Assignment Due 9/7 @ 10pm

I am a psychology major and so naturally a lot of my interest swings on that side. For this reason it is no surprise that I get great enjoyment out of knowing the people behind the ideas and theories that we learn about. For this blog I chose to right about the work of Hugo Munsterberg. I read about him before in another class, but he was brought back to life in chapter two of the text book. Hugo is a key piece of the connection between pscyhology AND law. He is well known for his creation of On the Witness Stand. Here he wrote about things like witness memory, hypnotism, untrue confessions, emotions in testimony, and the prevention of crime. I think it is quite clear how this fits in with the chapter. It spends much time showing how these two different disciplines mesh to form a whole unique area of study. Hugo serves as part of the glue that holds them together. Out of all of these different topics in his work on On the Witness Stand was untrue confessions. From a psychology perspective it is very interesting that someone who is completely innocent would claim that they committed the crime in question. According to Hugo one reason a person might make such a false claim is they are hoping for mercy. To the mind it makes sense that if you come clean for something the authorities seem sure you have done, then they will surely show more mercy than if you drug the process out. They may also feel they have no other choice or are overwhelmed by the "power" of authority. If you would like to read more on explanations why you can check out the following website:

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/false-confessions.html

While I was searching the web I also came across examples of this phenomenon. Hugo reported that he was once asked to give his expert psychological opinion in Chicago on the case of a man that had been condemned to death. The man had confessed to the crime, but Hugo was so sure the man was in fact innocent. Unfortunately the public only tried to show him and his efforts in a bad light. The man, unfortunately, did hang. He did say that the court system could not be held accountable for what happened. People of the legal system, especially then, were not expected to know the unique cases of a person's mind. A man had confessed. In the eyes of the law what more was there to investigate? This is where the argument for a mix of the two fields can be made. By including a professional on the matter of of the mind crises such as these could be avoided in the future. For more on this specific case you can visit: http://psychclassics.asu.edu/Munster/Witness/confessions.htm
In a Congressional hearing last year Ali Soufan, an FBI interrogator, testified that torture cases actually are known to produce false confessions. It appears that this phenomenon isn't something that only happened back then and it may in fact be a real problem with real life applications. I won't go into too much detail, but I found this on a YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO5mpevjqkE

As can be seen from his well-known work there is a lot of fallibility on the part of a witness. They can have problems with memory, there can be too much personal interference leading to recall issues as well as untrue confessions. It is important, in my opinion, to remember that when dealing with people as a form of evidence it is not enough to look at them as pieces of science or fact. Instead you have to look at them as puzzles in their own right and remember everything is subjective. This is where psychology and the law system really meet.

I chose to talk about the legal system in the media because I am one of those people who are obsessed with watching court TV, NCIS, Dexter, Bones, etc. I love watching TV shows that have to do with the law.
Obviously, the media plays a crucial role in our lives today. We have facebook, twitter, and everything has its own website. We have the world at our finger tips and all it takes is one quick trip to Google, and we can find nearly anything we are interested in. When I searched “the legal system in the media” the first thing that came up was a Reader’s Digest article about how the media reporting on legal matters can not only sway a jury, but ruin lives. They list many examples such as Michael Crowly, the man who began as a “person of interest”, then “clearly a suspect”, and finally “the prime suspect” according to Nancy Grace. The article goes on to talk about a school janitor, whose life was ruined because a young girl, age 8, accused him of raping her. His arrest was taped and his life was in shambles. At the rate at which news spreads in this day in age, it’s a wonder that there are any fair juries with no preconceived opinions in a case. Its possible that a juror may have already read about the case, and made an opinion long before they received their jury summons. The Reader’s Digest article concludes with these three things:

“• Call them out -- Most journalists listen to feedback. If someone's getting an unfair rap, protest to the network, newspaper, or magazine.

• Reward good behavior -- Some commentators take admirable care to presume that people are innocent until proven otherwise. Let them know you've noticed.

• Spread the word -- If you suspect a trial by media, contact a local columnist, e-mail a press watchdog organization (two nonideological sources are factcheck.org and cjr.org), or let us know at letters@rd.com.”

http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-people-and-stories/media-influences-the-legal-system/article81290.html

There is another article about a juror who was blogging during a trial, one that included charges for two felonies. This juror was apparently blogging his opinions on everything, from the defendant to his lawyers, calling them “riff-raff”. This clearly showed that he had an opinion before the trial was over, thus grounds for a mistrial. Luckily when the defendant filed for an appeal, he was denied, but there was a chance that he could win his appeal, just because one juror couldn’t keep on his blog for a few days.
http://news.cnet.com/Police-Blotter-Did-blogging-juror-affect-DUI-trial/2100-1030_3-6217783.html

Finally, why are people obsessed with crime or law TV? CBS news says that we like crime shows because it satisfies many of our entertainment needs, something gruesome and disgusting happens, beautiful people spend an hour or so solving this crime, and by the end of the episode everything is fine and dandy once again. There you have it, humans are obsessed with good vs. evil, gore, beauty, and happy endings, not necessarily in that order. Crime dramas give us all of that in one drama filled package. Since a majority of the things that happens on crime shows, such as super computers and solving a murder in few days don’t really happen, it makes it all the more interesting to watch these super humans go about their business, putting away those evil doers who threaten our society. Unlike real life, crime shows don’t have unsolved murders; they don’t have victims whose families never get closure. This article also mentions something that is quite interesting, Rene Balcer, executive producer for Law and Order said, "The second story ever told was a murder mystery - you know, the first story ever told was Adam and Eve, a love story. The second story, Cain and Abel."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/sunday/main6488704.shtml

After reading through chapter one, I was easily drawn to the section(s) over clinical psychology. I am currently a psychology major, and the field of clinical psychology has really interested me. As I was reading through your section over 'Psychological Treatments' (which is one of the basic wedges for understanding psychology), I discovered something about clinical psychology that I never knew before. I was surprised to see that this area of psychology just developed within the past 50 years. So, I decided to do some research over this fact first.

In the rise of clinical psychology, there was a man named Lightner Witmer. He opened his own psychological clinic in 1897 to evaluate and treat cases of psychological problems. Witmer's first case was a teenage boy with spelling problems. After treating the 14-year-old, he successfully got rid of the problem. Witmer's success was quickly noticed and soon other cases were brought to him. Many believe that his clinic was the beginning of clinical psychology and school psychology. After several years of working single-handedly at his clinic, he came out with a journal, named "The Psychological Clinic". In this journal, he had a lead article, entitled "Clinical Psychology", and in this article, he discussed and laid out a program for doctoral training. Overall, Witmer was a very intelligent man with many great ideas. However, much of his clinical work does not resemble our practices we have today. But Witmer had a very good understanding that our difficulties were usually a product from our cognitive and behavioral problems. He also introduced us to treatments and techniques to help clients.

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/.../annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.143758

Now that I've read a bit of the history of clinical psychology, it brings me to another question: what is clinical psychology like today? Like I said before, Witmer's work does not resemble what clinical psychologists do today. So, what do they do? The Clinical Psychologist is educated and trained to generate and integrate scientific and professional knowledge and skills so as to further psychological science, the professional practice of psychology, and human welfare. (Society of Clinical Psychology Division 12, 2008) Whew, that sure is a mouthful. To break it down, I believe clinical psychology is designed for understanding, preventing, and helping others with psychological problems. Also, I believe it is important that clinical psychologists encourage a healthy well being and state of mind. I also read that they are involved in the research aspect of psychology. There are other aspects they deal with, but I believe these were the most important to discuss. Another key element is that clinical psychologists work directly one on one, in person, with a client. There is no specific age group they deal with, it can be any age and any person.
When it involves assessing someone, the clinical psychologist will determine the nature, causes, and potential effects of the persons problem(s). Another way to look at clinical psychology is through intervention. When they hold an intervention, that is for the prevention, treatment, and correction of the problem. Overall, clinical psychologists are here to work with anyone who has a problem, and they will try to diagnose the problem, then treat the problem through several techniques and research methods.

http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/aboutcp.html

Finally, I was curious as to what kind of jobs or job titles to clinical psychologists have? As I was browsing, I quickly realized that there are MANY job opportunities for clinical psychologists. They are not just limited to a private practice or mental hospital, but they are also found in general hospitals, rehabilitation centers, medical schools and universities, clinics and schools. These psychologists deal with a wide variety of cases. It can be short term crisis or chronic illnesses, for example depression. Another thing to keep in mind is that clinical psychologists work very closely with medical professionals to help them treat the patient. If you are a clinical psychologist, you are not typically licensed to prescribe medication to clients. In some clinical psychology careers, you can have an emphasis or sub-specialty. For example, some psychologists might decide to work with only children who have been sexually abused, or substance abuse counseling. Overall, looking at some of the job opportunities for clinical psychology, I can see there are many ways you can go with it. It's a wide open field, but it will require a doctorate degree!

http://www.psychologyjobs.com/clinical-psychology-jobs/

I decided to choose to talk about different colleges that someone could attend to get a masters or doctorate degree in Forensic Psychology. I will be focusing on two. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology and John Jay College of Criminal Justice in NYC. I have actually been looking at attending John Jay since my senior year of high school. So when the opportunity presented itself for me to share the opportunities available at John Jay I had to jump on it. The masters program at John Jay focus on how to understand, evaluate and treat both offenders and victims within the criminal justice field. Masters students at John Jay will either complete a 300 hours externship under the supervision of a licensed psychologist or a masters thesis. http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/academics/691.php
Now to get admitted into the John Jay school for a masters program a student must have a minimum of a 3.0 GPA, A minimum score of a 1000+ on the GRE, and 3 academic letters of recommendation. http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/2044.php
At the Chicago School of Professional Psychology a masters degree is offered in Forensic Psychology at both the Chicago and DC branches. A really cool thing about the Chicago School is that students get to design their own program emphasis. Through the schools forensic center students get the opportunity to work hands on in the community through various organizations. Students also get the opportunity to apply what they are learning in mock trials, crimes, and events incorporating all fields of psychology. http://www.thechicagoschool.edu/content.cfm/forensic
SO...how do you get admitted in the the Chicago School of Professional Psychology. Well you must have a GPA of 3.0 or greater, you must provide a curriculum Vitae or resume, 3 letters of recommendation, college transcripts, and A 500-750 word essay. http://www.thechicagoschool.edu/content.cfm/ma_application_requirements
So what does all this have to do with the textbook or our psychology and law class? Simple without the education and resources behind you that make you a well rounded and unique individual there is no way you could ever have a career in psychology and law. These schools provide the foundation to help mold a generation into critical thinkers and analyzers who will help to change policies we have today into the visions of the future. So I guess what I'm trying to say is find a school that fits with what you would like to accomplish in your life.

While reading chapter one the section about the citizens part of the criminal justice system caught my eye. One on the most important ways citizens can participate in the justice system is to serve jury duty which i would love to do, i have been called to jury duty one time when i was 18 but i wasn't able to go because i was out of the country. Ever since i got called i wondered why i was able to get out of it and how that actually worked since my parents took care of it for me. So i decided to look into the details of jury duty; who is eligible to serve, what if you don't serve, how do you get chosen once you get called and what kind of benifits do you recieve when you serve.
There are certain people who no matter if they want to serve or not they are not elibible to. These people include: those who cannot speak english, those withmental disabilities, persons 70 and older, those who have served recently, non citizens, felons, persons in prison or jail, those who participate in the legislature, and judges. So if a person who falls into one of these categories gets called for jury duty they simply have to write to the jury administrator explaining their reason for being disqualified.
If you do get called to jury duty and you decide for any reason not to report on the day you were instructed it is considered a criminal infraction and you will be fined $136 or be held in jail in contempt of court.
The initial selection for jury duty is randomly selected from a list of names of all the citizens. Once these jurors are selected they are given a questionnaire to fill out to determine if they qualify to serve. From those who qualify the court randomly selects those who will come to serve. This process ensures that there are a variety of people in the jury. These people then meet in front of the court and the judge and attorneys ask questions to determine if they would be able to try the case fairly. The attronys can dismiss individuals for any reason and don't have to give a reason why.
Those who are actually selected to sit in on the trial and be a juror do get a few compensations, if you are employed full time their employeer is required to pay their regular wages for the first 5 days of trial, if you are not employeed full time the state will reimburse you up to $50 a day for the first 5 days. For any days following the 5th day they state will pay $50 per day. If you have children who have to go to a daycare or babysitter during the trial you can be reimbursed $50 per day. So the state does try to make it as non intrusive as possible in terms of loosin wages while you serve but it is a part of you civic duty and is important to do even if you do loose a little money.

http://www.jud.ct.gov/jury/faq.htm#paid
http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/JuryService.aspx
http://www.co.pierce.wa.us/pc/services/lawjust/juryservicespecifics.htm

i chose to write about criminal profiling. it is something that has interested me for many years. it fits into the second chapter because it is one of the careers that exists at the crossroads between psychology and law. information about my three sources is below:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-criminal-profiling.htm
this source provided me with a lot of information that i hadn't previously known about profiling. the major thing i learned from this article is the categories of offenders defined by profilers. first is an offender known as an organized offender...they are often meticulously organized and stake out their crime/victim beforehand. also these offenders are likely to bring any tools or weapons to the crime scene that they feel they will need. next is an offender known as a disorganized offender...they often pick their victims at random and their crimes are spontaneous. the crime scene of a disorganized offender will appear very random and sloppy.

http://www.suite101.com/content/a-brief-history-of-criminal-profiling-a243246
this article provided a brief, but detailed history of criminal profiling. i found it very iteresting, and i liked that it didn't just touch on all the wonderful parts of profiling. the article did touch on the effectiveness of profiling if enough information can be obtained to form a detailed profile. however, when the profile is vague, it can often be almost useless to investigators. also, since profiling is not an exact science, an incorrect profile could possibly hinder an investigation because it leads detectives in the wrong direction. the article states that although profiling is very useful and shouldn't be viewed as worthless, it should generally be used as a last chance type of tool...when you've analyzed all the evidence and utilized all your tools you should go for a profile to try and narrow your suspect pool and focus the investigation.

http://www.wikihow.com/Become-an-FBI-Profiler
this article was really interesting because it gave a very straight-forward and honest representation of what it took to become an FBI profilier. i say it's an honest article because the first step it lists is to understand that there isn't actually a position within the FBI titled 'criminal profiler.' however, they do inform the reader that members of the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime (NCAVC) do create profiles of violent criminals, among other responsibilities. the rest of the article outlines what it would take to become a member of the NCAVC. for example they make it known that you can't just apply to the FBI and hope to instantly work for the NCAVC. you have to work your way up, many people in the NCAVC have at least 10yrs of prior service, including experience with violent crime and/or abduction.

these three articles provided me with a lot of knowledge about profiling that i didn't previously have. i found these three articles very helpful because they contained information on such vastly different topics within profiling. i learned about the history, some of the basics of profiling, and what it would take to become a profiler (tho that title doesn't technically exist).

Eyewitness testimony has always been very influential evidence in the courtroom. I chose this topic because it has always interested me to hear stories of how people who swore they saw something… could get it wrong and in their testimony. I came upon it in the chapter, reading about how Hugo Munsterberg was interested by the very same thing. He talks about a bar fight, which people saw two radically different situations. When I was browsing the internet for information on this topic I was bombarded with websites talking about the problems with eyewitness testimony.
The first thing I came across was something I had actually learned in my social psychology class. It was the experiments of Elizabeth Loftus who had done an experiment with memory. The subjects of the experiment were shown a picture of a car at a yield sign. When talking about the picture they were able to ask questions and slide in the word ‘stop’ sign instead of ‘yield.’ This experiment was successful. Proving that a person’s memory can be easily manipulated, even by accident.
One thing that has been found about memory is that it fills in gaps that may happen in order to complete the memory. If perhaps you’ve heard snippets of a conversation, you could tie them together to make sense to you, but that may not be what was actually said. So if logically you felt something could happen next, then you might assume it happened and that assumption is put in memory and becomes part of it, with no regard to whether or not it’s true.
Another factor is that no one ever tells a story without a purpose. So when someone is telling a story, they have a key audience, and reason, and reaction that they expect from their story. So in telling it they could change details, or perceive them differently based on the situation they’re in as opposed to if they were with different people, and telling it for a different reason.
The worst part about all of this information is that jurors put a ridiculous amount of weight on eyewitness testimonies. It has been suggested that a psychologist is hired to evaluate the eyewitness testimony for the jury in order to help their decision. Even then, what could be more convincing then the victim pointing to the defendant to say “He did it!” These days there is DNA evidence to help out weigh the eye witness testimony. In fact, of those who have been sentenced to life in prison, based at least partially on eyewitness testimony, ¾ of these inmates have been cleared based on DNA evidence. Even so not every case has that kind of evidence.
The last clip- from CBS News is a story about a girl who was raped. During the rape she committed herself to studying the man and making sure she knew exactly who he was so if she lived through it she could put him away. She ended up running from him, and told the detective she could identify him. She went through a picture line up and then another physical line up of men and both time picked the man who was eventually sentenced to life in prison for raping her and another girl. She was positive. She was wrong.
It is more than a little unsettling to read about this and see what it has done to the lives of so many. Eyewitness testimony would be a wonderful thing, if it worked 100% of the time. However memories are so easily manipulated or misinterpreted, it’s just not a logical reliable method.
http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm

http://psy2.ucsd.edu/~hflowe/eyetest.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5153451n&tag=related;photovideo

I decided to look into criminal profiling, since it's my goal to be one someday. This relates to Psych & Law because profilers usually must have some kind of psychology degree, but also work w/police and other law enforcement to help them figure out the kind of person that would commit a particular crime. Usually, there are 3 different types of criminals: organized, disorganized and mixed. Organized criminals are typically very intelligent, are fairly social and have stable jobs. They will pick out their victim very carefully and are generally careful to leave minimial clues behind. Disorganized offenders, however, usually have lower intelligence and are not social butterflies. They will typically live alone or with a relative (usually their mother) and will have a poor work history, often moving from job to job. They usually pick random victims and will leave many clues behind; they aren't careful to "clean up" afterwards. These two types of criminal are pretty easy for a trained profiler to spot and work a profile up for. Mixed types, however, are harder. These criminals will mix both organized and disorganized elements into the crime. For instance, they may pick a victim out at random, but will be very careful to clean up the crime afterwards.

Criminal profilers aren't exactly common. In fact, despite all the shows that have profilers, it's very difficult to get a job as one. Most profilers work part-time, supplementing their income with teaching and/or writing. There are very few police departments that can afford to have a profiler on the payroll, and the FBI doesn't need a lot of them either. According to Pat Brown, a fairly well-known profiler, you must be in pretty good mental health to be a profiler. Oh, and not be easily addicted to things like drugs, alcohol, or sex. He also recommends you be older, since you will have more experience of the dark side of life. I may be too bubbly to be a good profiler :)

Finally, I looked at the FBI website to see what I could find. I would love to work as a profiler for the FBI; they are probably the best able to pay me a lot of money :) Besides, they get national cases and there would be a good chance I would be able to help catch the criminal before they commit any more crimes. According to their website, they aren't hiring profilers.... but they are hiring forensic accountants. I suck at math, otherwise I might have a shot. There actually wasn't a "profiler" tab; it would fall under the psychology, sociology tab. I also looked at the requirements for becoming a special agent. They are pretty extensive. You must be between 23-37 and have a four year degree. You must also have worked in your area of expertise for at least 3 years. You must pass a physical and if you fail it three times, you cannot be a special agent ever. You must also past a vision and hearing test and a medical check. They also give you a very, very thorough background check, which includes talking with past/present employers, relative, friends, and others who know you. They also give you a polygraph. Based on all this, maybe I should just counsel people..... but I still really want to profile.
http://www.patbrownprofiling.com/profile.html
http://www.fbijobs.gov/111.asp
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-criminal-profiling.htm

The topic I chose to research more in depth is developmental psychology. This topic fits into the textbook in the chapter where the different disciplines of psychology are described; developmental psychology is one such discipline. I am very much interested in this field because I hope to someday work with either children or senior citizens as an occupational therapy. I find it fascinating to learn about how an individual develops from a few cells to an infant, all the way to a teenager and up through adulthood. In particular I find the development of children to be very interesting. What especially interests me is learning about developmental delays because I want to work with children who aren’t following the typical developmental timeline. It is my career and life goal to help these children overcome these developmental delays. For these reasons I find the field of developmental psychology to be very interesting.
The first website I found details the developmental milestones that the typical child should reach by the certain ages. For example, it lists that by age 7 months the child should be able to turn his or her head when name is called, smile back at another person, respond to sound, and enjoy social play like peek-a-boo. These developmental milestones are listed all the way through 5 years old. I find this very helpful in determining whether a child is developing on track with his or her age group. Of course every child is different, and just because a milestone hasn’t been reached doesn’t mean the child is developmentally delayed. But it does give a good guideline and is a useful resource for parents. Also on this page is information about child development screening. It explains what development screening is, the importance of this screening and also gives information about developmental delays and what should be done if the child has a delay. I found this to be very informative. One thing I learned that I did not previously know is that children should be screened for autism at 18 months. I was surprised by this because I didn’t realize that autism could be diagnosed at such an early age. But I now know that it’s extremely important for autism to be diagnosed as early as possible so treatment can have the most impact. I found this page as a whole to be very interesting and informative.
http://www.child-autism-parent-cafe.com/child-development.html
I am particularly fascinated with the developmental disorder autism. I hope to one day treat children with autism and help them adapt to the world around them. An article I found from Aol News is very interesting and discusses a finding I had never heard of. The researchers have developed a computer program that is able to distinguish between the speech of normal children and children with autism. It is able to correctly identify more that 85% of the children as autistic or non-autistic. This seems to me like a huge stride in determining how to diagnose autism in children. It’s critical to diagnose the disorder in as early an age as possible, but so far it has been a long and difficult process for doctors to diagnose the disorder in children. But this discovery could make it very possible for the diagnosis to be made early enough for effective treatment to be put in place. This article made me very excited that strides are being made to understand the disorder and help children overcome their autism.
http://www.aolnews.com/science/article/autism-study-babys-babble-may-contain-vital-clues/19559884
On the opposite end of the lifespan is senior citizens, those who are aging and nearing the end of their lives. Some believe that people only develop and grow up through adolescence, and once they reach adulthood they no longer develop. This is not true, and in fact psychology still very much applies to the study of adults and older adults. In the third article I found the topic of aging and depression is discussed. Events that take place later in life are very difficult, such as the death of friends and loved ones, chronic illnesses, and the decline of mobility. All of these can take a big toll on the mental health of senior citizens. This article explains that all of these events are often accompanied by anxiety, loneliness, social withdrawal and depression. I found this article very intriguing, for the typical image of senior citizens are cheerful men and women enjoying retirement and spending time with loved ones. But on the flipside of this there is a lot of emotional and physical upheaval, all of which can negatively impact the person’s mental wellbeing. Depression is a very real disease that can lead to very harmful effects. By reading this article I was made more aware of the psychology behind aging and the tendencies toward depression in the elderly.
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/aging-depression.aspx
To conclude, the topic of developmental psychology is a very wide discipline that encompasses everyone from infants to the elderly. Much can be discovered about humans by studying this field.

I am a psychology major, but am also very interested in the law, so I decided I would look into a specific area of psychology and how it relates to the law. I chose to look up developmental psychology. Developmental psychology is the study of behavioral changes throughout a person’s life. Developmental psychology becomes involved with the law by doing relevant research and consultation with children and adolescents. The biggest issue with children’s law and elderly law is competence. There are people that believe that children and the elderly can’t make decisions for themselves. Examples would be: seeking an abortion, refusal or acceptance of medical treatment, and to decide which parent they would prefer for custody. A major area of interest for developmental psychologists is children in court, whether they are a witness or a victim of a crime. There are two concerns with this: the child’s right not to be traumatized or abused by the legal system, and the accuracy of children as witnesses. Theres a question as to whether children are capable of standing trial and whether they make things up and if they can distinguish fact from fantasy. Studies have shown though, that children rarely make up memories of non-existent events. Children can be highly suggestible though. Some states now allow children’s testimonies to be videotaped, so they can be later displayed in a courtroom and a child doesn’t have to actually go through sitting in a courtroom and testifying and possibly being traumatized. I found this very interesting, I’ve never heard of it before. I looked into this more to see if this worked or not. I couldn’t really find any solid evidence as to what this does in a courtroom, but my source said that it does protect the child from the stress of testifying in court, but it also could influence the juror’s perceptions of the child and the defendant and juror’s verdicts. It suggested that jurors would perceive the prosecution witnesses and their testimonies more favorably, the defense witnesses and their testimonies less favorably, and give more guilty verdicts than jurors who viewed identical testimony during the course of a trial.

I really liked reading about the different types of psychology in chapter one. The one that really interested me was personality psychology, especially personality disorders. I have always been interested in why people act the way they do and what causes them to act that way.

I am very interested in how people develop personality disorders. While researching it I read that it has to do with both genetic and environmental factors. I think that makes sense, but I think it is different for everyone which affects them more, because I have seen siblings go through the same situations and have it affect them all differently. I am most interested in what causes someone to develop a personality disorder. A lot of the web sites said the same thing, that childhood experiences have a lot to do with it. I am a psychology major and when I graduate I wanted to work with children and I think this is something I could get into by working with young children and adolescence who are showing signs of a personality disorder.

I learned that there are a lot of different types of personality disorders and they are put into clusters. Cluster A are the odd and eccentric personality disorders. Cluster B are the dramatic and emotional personality disorders. Cluster C are the fearful and anxiety personality disorders. I find cluster A the most interesting of them all and I kind of find these disorders to be more confusing of how someone develops these kinds of disorders. Cluster A also seems to be the least common of them all, and I have never met or dealt with anyone with any of these disorders.

While I would like to help treat people with a personality disorder, I find it really sad that it seems like most disorders will never completely go away, but can be helped by many different things, especially medications and psychotherapy. I also think that trying to help someone with a personality disorder would be very difficult because it would be very hard to understand them. However I think it would always be a very interesting job!

https://health.google.com/health/ref/Personality+disorders

http://www.nmha.org/go/information/get-info/personality-disorders

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-different-types-of-personality-disorders.htm

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/personality-disorders/DS00562/DSECTION=treatments-and-drugs

I chose to do some research on Abnormal Psychology in Law. The majority of the population when they think about Psychology they think about Abnormal Psychology. Well, I have always been fasicnated in the topic of Abormal Psychology, and like most Psych. majors it was my first exporsure to the science of Psychology, and what really peaked my interest.

In class we are viewing the crimininal legal system as a timeline. I took this same approach in my "mini" reasearch project on Abnormal Psychology. From my findings/previous knowledge is that Abnormal Psychology and more specifically the mentall illness takes a prominent role in the legal system. At almost every point in the "criminal time-line" Abnormal Psychology takes a substantial role. Obviously, not every case or individuals is assoicated with the Abnormal Psychology but from my data I've discovered there are some major connections between Abnormal Psychology and the legal system.

Two thirds of prisoners nationwide with a mental illness were off treatment at the time of their arrest, according to a new study by Harvard researchers that suggests under-treatment of mental illness contributes to crime and incarceration. [emphasis added] http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2009/01/18/undertreatment-of-mental-illness-causes-crime/

This statement was from Psychcentral showing the significance of mental illness in the legal system. The statistics clearlly show that there is something going on with abnormal psychology and crime. Now obvious this is far too complex of concept to sum up with one aspect. Crime is a complex issue, however, there has been some findings to show a correlation between crime/mental illness. The extent of the correlation is still a mystery.

However, now that a crime is commited the individual must be incarcerated. This creates a whole new set of issues and problems for not only the individual but the institutions designated to look over this individuals. This article states that our Prison systems are the psychic wards for the mentally ill. It points out, however, that the majority of prison workers are not properly trainned and educated on the mentally ill. This makes prison even more difficult for the prisoners and the guards.
http://mentallyillinprison

Another website says that since there is such a vast number of mentally ill individuals in our prison system there are countless issues popping up. Once again prison staff members are not properly trained to deal with these types of issues. Therefore, suicide, substance abuse, and medication have become major concerns for the mentally ill in prisons. Here are some intreseting facts I found on this website. These stats. show the importance of abnormal psychology in the legal system.

Suicide is the third leading cause of death in U.S. state and federal prisons, exceeded only by natural causes and AIDS.

While in prison, most inmates receive minimal medical treatment for substance abuse, except for detoxification. Long-term relapse prevention is limited to self-help groups, like Alcoholics Anonymous, and therapeutic communities.

A recent study (2006) by the U.S. Department of Justice5 found that more than half of all prison and jail inmates have a mental health problem compared with 11 percent of the general population, yet only one in three prison inmates and one in six jail inmates receive any form of mental health treatment.

Found this in my backup posts, apparently I missed this assignment:

I also looked into eyewitness testimony and was shocked to find out that its legitimacy in the courtroom is actually really low. I always assumed "hey, if someone saw that guy do it, he did it." But have found from reading the chapter and browsing online that this is simply not the case.
According to The Innocence Project's website, of the more than 200 exonerated cases by way of DNA evidence, 75% of those convicted wrongfully at the hands of 'expert' eyewitness identification.

http://innocenceproject.org/understand/Eyewitness-Misidentification.php

Despite these incredibly high errors, jurors still take eyewitness identification to be compelling evidence to lock someone up.

What exactly is seen during a traumatic event like a crime can be falsely interpreted, wrongfully recorded, or just downright forgotten and then recreated later. Ive read that witnesses attempt to fit, or 'catalog', an event in their mind to match what they're either used to seeing or want to have seen. Of course this is not done intentionally, but by human nature, the brain seeks to process and interpret events in a nature it finds most comfortable.

Dr. Neil Tyson makes this argument by discussing the validity of UFO 'sightings' and how, despite popular science, the sole 'evidence' for UFOs has been eye witness accounts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfAzaDyae-k

A perfect example of eyewitness mis-identification (though troubling) was in the case of Jennifer Thompson who was raped at knife point by an attacker in 1984. During the rape, Jennifer made every attempt possible to memorize all features of her attacker to identify him later. THE SAME EXACT DAY Jennifer went to the police station to have a composite sketch drawn up. Later, her alleged attacker Ron Cotton was in custody and she testified against in him trial, swearing it was him.
Ronald Cotton spent 11 yrs in prison for a crime he did not commit, DNA evidence later freed him of any wrongdoing. The actual attacker was in a the same courtroom with Jennifer a year later and she did not recognize him. The man that raped Jennifer was within a few feet from her and she again swore it was really Ronald Cotton.
Now, Jennifer was looking her attacker in the face WHILE he was raping her. A traumatic experience but Jennifer was face to face with her perpetrator yet wrongfully identified an innocent man who spent over a decade in prison.
http://faculty.washington.edu/gloftus/Other_Information/Legal_Stuff/Articles/News_Articles/Thompson_NYT_6_18_2000.html

An interesting video just to try out your own cognitive skills:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47LCLoidJh4

http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm