Research in Clinical Forensic Settings

The provision of clinical services in forensic settings is, in some ways, very similar to non-forensic settings. However, forensic populations may provide challenges not typically seen in other settings. One challenge in many forensic clinical settings is the prediction of future behavior. In many cases, the behavior of interest is violence. Violence, like many behaviors that are rare, is, at best, difficult to predict. Much research has been conducted on the various methods used to predict future violence. From actuarial risk measures to clinical intuition, forensic psychology researchers have debated the best way to assess the potential for violent acts.

Other psychological issues found in clinical forensic settings and that trigger research questions include the development of treatment programs to restore an individual’s competency to stand trial, the treatment of the criminally insane, sex offender assessment and treatment, and even the general evaluation of the need for long-term placement. Research can help forensic psychology professionals make important decisions in these and other related areas.

To prepare for this Discussion:

• Review this week’s DVD program, “Application of Psychological Research – Clinical Settings.” Consider the areas of forensic psychology research that are relevant to forensic clinical settings.
• Review the article, “ Actuarial Versus Clinical Assessments of Dangerousness,” in this week’s Learning Resources.
• Pay particular attention to the studies discussed in the article and the key “takeaways” from these studies. Think about how a forensic psychology professional might use the findings of the studies in a forensic clinical setting.
• Using the Walden Library, select and review another study, current or historical, that was conducted in a forensic clinical setting.
• Again, focus on the key “takeaways” of the study you selected and think about how the findings might be used by a forensic psychology professional in forensic clinical settings.

Learning Resources

This page contains the Learning Resources for this week. Be sure to scroll down the page to see all of this week’s assigned Learning Resources. To access select media resources, please use the media player below.

Reading

• Article: Litwack, T. R. (2001). Actuarial versus clinical assessments of dangerousness. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(2), 409-443.

  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Media

• Video: Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Understanding forensic psychology research: Application of psychological research – Clinical settings. Baltimore: Author.

Optional Resources

• Note: Because of the ever-changing nature of websites such as those listed below, there is no guarantee that clips or websites will always be available. Hence, the following links are listed as Optional Resources only. However, it is highly recommended that you view them as they will assist you in completing one or more of your assignments.
• Monograph: O’Toole, M. E. (n.d.). The school shooter: A threat assessment perspective. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/school-shooter
• Article: Boothby, J. L., & Clements, C. B. (2000). A national survey of correctional psychologists. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27(6), 716-732.
• Article: Homant, R., & Kennedy, D. (1998). Psychological aspects of crime scene profiling. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25(3), 319–343.
• Report: U.S. Department of Justice. (2003). Federal Bureau of Prisons drug interdiction activities, report number 1-2003-002. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/BOP/e0302/final.pdf

PSY 201 – General Psychology

Research Consumer Paper

One of the main objectives of this course is to learn how to be a wise consumer of psychological research. This research consumer paper will put you in the consumer role and give you practice understanding and communicating clearly and effectively about psychological research. This paper will focus on intelligently critiquing media coverage of scientific research.

For this paper assignment, you will be reading a set of two articles. The set consists of an original peer-reviewed journal article and a media report covering the research.

Gesturing and creativity

Peer-reviewed journal article: Kirk, E., & Lewis, C. (2017). Gesture facilitates children’s creative thinking. Psychological Science, 28(2), 225-232. Free pdf of journal article: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CE0fB6xYoa0u4WRmRs0hGUWOruN9tWho/view?usp=sharing

Media report:

https://www.ozy.com/acumen/why-wild-gesticulating-could-indicate-genius/75182

Paper Specifics

Carefully read the original peer-reviewed journal article and evaluate the quality of the coverage in the media report. Your overall goal is to use your scientific thinking skills to answer this question: Is this journalist’s claim an accurate representation of the original article, or is it misleading to people?

Your paper should be approximately between 500 – 700 words long and include the following components, in this order. Please use headings to separate the different sections.

Summary of original peer-reviewed journal article

1. Briefly summarize the key aspects of the empirical journal article. What were the main

variables? What was the key finding or findings? What theory do the findings support?

Summary of media article covering the research

2. Briefly introduce and summarize the journalist’s story. Identify and classify any claims that the journalist makes in the headline or in the body of the article. For example, did the journalist make causal claims, correlational (association) claims or descriptive claims? Explain your reasoning.

See Next Page for More

Critique of media article covering the research

3. In light of your understanding of the study as described in the peer-reviewed journal article, analyze and critique the journalist’s coverage of the research. In this section, try to make at least three significant points. Use the following questions as a guide:

• What did the journalist get right?

• What did the journalist get wrong, and why?

• What might the journalist have said differently?

• Were any causal claims made by the journalist accurate? (Apply the information on correlation vs. causation we learned in class).

• Did the journalist focus on the same key finding as the scientists did?

• Did the journalist accurately describe the procedures of the study? Did the journalist leave details out?

• Rephrase or rewrite parts of the journalist’s article to be more accurate, if appropriate (NO DIRECT QUOTES – We seldom if EVER use direct quotes in scientific/technical writing).

Your paper should be typed, double-spaced and submitted to Moodle by 11:55 p.m. on the date indicated in one of the acceptable formats (.pdf, .doc, docx, .rtf).

Grading Guideline