Forensic psychology and correctional psychology: Distinct but related subfields of psychological science and practice.

Neal, Tess M. S.

doi:10.1037/amp0000227

Cited by 30 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, "they need to learn a lesson." Neal (2018) discussed exactly these kinds of problems resulting from correctional treatment staff being trained in forensic assessment curricula.…”

Section: A Culture Of Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inside of a prison: How a culture of punishment prevents rehabilitation.

Bloom¹,

Bradshaw²

2022

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States spends over $80 billion to hold 2.3 million individuals in prison. Despite these expenditures, 68% of released prisoners are arrested within 3 years of reentry, 79% within 6 years, and 83% within 9 years. Incarcerated citizens leave prison more alienated, more traumatized, and less capable of prosocial skills than when they entered prison. The reasons for prison rehabilitation failure are clear. The prevailing philosophy in prisons is based on punishment, which psychology has demonstrated in countless studies, exacerbates fear, anger, aggression, deception, and often proclivities for depression and suicide. Furthermore, the majority of prisoners have experienced abuse and trauma prior to incarceration. The punishment-based prison culture functions as retraumatization by maintaining a sense of fear and insecurity and promulgating a distrust of authority, all of which lead to hostility and violence which then, exports to the community outside upon release. Observations from over 8 years of working with prisoners deemed to be "violent" in a high security state prison are provided along with supporting research that offers more effective alternative approaches. We provide specific recommendations regarding the implementation of trauma-informed processes to resolve these challenges which will significantly improve public safety. Public Significance StatementDrawing from observations from inside a men's maximum security prison, we document and discuss how current U.S. prison staff culture, based on punishment and prisoner objectification, exacerbates violence and undermines rehabilitation success. Most prisoners have experienced trauma, the majority of whom have sustained a series of severe traumas including early relational trauma, all of which is highly causal to violent behavior. Commensurate with established psychological theory and data, we assert that any possibility for successful rehabilitation, as well as within prison wellness, requires building a prison staff culture shaped by trauma-informed approaches, which focus on models of accompaniment, the cultivation of positive and supportive relationships with prisoners. Such transformational change leads to prison and community violence reductions.

show abstract

“…Thus, "they need to learn a lesson." Neal (2018) discussed exactly these kinds of problems resulting from correctional treatment staff being trained in forensic assessment curricula.…”

Section: A Culture Of Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inside of a prison: How a culture of punishment prevents rehabilitation.

Bloom¹,

Bradshaw²

2022

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Integration into existing training programs : Formal training opportunities in correctional psychology are needed across training levels (Neal, 2018). Although the CCM for Corrections training we articulate is by necessity targeting existing clinical staff within a state prison system, it could be integrated within earlier educational phases in doctoral psychology graduate programs, practicums, and/or internships within correctional settings.…”

Section: Additional Considerations In Designing and Implementing Ccm ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The core competency model for corrections: An education program for managing self-directed violence in correctional institutions.

Cramer¹,

Kaniuka²,

Peiper³

2022

Psychological Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-directed violence (SDV), comprising both suicide and self-injury, presents a continued public health challenge for correctional institutions. In fact, correctional settings are one of four primary targets for the reduction of SDV by leading professional organizations. This article presents a public health solution to SDV in correctional settings, namely the Core Competency Model for Corrections (CCM for Corrections), an educational program for correctional mental health providers. Grounded in the general CCM of Suicide Prevention, we proffer an evidence-based sample curriculum covering 10 SDV prevention competencies in correctional settings. These competencies address both clinical care (e.g., enacting evidence-based treatment plans, using best practice documentation standards) and provider-focused (e.g., managing personal attitudes about SDV and incarcerated persons, engaging in self-care and debriefing) skills. We further espouse the underlying social-cognitive theory of CCM for Corrections toward the goal of identifying mechanisms of action for improved SDV prevention skills. Finally, we highlight considerations in the initial design and testing of CCM for Corrections. These recommendations address (a) utilization of a community–academic partnership approach and corrections SDV advisory panel, (b) selection of an in-person or online training modality, and (c) measurement of sample educational program outcomes. The CCM for Corrections represents a promising approach to SDV reduction and management in correctional settings ripe for collaborative pilot testing.

show abstract

“…Forensic psychology is a subfield of psychology in which psychological science or professional practice is applied to the law to help resolve legal, contractual, or administrative matters (Neal, 2018). Forensic psychology has grown steadily in recent years, as evidenced by the APA’s recognition of forensic psychology as a specialty area of psychology, its addition of a special section on “forensic activities” to the ethical principles and code of conduct for psychologists, and its publication of specialty guidelines for forensic psychology (see, e.g., APA, 2013; Neal, 2018). As of 2017, 7% of all licensed psychologists in the United States had a primary or secondary area of specialty in forensic psychology, and 8% of all board-certified psychologists in the United States were certified in forensic psychology (Lin, Christidis, & Stamm, 2017).…”

Section: Part I: a Systematic Analysis Of Psychological Assessment Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Establishing the scientific foundations of psychological assessments used in high-stakes contexts such as legal proceedings is particularly critical. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has attended to the psychometric properties of psychological assessment tools in some settings (see, e.g., Hall v. Florida , 2014, focusing on statistics regarding the standard error of measurement in intelligence tests), some of the psychological assessment tools and methods of expert judgment admitted into court might not be admitted if subjected to serious scrutiny (Neal, 2018; Otto & Heilbrun, 2002). The time is ripe for an investigation of the scientific status of psychological assessments used in legal contexts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Assessments in Legal Contexts: Are Courts Keeping “Junk Science” Out of the Courtroom?

Neal

Slobogin

Saks

et al. 2019

Psychol Sci Public Interest

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we report the results of a two-part investigation of psychological assessments by psychologists in legal contexts. The first part involves a systematic review of the 364 psychological assessment tools psychologists report having used in legal cases across 22 surveys of experienced forensic mental health practitioners, focusing on legal standards and scientific and psychometric theory. The second part is a legal analysis of admissibility challenges with regard to psychological assessments. Results from the first part reveal that, consistent with their roots in psychological science, nearly all of the assessment tools used by psychologists and offered as expert evidence in legal settings have been subjected to empirical testing (90%). However, we were able to clearly identify only about 67% as generally accepted in the field and only about 40% have generally favorable reviews of their psychometric and technical properties in authorities such as the Mental Measurements Yearbook. Furthermore, there is a weak relationship between general acceptance and favorability of tools’ psychometric properties. Results from the second part show that legal challenges to the admission of this evidence are infrequent: Legal challenges to the assessment evidence for any reason occurred in only 5.1% of cases in the sample (a little more than half of these involved challenges to validity). When challenges were raised, they succeeded only about a third of the time. Challenges to the most scientifically suspect tools are almost nonexistent. Attorneys rarely challenge psychological expert assessment evidence, and when they do, judges often fail to exercise the scrutiny required by law.

show abstract

Forensic psychology and correctional psychology: Distinct but related subfields of psychological science and practice.

Cited by 30 publications

References 64 publications

Inside of a prison: How a culture of punishment prevents rehabilitation.

Inside of a prison: How a culture of punishment prevents rehabilitation.

The core competency model for corrections: An education program for managing self-directed violence in correctional institutions.

Psychological Assessments in Legal Contexts: Are Courts Keeping “Junk Science” Out of the Courtroom?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About