福利在线免费

Study-Unit Description

Study-Unit Description

锘�
CODE CRI2003

 
TITLE Psychology and Investigation

 
UM LEVEL 02 - Years 2, 3 in Modular Undergraduate Course

 
MQF LEVEL 5

 
ECTS CREDITS 4

 
DEPARTMENT Criminology

 
DESCRIPTION This study-unit shall provide students with a deeper insight of the use of applied psychology in forensic settings. By the end of the study-unit, students would be able to understand the contribution of psychological research to conducting criminal investigations, interviewing suspects and witnesses besides salient issues related to the process of memory.

Study-unit Aims:

- To introduce students to offender profiling;
- To review the processes emanating from the knowledge of memory and how to carry out investigative interviewing;
- To investigate the concept of eyewitness memory;
- To transmit the processes relating to evaluating evidence;
- To introduce the psychology of false confessions;
- To cover the legal and psychological measurement issues pertaining to the state of the mind, through an assessment of the mental state.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Knowledge & Understanding
By the end of the study-unit the student will be able to:

- debate what constitutes offender profiling;
- measure how effective investigative interviewing techniques work;
- evaluate the realities of eyewitness memory;
- test the validity of tools employed in forensic setting;
- categorise the factors underpinning false confessions.

2. Skills
By the end of the study-unit the student will be able to:

- identify Crime Scene characteristics;
- review interviewing models employed as information-gathering techniques;
- evaluate the relative research evidence covered in the unit;
- discuss the efficacy of the lie-detection tools;
- discuss the mental state assessment of offenders.

Main Text/s and any supplementary readings:

Main:

- Bekerian, D.A. and Jackson, J.L. (1997). Critical issues in offender profiling. In J.L. Jackson and D.A. Bekerian (Eds.) Offender Profiling: Theory, Research and practice. (pp.209-220) Chichester: Wiley.
- Canter, D. (2000). Offender profiling and criminal differentiation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 5, 23-46.
- Copson, G., Badcock, R., Boon, J., and Britton, P. (1997). Editorial: Articulating a systematic approach to clinical crime profiling. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 7, 13-17.
- Gudjonsson, G.H. (1996). Interviewing: Basic principles and theory. In The psychology of interrogations, confessions and testimony. (pp. 5-23). Chichester: Wiley.
- Gudjonsson, G.H. and Copson, G. (1997). The role of the expert in criminal investigation. In In J.L. Jackson and D.A. Bekerian (Eds.) Offender Profiling: Theory, Research and practice. (pp.61-76) Chichester: Wiley.
- Iacono, W.G. and Lykken, D.T. (1997). The validity of the lie detector: Two surveys of scientific opinion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 426-433.
- Kassin, S.M. (1997). The psychology of confession evidence. American Psychologist, 52, 221-233.
- Memon, A., Holley, A., Milne, R., K枚hnken, G., and Bull, R. (1994). Towards understanding the effects of interview training in evaluating the cognitive interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 641-659.
- Ruby, C.L. and Brigham, J.C. (1997). The usefulness of the criteria-based content analysis technique in distinguishing between truthful and fabricated allegations. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 3, 705-737.

Supplementary:

- Gemignani, M. (2014). Memory, Remembering, and Oblivion in Active Narrative Interview. Qualitative Inquiry, 20 (2), p. 127-135. DOI: 10.1177/1077800413510271.
- Beatty, P.C. & Willis, G.B. (2007). Research Synthesis: The Practice of Cognitive Interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly, (2), pp. 287鈥�311.
- Saywitz, K.J., Goodman, G.S., & Lyon, T.D. (2002). Interviewing children in and out of court: Current research and practice implications. In J. Myers, L. Berliner, J. Briere, C.T. Hendrix, C. Jenny, & T. Reid (Eds.), The APSAC Handbook on Child Maltreatment (2d Ed., pp. 349-377). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Snook, B, Cullen, R.M., Bennell, C., Taylor, P.J & Gendreau, P. (2008). The Criminal Profiling Illusion: What's Behind the Smoke and Mirrors? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, p.1257- 1276. DOI: 10.1177/0093854808321528.
- Torres, A.N., Boccaccini, M.T. & Holly A. Miller, H.A. (2006). Perceptions of the Validity and Utility of Criminal Profiling Among Forensic Psychologists and Psychiatrists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37 (1), p. 51鈥�58.
- Dutton, D.G. (1988). Profiling of Wife Assaulters: Preliminary Evidence for a Trimodal Analysis. Violence and Victims, 3(1), p. 5-29.
- Mayne, R. & Green. H. (2020). Virtual Reality for Teaching and Learning in Crime Scene Investigation. Department of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Applied Sciences, University of the West of England, Bristol, BS16 1QY, United Kingdom Mayne Bioanalytics: Bristol.
- Watalingam, R.D., Richetelli, N., Pelz, J.B., & Speira, J.A. (2017). Eye tracking to evaluate evidence recognition in crime scene investigations. Forensic Science International, 280, p. 64鈥�80.
- Goodman, G.S., Golding, J.M., Helgeson, V.S., Haith, M.M & Michelli, J. (1987). When a child takes the stand: Jurors鈥� Perception of Children鈥檚 Eyewitness testimony. Law and Human Behaviour, 11(1), p.27-40.
- Grubin, D. (2008). The case for polygraph testing of sex offenders. Legal and
Criminological Psychology, 13 (2), pp. 177-189.
- Meissner, C.A. & Kassin, S.M. (2009). 鈥淗e鈥檚 guilty!鈥�: Investigator Bias in Judgments of Truth and Deception. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13 (2), pp. 177-189.
- Magnussen, S. Melinder, A., Stridbeck, U. & Raja, A.Q (2010). Beliefs About Factors Affecting the Reliability of Eyewitness Testimony: A Comparison of Judges, Jurors and the General Public. Applied Cognitive Psychology, pp.122-133.
- G眉nther, K. (2004). Statement Validity Analysis and the 鈥榙etection of the truth鈥�. In P.A. Granhag & Str枚mwall (Eds.), The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts, pp. 41-63, Cambridge University Press.

 
STUDY-UNIT TYPE Lecture

 
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
Assessment Component/s Assessment Due Sept. Asst Session Weighting
Presentation SEM1 No 20%
Examination (2 Hours) SEM1 Yes 80%

 
LECTURER/S Janice Formosa Pace

 

 
The University makes every effort to ensure that the published Courses Plans, Programmes of Study and Study-Unit information are complete and up-to-date at the time of publication. The University reserves the right to make changes in case errors are detected after publication.
The availability of optional units may be subject to timetabling constraints.
Units not attracting a sufficient number of registrations may be withdrawn without notice.
It should be noted that all the information in the description above applies to study-units available during the academic year 2025/6. It may be subject to change in subsequent years.

Study at UM

/course/studyunit