Observation
Observational research is a type of descriptive research that differs from most other forms of data gathering in that the researcher’s goal is not to manipulate the variables being observed. While participants may or may not be aware of the researchers’ presence, the researchers do not try to control variables (as in an experiment), or ask participants to respond to direct questions (as in an interview or survey based study). Instead, the participants are simply observed in a natural setting, defined as a place in which behavior ordinarily occurs, rather than a place that has been arranged specifically for the purpose of observing the behavior. Unlike correlational and experimental research which use quantitative data, observational studies tend to use qualitative data.
For example, social psychologists Roger Barker and Herbert Wright studied how a sample of children interacted with their daily environments. They observed the children go to school, play with friends, and complete daily chores, and learned a great deal about how children interact with their environments and how their environments shape their character. Similarly, anthropologist Jane Goodall studied the behavior of chimpanzees, taking careful notes on their tool making, family relationships, hunting, and social behavior. Her early work served as the basis for future research on chimpanzees and animal behavior in general.
Advantages of Observational Studies
By observing events as they naturally occur, patterns in behavior will emerge and general questions will become more specific. The hypotheses that result from these observations will guide the researcher in shaping data into results.
One advantage of this type of research is the ability to make on-the-fly adjustments to the initial purpose of a study. These observations also capture behavior that is more natural than behavior occurring in the artificial setting of a lab and that is relatively free of some of the bias seen in survey responses. However, the researcher must be careful not to apply his or her own biases to the interpretation. Researchers may also use this type of data to verify external validity, allowing them to examine whether study findings generalize to real world scenarios.
There are some areas of study where observational studies are more advantageous than others. This type of research allows for the study of phenomena that may be unethical to control for in a lab, such as verbal abuse between romantic partners. Observation is also particularly advantageous as a cross-cultural reference. By observing people from different cultures in the same setting, it is possible to gain information on cultural differences.
Disadvantages of Observational Studies
While observational studies can generate rich qualitative data, they do not produce quantitative data, and thus mathematical analysis is limited. Researchers also cannot infer causal statements about the situations they observe, meaning that cause and effect cannot be determined. Behavior seen in these studies can only be described, not explained.
There are also ethical concerns related to observing individuals without their consent. One way to avoid this problem is to debrief participants after observing them and to ask for their consent at that time. Overt observation, where the participants are aware of the researcher’s presence, is another option to overcome this problem. However, this tactic does have its drawbacks. When subjects know they are being watched, they may alter their behavior in an attempt to make themselves look more admirable.
This type of research can also be very time consuming. Some studies require dozens of observation sessions lasting for several hours and sometimes involving several researchers. Without the use of multiple researchers, the chances of observer bias increase; because behavior is perceived so subjectively, it is possible that two observers will notice different things or draw different conclusions from the same behavior.
===============
The activities of forensic psychologists include the assessment of competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility, determining the validity of defenses (such as intoxication, amnesia, dissociative identity disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder), predicting violent behavior, assessing eyewitness testimony and personal injury, providing testimony on appropriate sentencing, profiling, and contributing to child custody evaluations. The most important forensic assessment procedures are the forensic interview and psychological testing, while forensic hypnosis is also sometimes used. Because reliability is questioned, the polygraph is seldom employed.
Competency to Stand Trial
Mental health professionals often conduct evaluations to assist courts in determining whether a criminal defendant is competent to participate in the adjudicatory process.In Dusky v. United States (1960), the U.S. Supreme Court articulated specific functional abilities that defendants must have to participate competently in the adjudicatory process: They must be able to assist counsel, and they must have both a rational and a factual understanding of the proceedings against them.
Most, if not all, jurisdictions recognize only mental impairment—often characterized as “mental disease or defect”—as a basis for incompetence to proceed to adjudication. When questions about a defendant’s mental capacities arise, the courts almost invariably solicit the assistance of mental health professionals (primarily psychiatrists and psychologists) in resolving the issue. These forensic evaluators attempt to inform the court whether, and the extent to which, the defendant’s functional abilities required by Dusky are compromised by psychiatric problems.
A variety of instruments have been developed to help structure these forensic assessments; this entry describes one of the more contemporary competence assessment instruments, the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA).
===================================
MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA).=
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the United States, people accused of crimes have certain rights with respect to the adjudicatory process that are guaranteed by the Constitution. In particular, they have the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination and rights articulated in the Sixth Amendment, which include the assistance of legal counsel, the right to confront their accusers, and the right to trial by a jury of their peers.
Competency to stand trial (CST) is related to the defendant's capacity to engage in a satisfactory level of participation in the court process. While the extant studies focus mainly on assessment-related issues such as assessment methods, guidelines for competency evaluations, and quality of competency evaluations,
or Fitness to Stand Trial requires that a defendant understands the nature and purpose of the legal proceedings against him and be able to effectively cooperate with counsel in his defense. It consists of two components: (1) foundational competence- a basic understanding of the trial process as well as the capacity to provide a lawyer with informational relevant to the trial: and (2) decisional competence- the capacity to make informed, independent decisions. Forensic Psychologist's function is to assess mental retardation, hallucination, delusion etc.
What factors are considered in competency to stand trial CST determinations?
(1) ability to understand the charge; (2) ability to plead to the charge and exercise the right to challenge; (3) understanding of the basic nature of the proceedings; (4) ability to follow the course of the proceedings in broad terms; (5) ability to understand the substantial effect of any evidence and be able to make
According to the American Psychological Association, forensic psychology is narrowly defined as a “specialty in professional psychology characterized by activities primarily intended to provide professional psychological expertise within the judicial and legal systems.”
The American Board of Forensic Psychology defines forensic psychology as “the application of the science and profession of psychology to questions and issues relating to law and the legal system.”
Forensic science examines the scientific evidence at a crime scene—DNA collection and analysis, fingerprinting, ballistics studies and other laboratory work. Forensic psychology applies the study of psychology within a legal framework. Yet both are integral parts of today’s judicial system.
Practicing Forensic Psychology
In an article for the Psychology Student Network in September 2013, Dr. Jane Tyler Ward broadens the original definition of forensic psychology when talking about the practice today. “The practice of forensic psychology, and perhaps the most frequent duty of forensic psychologists, is the psychological assessment of individuals who are involved, in one way or another, with the legal system. Therefore, although it is necessary to have training in law and forensic psychology, the most important skills a forensic psychologist must possess are solid clinical skills.”
Important clinical skills that a psychologist should develop to work within the field of forensic psychology include:
- Clinical assessment
- Interviewing
- Report writing
- Strong verbal communication skills
- Case presentation
- Investigation techniques
- Research studies
- Assessments and consultations
According to the American Board of Forensic Psychology, “the practice of forensic psychology refers to the application of scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge of psychology to inform matters of law within the judicial system, legislative bodies, and administrative agencies.” The board goes on to describe how important it is for new forensic psychologists to learn how to conduct psychological evaluations, treatment, or research in anticipation of legal proceedings; offer expert psychological opinions in the form of testimony or amicus briefs; and to provide trial consultation.
Working as a Forensic Psychologist
What type of work can a psychologist expect to find after studying the science of forensic psychology? According to Marisa Mauro, Psy.D., in an article for Psychology Today, a psychologist might find work in prisons, jails, rehabilitation centers, police departments, law firms, schools, government agencies or private practice. As Dr. Mauro describes, the psychologist provides everything from assessments to screenings, counseling services to crisis management. “The field seems limitless,” say Dr. Mauro. “Psychologists working in forensic psychology research or academic settings may teach or research on any topic in which psychology and the law interact.”
Northcentral University’s Master of Science in Forensic Psychology program* helps prepare you to apply psychological principles in forensic settings and equips you to work within the justice system, with law enforcement, the courts, corrections, and departments of victim services. In this 100% online program, you will be immersed in the psychology of criminality through seven courses specific to succeeding in this cutting edge field, as well as three electives to augment your depth of knowledge. As a master’s student, you will be expected to think critically and apply your problem-solving and creative thinking skills to practical application of forensic psychology, while adhering to ethical principles in research and academics.
According to James Billings, Dean, School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, “NCU’s Master of Science in Forensic Psychology degree has been designed to equip students for the important work of understanding the criminal mind, and the root causes of criminal and antisocial behavior. They will be prepared for a variety of career paths that rely on the expertise of forensic psychologists.”
Forensic science examines the scientific evidence at a crime scene—DNA collection and analysis, fingerprinting, ballistics studies and other laboratory work. Forensic psychology applies the study of psychology within a legal framework.
