

From a social psychology standpoint, jury
selection involves a good knowledge of:
 Stereotype formation: social
categorization, outgroup homogeneity
bias, illusory correlations,
subcategorization, contrast effect
 Implicit personality theories
 Impression formation
13
(2) Jury selection (cont’d)
Prejudice: individual differences,
authoritarian personnality
 Trait differences : implicit personality
theories and the power of first
impressions
 Confirmation bias
 Research methods (observation, selfreports, surveys, etc…)

14
(3) Pretrial attitudes and bias


Systematic jury selection: Finding valid
and objective indicators allowing the
lawyer to identify individuals coming from
the pool of potential jurors who will be
favorable or neutral with respect to the
theory of the client represented and to
reject unfavorable or biased individuals
Verdict prediction depends on the specific
issues and details of a particular case
15
(3) Pretrial attitudes and bias
(cont’d)

Scientific jury selection involves
knowledge of:
 Demographics and attitudes relevant to
trial
 Confirmation bias and confirmatory
hypothesis testing
 Kohlberg’s stages of moral development
 Research methods
16
(4) Credibility assessment

Identification of the behaviors (nonverbal,
paralinguistic and verbal) allowing an
evaluator (judge, police officer, custom
officer, etc…) to distinguish between those
telling the truth and those lying (or
deceiving)
17
(4) Credibiity assessment (cont’d)

For a better understanding of this concept
and its applications, the student should
master :





The link between attitudes and behavior
Persuasion by means of communication
Behavioral observation methods
Social psychophysiology: sympathetic and
parasympathetic reactions
Role of scripts and self-schemas
18
(5) Eyewitness testimony



The testimony (or evidence) given by someone
present during an event who actually saw what
happened and who is willing to testify in court to
help the judge or jury arrive at a decision .
General research conclusions = (1) eyewitnesses
are imperfect, (2) many well known factors
systematically affect their performance, (3)
judges and juries are usually unaware of these
factors
The main cause of wrongful convictions
19
(5) Eyewitness testimony (cont’d)

Involves the knowledge of:

The three stage process in memory:
(1) acquisition: relation between arousal and
performance (Yerkes-Dodson Law), cross-racial
identification bias
 (2) storage: theory of reconstructive memory
 (3) retrieval: line up construction, identification,
instructions



Role of self-confidence and accuracy
Over-estimation of eyewitness accuracy
20
(6) Pretrial publicity




The more information the people have about a
case from the media, the more likely they are to
presume the defendant guilty
Does this information have an impact on jury
verdict ?
Pretrial publicity can severely compromise a
defendant’s right to a fair trial
The closest social psychology concept that helps
better understand what’s going on is the power
of first impressions
21
(7) Jury deliberation


Group deliberation process designed to
produce a binary decision : guilty or not
guilty
Involves a large number of social
psychological concepts:




Group polarization
Conformity,
Majority influence
Effect of group size, social change, leadership, etc…
22
(8) Psychological expertise



Expert witnesses: individual who testify in court
on technical matters related to their expertise
Psychologists are being asked with increasing
frequency to testify as expert witnesses (mostly
in custody cases, but also in areas more familiar
to the social psychologist, like cameras in court,
eyewitness testimony, trademark litigation, etc…
What do we need to know about social
psychology to become a better expert ?
23
(8) Psychological expertise




An overview of research methods
Ethics and values in social psychology
Again, social influence and persuasion
The expert witness is allowed to voice
opinions (inference from observed facts),
to report hearsay, to speculate based on a
recognized (even if not exact) science
24
Promotion of learning through
experiental activities


In each area that we have just looked at, I
have, throughout the years, made special
efforts to design learning activities related
directly to the issues under scrutiny
The idea was to supply undergraduates, in
some cases, and graduate students in
other occasions, with the chance to live an
experience that would provide them with a
better comprehension of the phenomenon
25
Trial consultation in real cases


Since 1985, I have been involved as a
consultant in over 30 jury (criminal) trials
in sometimes highly publicized cases
Each time, I would profit from the
occasion to involve my graduate students
as assistants, either for the gathering of
data and/or the discussions concerning
the specific issues of a particular case.
They would also be present during the
trial and the debriefings with the lawyer
26
Trial consultation in real cases

Various types of services can be offered to
help lawyers with case preparation:


Organization of a mock trial (from paper
presentations to highly sophisticated « trial »
with actors in « real » courtrooms)
Videotaping (and thorough reviewing) of
opening statements and closing arguments in
light of social psychology principles: Ex.:
primacy and recency effects, one or two-sided
arguments, etc…
27
Trial consultation in real cases

Goal of these procedures: (1) to test the
reactions of lay persons to the arguments
that could be used and to identify
potential problems of comprehension, (2)
to gather demographic information that
can eventually be used for jury selection
28
Jury selection


Using systematic jury selection
methodology, information is gathered
through the application of survey
techniques or by using questionnaires with
mock jurors and/or results of credibility
assessments.
Data collected allow us to define the
favorable and unfavorable profiles of
potential jurors
29
Jury selection


In highly publicized cases, where
prejudicial information has circulated, data
can also be provided by using the public
opinion poll methodology
Graduate students are involved in the
design of the questionnaire, the actual
polling and the data analysis. Thus they
learn concretely how things are done
30
Jury selection




General scheme of a pretrial survey:
First, spontaneous recall, then recognition.
Then specific questions concerning
attitudes toward the arguments to be used
by the defense and/or the prosecution
Judgment call on the degree of perceived
guilt of the accused
31
Jury selection




Measure of general attitude toward certain
issues, v.g. racial prejudice
Finally, gathering of socio-demographic
data
Through appropriate statistical analysis
(multiple regression), possible to establish
the relation between different variables
and draw very precise profiles
Importance of proceeding in a systematic
fashion for jury selection using data
gathered
32
Credibility assessment


Important to know how the accused is
perceived to enable attorney to decide if
he/she will testify, since there is no
obligation to do so.
Also important to know the credibility of
the major witnesses for the prosecution

In Canada, obligation for the prosecution to
demonstrate sufficient evidence to support
the charges laid against the accused during a
preliminary hearing.This information can be
used for credibility assessment.
33
Credibility assessment



Also, a videotaped mock interrogation (with a
cross-examination by a mock prosecutor) of the
accused can be evaluated for credibility by a
sample of lay persons
Test using Adjective Check List devised to
perform this evaluation both for the witness
itself and his/her testimony ; administered to
large samples and results compiled. Again,
graduate students are directly involved in data
collection
Decisions made are therefore based on empirical
data
34
Credibility assessment



Same material used for credibility assessment
can be used to stage a mock trial with balanced
presentation of the evidence and mock jury
deliberations
Multiplied a certain number of times, these mock
trials provide useful empirical data that can be
used for jury selection
Also, in-depth viewing and analysis of the
videotapes of the mock jury deliberations can be
very useful to assess proper understanding of
legal concepts involved
35
Credibility assessment

For teaching purposes with students (in
psychology or in law school), as well as for
judges and custom officers, an
experiential workshop was designed

First activity: gathering information on what
indicators are spontaneously used by the
participants to identify truth tellers or liars.
Degree of confidence of indicators
36
Credibility assessment


Second activity: viewing the testimonies (on
video) of an alleged victim and an alleged
accused in a « university » case seemingly
involving sexual harassment. Evaluation of
the credibility of both and listing of indicators
used to arrive at conclusion
Third activity : evaluating the pertinence of a
list of 25 indicators to help identifying truth
tellers or liars and noting their degree of
confidence in these indicators.
37
Credibility assessment


Fourth activity: Being given a 45-min. lecture
involving general notions of credibility and
research results concerning the validity of a
certain number of indicators (all in previous
list) to distinguish between liars ans truthtellers
Fifth activity: Results of third activity have
been compiled and general results (means of
the group) are presented and discussed.
Indications are given as to the most valid
indicators and those who are anecdotic
38
Eyewitness testimony

Two experiments have been designed to
enable undergraduate students to better
grasp the reality (and difficulties)
surrounding eyewitness testimony

(1) A confederate accomplice knocks and
enters my classroom with a big problem: a
specific car is blocking his own and needs to
be immediately removed. It happens to be
my car ; I lend him my keys with the promise
that they will be returned immediately
39
Eyewitness testimony

Doesn’t come back after 10 minutes. I call for
a pause to go see what has happened. Car is
stolen. University security (other
accomplices) is called in, and since it’s too
long to interview everyone individually, they
distribute a paper with various questions for
proper identification of culprit ; in order to
follow up only the sure indicators, students
are asked to rate their degree of certainty
concerning the various elements of their
report.
40
Eyewitness testimony



Once all students have completed the task, I
inform them that the car theft is a hoax ! The
« culprit » comes back into the room…
Each one then compiles his own report,
noting number of correct and incorrect items,
as well as the degree of certainty for each
items
The experiment ends with a long discussion of
the difficulties surrounding eyewitness
identification…
41
Eyewitness testimony

(2) The second experiment is also presented
as a true story. A Swedish colleague involved
as a consultant to the prosecution has asked
me to evaluate the construction and validity
of a lineup made by the Stockholm police
during the inquiry surrounding the
assasination of Prime Minister Olof Palme in
1986. (True)Reason: the convicted murderer
has appealed to the Swedish Supreme Court
advocating that the video lineup was invalid
42
Eyewitness testimony



Student are asked to view the video of the
lineup with twelve suspects and to identify
who they think would be the culprit
If the lineup is valid, each suspect has one
chance out of twelve to be chosen. If any
one suspect or suspects are chosen
significantly more often than chance, and if
the murderer is correctly identified, then the
video is not valid
Answers are compiled and there is discussion
43
Pretrial publicity



Usually the main argument for asking for a
change of venue and/or supporting the
need to ask questions during the voir dire
(selection of jurors)
The large amount of prejudicial publicity in
the written articles or in media broadcasts
is not sufficient to show convincingly that
a true prejudice exists
There must be a causal relationship
44
Pretrial publicity



Again, this factor is evaluated by means of
public opinion polling with first, the
measurement of spontaneous recall, then
that recognition
The impact of the most prejudicial
informations that circulated is evaluated
Graduate students participate in all stages
of questionnaire preparation,
administration and data analysis
45
Jury deliberation process

Following the trial part (or after the
presentation of evidence by the
prosecution and the defence and the
closing arguments) of a mock trial, the
mock jurors are given instructions and
asked to deliberate, as if for real, in a
special room equiped with video recording
46
Jury deliberation process

Viewing and analysis of these videos is
very instructive for students (or for
lawyers !) with regard to what is
remembered from the evidence presented
initially, what is used to reach a verdict,
what is clear, what is unclear, what is
understood, what is not understood, how
legal concepts are interpreted or
understood, etc…
47
Jury deliberation process



Also, it gives information on how the
group structures itself and what degree of
polarization can be witnessed
Very instructive to look at the way siding
develops and ultimately, how is consensus
reached
Observing for specific behaviors or
arguments (in terms of frequency and
duration) is also very helpful to better
understand the deliberation process
48
Psychological expertise

Over the years, I have been involved as
expert witness or consultant not only with
criminal jury trials, but also in various
cases dealing with lie detection in civil
proceedings, the impact of cameras
outside the courtroom and presently, with
the identification and control of vexatious
litigants (at the request of the Chief
Justice)
49
Psychological expertise


In most of these occasions, and whenever
possible, I have tried to involve my
graduate students in the discussions
surrounding those cases, but also in the
main activities deriving or required by the
expertise.
In a way, it’s like supervising interns in the
application of psychology to law
50
Conclusion


We strongly believe that relating
concretely social psychological concepts to
the reality of the real world of law enables
the students to better comprehend
sometimes difficult to grasp theoretical
concepts
For doing so, involving personnally and
experientially the learner surely enhances
significantly the learning process
51