In the article analysed the practice of obtaining opinions of expert psychologist in juvenile delinquency cases. The choice of types of cases is premeditated, and is based on their specific character. Juvenile delinquency cases are special in terms of their subjects (children and adolescence) and aims to be achieved (the welfare of the child/adolescence). Forensic psychology expertise plays a significant part in arriving at a court ruling. Therefore, it is important to raise the quality of diagnostic procedures, expertise activities, and to establish evaluation standards for evidence from psychological expertise. The presentation of proposed psychological expertise standards should take a form of guidelines and recommendations to be met by the experts, and serve as an aid to expertise evaluation performed by courts. To reach these goals, we gathered and analyzed court records of juvenile cases in six districts (N = 253). The results of the research are related to a) the analysis of the methodological and diagnostic procedures used by experts in the process of psychological evaluation in juvenile cases and b) the formulation of principles for evaluating the evidence of psychological opinions for trial authorities. The research project indicates the practice of psychological experts by the court, the diagnostic procedure and the method of formulating psychological opinions. The analysis of the material showed, first of all, the diversity of the diagnostic and opinion practices of psychologists, thus confirming the lack of procedures standardizing the process of psychological evaluation. The variety of assessment tools, and method, and areas of diagnosis make difficulties in assessing of the evidentiary value of psychological-court opinions. The lack of principle for assessing level of opinions’ quality may promote the practice of so-called junk science.

Zgodnie z ideą polityki karnej opartej na dowodach (ang. <i>evidence based crime policy</i>) w celu poprawy obiektywnego i subiektywnego bezpieczeństwa obywateli należy wdrażać takie inicjatywy, których skuteczność i celowość znajdują potwierdzenie w rzetelnie przeprowadzonych badaniach naukowych. Coraz częściej realizacji wspomnianych celów służy monitoring wizyjny cieszący się zresztą społeczną aprobatą. Jako że instalacja i zarządzanie takim systemem są działaniami kosztochłonnymi, kluczową kwestią jest zatem czy — w celu obniżenia poziomu przestępczości — wspomniane wydatki lepiej ponieść na kamery CCTV (ang. <i>Closed-Circuit TeleVision</i>) czy inne środki prewencyjne. Nie sposób jednak — co często zdarza się w praktyce — w ocenie skuteczności narzędzi prewencyjnych poprzestać na anegdotycznych doniesieniach o ich skuteczności. Bez przeprowadzenia wysokiej jakości (w rozumieniu metodologicznym) badań skuteczności monitoringu wizyjnego nie można rzetelnie odpowiedzieć na pytanie, czy jest on rzeczywiście skuteczny w walce z przestępczością. Przeprowadzenie badań ewaluacyjnych służących ocenie skuteczność kamer CCTV wymaga jednak rozważenia kilku kluczowych kwestii. Niniejszy artykuł stanowi zbiór rekomendacji dotyczących prawidłowej ewaluacji skuteczności monitoringu wizyjnego, która powinna zostać zaplanowana już na etapie projektowania systemu. Publikacja zawiera szczegółowy przegląd celów monitoringu wizyjnego, bez określenia których nie sposób wskazać, czy monitoring jest skuteczny (skuteczny to taki, który realizuje zakładane cele). Ponadto wskazuje on w jaki sposób wybrać obszary, w których zostanie przeprowadzona ewaluacja monitoringu, i zaplanować procedurę eksperymentalną. Wreszcie wskazuje, jaką metodę ewaluacji wybrać i w jaki sposób radzić sobie z nieuniknionymi ograniczeniami badań eksperymentalnych nad skutecznością monitoringu.

The aim of the study is to present the results of a quantitative research study entitled“Security in Cracow”, which investigated the fear of crime among the city’s citizensin the years 2014–2016. Under the Agreement for Security concluded between the Cityof Cracow and the Jagiellonian University in 2014, the survey is held two times each year.Both the Agreement and the concept of the presented research arose from the moralpanic that was visible in Cracow in the second half of 2013, following several casesof serious offences committed by football hooligans and a widely publicised homicideof a young student in September 2013.Empirical analysis of the fear of crime faces numerous theoretical and methodolo -gical problems. For the purpose of the present research, an operational definition of fearof crime was adopted, according to which fear of crime is similar to the psychologicalconstruct of attitude, comprised of three components: cognitive, affective and be -havioural. The research was additionally intended to verify the selected hypotheseson the causes of fear of crime, that is the victimisation hypothesis, the vulnerabilityhypothesis and the reduction of social control hypothesis.The research was conducted via telephone interviews (CATI, Computer AssistedTelephone Interviews) six times – in March and September 2014 (N = 1815 andN = 1770), June and September 2015 (N = 1808 and N = 1811), April and September2016 (N = 1820 and N = 1803). The sample was representative for the gender, ageand the district of the city’s residents. The questionnaire included 33 items: 13 itemson the demographic and social participants’ characteristics, and 20 concerning:a) prob lems and threats encountered in Cracow, b) the respondents’ sense of safetyin Cracow, their district of residence and the nearest surroundings, c) victimisation,the likelihood of becoming a victim to a crime, the means adopted to prevent crime,and d) the attitudes towards the services responsible for security and public order.To measure the fear of crime, an index was constructed based on the questionnaireitems referring to its three components. In the light of the results of the past six roundsof the study, the level of the citizens’ fear can be estimated as low. However, a moderatelysized group of citizens was identified whose fear of crime was at a considerable leveland who – in future research – ought to be addressed in a more qualitative manner toexplore the underlying causes of their fear.Evidence was found to support the victimisation hypothesis, according to whichfear of crime is correlated with the experience of being an actual victim of a crime.Additionally, the vulnerability hypothesis that claims fear of crime results fromperceiving oneself as a potential target of criminal activity was partially corroboratedin the light of the obtained results. Evidence was found to support the fear of crimeparadox with reference to gender, though not to age differences. Finally, the reductionof the social control hypothesis states that fear of crime is related to the condition andstrength of the local communities. The obtained results suggest that the respondents’fear of crime is correlated with the perceived disorder in the nearest surroundings, butno evidence has been found that it is related to the disintegration of neighbourhoodties.Fear of crime remains an important social issue which influences the quality ofcitizens’ lives on the individual (personal) level, the level of local communities and onthe macrosocial one. To maximise citizens’ security, it is essential to undertake actionsaddressed to the objective (minimisation of threats and/or dangers) and subjective(focus on citizens’ sense of safety) understanding of safety.The research in question is unique on both the national and the internationallevel. Periodical analyses of this sort based on the same research questionnaire providea rare opportunity to investigate temporal and spatial dynamics of the phenomenonin question. The authors believe that the presented research will contribute to scientificdiscussion concerning the methods of measuring fear of crime and will allow the safety stakeholders to recognise the need for research-based community crime prevention programmes.

The purpose of this qualitative research is to explore the perceptions of Polish judges and prosecutors regarding the role of psychologist expert witnesses in the evaluation of eyewitness testimony. Two main research questions were formulated: What are the criteria for selecting psychologist expert witnesses to participate in interviews and then to formulate expert opinions? What do judges and prosecutors expect from psychologist expert witnesses and their evaluations of eyewitness testimony? In-depth interviews were conducted involving judges (N = 31) and prosecutors (N = 30), both male (N = 35) and female (N = 26). Though other factors, such as availability, were also frequently mentioned, the judges and prosecutors declared that their choices of psychologist expert witnesses were predominantly determined by their professional abilities. These criteria correspond with the characteristics that judges and prosecutors claim to value the most in psychologist expert witnesses: their specialist fields, their experience, and their reliability in carrying out their work. It is of particular importance to the evaluation of witness testimony that judges and prosecutors recognize that, for an opinion to be complete, there is a need for psychological testing and diagnosis in addition to being present at interviews. However, judges and prosecutors do not always recognise the difference between legal conceptions of witness credibility and the assessments of it formulated by psychologist expert witnesses. The research provides an unique insight into the expectations of Polish judges and prosecutors regarding the role of psychologist expert witnesses in evaluating, and reporting on, witness testimony. To identify the aspects of psychologists’ opinions that are particularly valued by judges and prosecutors can enable better cooperation and communication between psychologists and legal professionals.

No abstract