Teaching Forensic Psychology: Psychology in the Courtroom
by Brenda Russell
Castleton State College
Castleton, Vermont
Misconceptions Spread by Court TV
As I write this, Court TV and television news report the latest on the trial of 15-year-old Christopher
Pittman, accused of killing his grandparents when he was 12. If convicted, he faces up to 30 or more
years in prison. He offers the use of antidepressants, Zoloft and Paxil, as his defense. A finding of guilty
but mentally ill or insane will result in hospitalization for an undetermined period of time. This murder
case is the first of its kind to argue the safety and use of antidepressants in children.
For many students, the term forensic psychology brings to mind glamorized depictions of specialists
solving crimes using elaborate crime labs complete with unlimited resources, not the experts involved in
the Pittman debate. Often these perceptions are not correct. With the advent of Court TV, and television
portraying forensic sciences and forensic psychology as one entity (e.g., CSI, Profiler, Forensic Files), it
is no wonder why students may have the wrong impression of what constitutes forensic psychology.
One major misconception is that the role of the forensic psychologist is that of a "profiler." I find this
even among the applicants to our forensic psychology graduate program. It is likely that many high
school teachers of psychology have experienced students who come to them for advice because they
would like to be a profiler. Profiling is only one of many possible roles for forensic psychologists. For
teachers of introductory psychology and AP courses, my aim is to clarify some of the misconceptions
associated with the term forensic psychology.
Defining the Field
Forensic psychology is generally associated with one of two perspectives: clinical or research. It should
be noted that these perspectives are not mutually exclusive. Many clinicians conduct research, and
many researchers also provide clinical assessment or treatment in legal contexts. Forensic
psychologists typically obtain their master's or doctoral degrees within various subfields in psychology.
Clinicians often obtain licensure before working with the courts.
Within these two perspectives, there are four general roles for forensic psychologists. First,
thebasic forensic psychologist might conduct research on legal issues and publish their research.
Second, applied forensic psychologists may be clinicians working directly with the court and clients,
and/or using the latest research to impart information as an expert. Third, a forensic psychologist may
be a policy evaluator, evaluating whether laws regarding speed limits lower rates of fatal accidents or
whether seat belt laws are effective. Last, the forensic psychologist may be an advocate -- paid to work
for the prosecution or defense (e.g., jury consultant).
The first perspective suggests forensic psychology be broadly defined. In this respect, the application of
psychological methods, theories, and concepts to the legal system can be considered forensic
psychology. In other words, research associated with topics such as delinquency, victimology, jury
decision making, eyewitness testimony, or attitudes toward the death penalty can be considered
forensic psychology. Also falling within this realm is applied research with regard to evaluation of public
policy or treatment at state or federal agencies such as correctional facilities.
Expert Testimony
In this regard, researchers may be called in as experts to testify about their own research findings that
relate to a specific case or to speak in terms of their research findings in a more general framework
(providing social framework from which legal actors can make more informed decisions). Such
information may come in the form of expert testimony or case or legislative briefs (Monahan and
Walker, 2002). For example, if a psychologist conducted research on the effects of antidepressants and
psychotic behavior leading to murder or the safety of antidepressant use in children, that psychologist
may be called to testify for the defense in the Pittman case.
In contrast, clinicians work directly with clients and the courts. Clinicians may conduct research to
develop assessment tools (e.g., predicting the future dangerousness of an offender), provide treatment
or intervention, or examine prevalence and incidence of forensic disorders. As practitioners, they may
provide treatment or assessment in correctional settings or police departments, or they may be called to
testify in a case with regard to insanity or competency. Forensic assessment can be done during or
before trials, assisting the prosecution or defense in describing the defendant's state of mind or
culpability. Clinicians may be called upon by the courts to aid in decisions of child custody or civil
commitment, or to give opinions associated with effects of a particular mental illness to help shed light
on a defendants' behavior. They may also explain such things as the extent to which the defendant or
plaintiff exhibited symptoms, repressed memories, dangerousness, or rehabilitation.
The Pittman case exemplifies where many of these facets of forensic psychology collide, often with
conflicting conclusions. A forensic psychiatrist (trained as an MD) in the Pittman case testified for the
defense, stating she believed Pittman committed the murders while in a psychotic state induced by
Zoloft. However, prosecutors have their own team of experts and clinicians testifying Christopher knew
what he was doing when he killed his grandparents. Clinicians for the defense team attempted to
demonstrate Pittman was not legally responsible for his actions and to show he was insane or mentally
ill at the time of the crime, based on his use of antidepressants.
Profiling and Behavioral Science
Although this discussion is designed to help educators guide high school students regarding the
realities of forensic psychology, many students will still profess an interest in becoming a profiler.
Profilers obtain information from all aspects associated with the crime in order to create a biographical
sketch that provides demographic, personality, and behavioral characteristics to help law enforcement
direct their investigations.
The FBI's Behavioral Science Unit (BSU) has a team of a few dozen profilers. However, students must
realize that most have been FBI agents in the field for many years before they are considered for BSU.
The FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia, offers classes in profiling, as do many forensic psychology
graduate programs. To date, there is no accredited or accepted curriculum to become a profiler in either
law enforcement or the psychological community.
Regardless of the route chosen to become a profiler, job prospects for the future profiler remain fairly
poor. And despite the proliferation of profilers in media and television, there is little empirical research to
support the effectiveness of profiling.
Conclusion
As I complete this paper, I realize that I have hardly scratched the surface of the many roles of the
forensic psychologist. It is important to note when directing high school students that while the
bachelor's degree provides the basis in the field, the minimum educational requirement for
psychologists is a graduate degree. While some programs offer concentrations in forensic psychology,
specializations typically begin during graduate studies. Specialties in forensics psychology may be
subsumed under subfields such as neuropsychology or clinical, social, or legal psychology. Many
career opportunities exist in forensic psychology. Undergraduate and graduate programs are stepping
up to provide training for the future forensic psychologist.
Twenty-five years ago, most people would not know what a forensic psychologist was, and 25 years
later, we still struggle with an accepted definition. Limiting forensic psychology to criminal or civil courts
or to research or clinical-based fields seems constricting and neglects the contributions of each study of
the legal system. But whether we broaden the definition, accepting the term with its many varied
aspects or not, experts under the umbrella of "forensic psychology" will continue to help us understand
complexities such as those found in the Pittman case.
Reference
Monahan, John, and Laurens Walker. Social Science in Law: Cases and Materials. 5th ed. New York:
Foundation Press, 2002.
Brenda Russell is associate professor and coordinator of the forensic graduate program at Castleton
State College in Vermont. Her research interests include social psychological aspects of jury decision
making, program evaluation, gender differences in sexual harassment and assault, female aggression
and male victimization.