History of Forensic Psychology

1
Jacqueline B. Helfgott and Joslyn K. Wallenborn

Key Points

• Origins of forensic psychology began in Ancient Greece and India with insanity
defenses, which gained modern traction in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century
Europe
• Forensic psychological research progressed in the United States and Europe in
the nineteenth century with a focus on eyewitness testimony, memory recall, and
practical application to the practice of law
• From the 1960s through the 2000s, forensic psychology distinguished itself
academically and professionally as an established field
• Today, the scope of research and professional practice has broadened and diver-
sified to include forensic evaluation, risk assessment, and treatment of civilly
and criminally confined populations
• The future of the field will face challenges and possibilities in the assessment of
diverse populations, the ethics of labeling, and technology advances

J. B. Helfgott (B)
Department of Criminal Justice, Criminology & Forensics, Seattle University, Seattle, WA,
USA
e-mail: [email protected]
J. K. Wallenborn
Criminal Justice Division, Washington State Office of the Attorney
General, Seattle, WA, USA

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 1

C. Garofalo and J. J. Sijtsema (eds.), Clinical Forensic Psychology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80882-2_1
2 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

Introduction

This chapter begins with an overview of the historical origins, development, and
milestones of the field of forensic psychology in order to provide a deeper under-
standing of how the field has evolved as a practice and profession, leading to
examination of how modern forensic psychology has distinguished itself both
academically and professionally as an established field that incorporates clinical
treatment, robust research and theory, and formal standards. The definition and
scope of forensic psychology will be discussed with attention to the range of
disciplines and subfields in the behavioral and social sciences, interdisciplinary
theories of criminal behavior, key theorists and researchers that have contributed
to the development of the field, and the role and importance of forensic psychol-
ogy in the study of criminal behavior and criminal justice and forensic practice.
The current state of forensic psychology is examined with attention to the broad
and diversified scope of research and professional practice to include forensic
evaluation, risk assessment, and treatment of civilly and criminally confined pop-
ulations. Historical lack of attention to race in the field of forensic psychology
and the differential impacts on Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC)
within the criminal justice system is explored, followed by analysis of how crim-
inal psychology in the media and pop culture has affected decision-making by
jurors. Further, the role and importance of the practical application of forensic
psychology in the criminal justice system will be examined with attention to the
roles and careers offered in this field. Challenges and possibilities for the future of
the field will be discussed with respect to the assessment of diverse populations,
the ethics of labeling, and technological advances.

Evolution of the Field

Historical Origins

The first uses of forensic psychology can be traced back to Ancient Greece and
India in which criminal insanity defenses were used for individuals who had
intellectual deficits (Gutheil, 2005). Contemporary origins of forensic psychology
first took root in Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries with an initial
focus on insanity defenses and, later, the psychology of testimony. An early case
in Britain involved an assassination attempt on King George III by James Hadfield
in 1800 who shot the King at a London theater (Brigham, 1999; Moran, 1985). At
trial, Hadfield successfully asserted an insanity defense by attributing his criminal
1 History of Forensic Psychology 3

behavior to a head wound suffered years earlier (Brigham, 1999). This case was
significant because until this time, one had to be considered entirely out of contact
with reality (as was not the case for Hadfield) to meet the standard for an insanity
defense it prompted the passing of the Criminal Lunatics Act of 1800 which
made indefinite confinement the standard outcome for insanity acquittals, rather
than release (Brigham, 1999; Moran, 1985).
On the clinical forensic psychology frontier, French physician Phillippe Pinel
introduced the novel concept of “manie sans délire,” or mania without delusion, in
one of the earliest conceptualizations of insanity as a moral rather than intellectual
affliction (Maughs, 1941). This was significant because, historically, conceptions
of insanity had been intrinsically linked with delusion, delirium, and diminished
intellect (Maughs, 1941). This development paved the way for future research,
diagnoses, and clinic work in psychopathy (Helfgott, 2019).
Nearly a half century later, in 1843, a shopkeeper, Daniel McNaughten,
attempted to assassinate British Prime Minister Robert Peel. At trial, McNaughten
had nine medical experts testify that he was insane at the time of the attack and
the jury returned a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. This resulted in the
“McNaughten Rule,” which established a clearly defined legal standard for insan-
ity defenses that remains the standard for many American courts (Finkel, 1988).
These events mark milestones in the early development of forensic psychology
that shaped jurisprudence and foreshadowed changes to come.

Early Development

As the end of the nineteenth century neared, J. McKeen Cattell (1895) broke
ground on another forensic frontier: The psychology of testimony. In his 1893
study, Cattell asked his students to recall the weather from one week prior.
Answers varied wildly, which affirmed long-held notions that eyewitness mem-
ory recall is notoriously unreliable (Cattell, 1895). Cattell (1895) highlighted the
practical value and applicability of his findings to eyewitness testimony and psy-
chological expert witnesses in courtroom settings. Joseph Jastrow, Alfred Binet,
and (Louis) William Stern conducted similar experiments evaluating eyewitness
accounts. Stern (1939) asserted that the expert testimony of psychologists is the
“true psychological wisdom which we must strive to incorporate in responsible
representatives of law…around the world” (p. 14). During this time, an early aca-
demic journal emerged, the Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice (1900–2016),
now the Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice (2017–present),
which signaled the continued growth of forensic psychology.
4 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

As the twentieth century got underway, two rising intellectuals with diver-
gent perspectives, Sigmund Freud and Hugo Munsterberg, both recognized the
importance of the practical application of psychology to the field of law and
thus attempted to integrate psychology into the legal system (Brigham, 1999;
Schuller & Ogloff, 2001). In a 1906 speech, Freud (1906/1959) compellingly
argued that psychology was valuable to the fact-finding process in legal proceed-
ings when he posited, “The task of the therapist … is the same as that of the
examining magistrate. We have to uncover the hidden psychical material; and
in order to do this we have invented a number of detective devices, some of
which it seems that you gentlemen of the law are now about to copy from us”
(Brigham, 1999, p. 108). Similarly, Munsterberg (1908) published On the Witness
Stand (1908) to illustrate the significance of psychology to the practice of law
and the decision-making processes of judges, juries, and attorneys. Munsterberg
(1908) stressed, “[T]he lawyers might learn endlessly more from the psycholo-
gists” (p. 64) and that “the psychological experiment could be made helpful to
the purposes of court and law” (p. 76). However, both Freud and Munsterberg
had a flair for the dramatic and neither were taken very seriously in their attempts
to convey the importance of psychology to law (Bartol & Bartol, 2013; Moran,
1985). Ultimately, their efforts, though harshly critiqued at the time, contributed
to progressive discourse about the nascent discipline of forensic psychology and
envisioned changes to come.

Legal Milestones

Despite these strides, attempts to incorporate psychology into the legal arena
remained relatively isolated until the mid-century when several landmark court
cases served as catalysts to greater integration of these disciplines (Schuller &
Ogloff, 2001). In Hidden v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. (1954), the court ruled that
a psychologist’s testimony was admissible in a civil proceeding. That same year,
Brown v. Board of Education (1954), historically significant for its racial deseg-
regation of American schools, also contributed to the advancement of forensic
psychology, as testimony was provided by psychologists for both parties, though
some of their research is now considered controversial (Bartol & Bartol, 2013).
Further, a “social science” brief written by psychologists was submitted to the
court and cited in the momentous decision (Bartol & Bartol, 2013; Brigham,
1999; Schuller & Ogloff, 2001). However, the permissibility of expert testimony
by psychologists in criminal cases remained an unresolved issue. Finally, in Jenk-
ins v. United States (1962)), the court ruled that psychologists were qualified to
1 History of Forensic Psychology 5

offer expert testimony in criminal cases regarding mental disorders and that a
medical degree was not necessary to do so. This decision had profound implica-
tions for the forensic psychological practice and increased the frequency of court
testimony by psychologists (Bartol & Bartol, 2013; Schuller & Ogloff, 2001).

Developments—1960s Through 2000

Following these legal victories, the field of forensic psychology continued to

distinguish itself both academically and professionally, firmly taking root as
a legitimate and established field. Indicative of these changes, the American
Psychology-Law Society was created in 1969, which marked the field’s first
formal professional organization, which began to hold professional conferences,
publish academic journals, conduct research, and establish field standards (Grisso,
1991). In 1978, the American Board of Forensic Psychology offered a foren-
sic psychology board certification (Otto & Heilbrun, 2002). Further, a number
of scholarly journals emerged including Criminal Justice and Behavior (1974–
present), Law and Human Behavior (1977–present), and Legal and Criminological
Psychology (1996–present).
During this period, forensic psychologists also established themselves as treat-
ment providers (Otto & Heilbrun, 2002). In 1991, standardized guidance was
published by the American Academy of Forensic Psychology and the American
Psychology–Law Society (Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psy-
chologists, 1991). On the heels of these strides, Loh (1981) declared that the
field of forensic psychology had “come of age” (p. 345). Though Loh (1981)
and others celebrated a century of progress, the field was not void of criticism.
In a critique leveled against the evolution of forensic psychology as aimless and
haphazard, Ogloff (2000) implored forensic psychologists to seize a more active
role in influencing the development of law and advancing social justice.

Forensic Psychology Today

Over the past two decades, forensic psychology has indeed delivered on Ogloff’s
(2000) call to action: Forensic psychology has taken an active role in law and
social justice initiatives both in research and practice. Forensic psychology has
continued to grow rapidly and was officially recognized as a specialization within
6 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

psychology by the American Psychological Association in 2001. Today, the dis-

cipline is burgeoning with intellectual capital as evidenced by the plethora of
academic journals that publish progressive research and theory.
The scope of research and professional practice has broadened and diversified
within the past two decades to include attention to risk assessment(McCallum &
Eagle, 2015) (Chapter 25), improvement of forensic evaluation and treatment
of unique populations, such as civilly committed sexually violent predators
(Chapter 22), treatment of incarcerated individuals within criminal justice system,
forensic neuropsychology (Cheng et al., 2019; Larrabee, 2011), the role of trauma
in criminal behavior, psychopathy, and forensic mediapsychology (Luskin, 2015).
Forensic psychology has also seen continued growth and shifts within legal,
criminal, and police psychology, as well as victimology. Restorative justice, an
alternative model of justice focusing on harm reparation through practices that
include reconciliation and restoration through dialogue between victims, individ-
uals who have committed crimes, and community members, has been recognized
as an area in which the expertise and training of forensic psychologists can be
particularly valuable (Noll, 2003).

Race in Forensic Psychology

One area of particular importance in any discipline that intersects with the
criminal justice system is racial disproportionality. In the 1980s, psychology
scholars advocated for the implementation of multicultural competence and train-
ing requirements for psychologists which resulted in the publication of the
“Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic, Linguistic, and
Culturally Diverse Populations” (APA, 2003), and the “Guidelines on Multi-
cultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for
Psychologists” (APA, 2006) and the Council of National Psychological Associ-
ations for the Advancement of Ethnic Minority Interests (2000) developed the
Guidelines for Research in Ethnic Minority Communities. Both APA guidelines
were approved as APA policy and Council of the National Psychological Associa-
tions guidelines was recommended by the APA Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs
and was published by, though not approved as policy of, the APA.
As has been the case in psychology generally, forensic psychology has his-
torically shown limited focus on race. In an examination of the focus on race in
forensic psychology research, Carter and Forsyth (2007) investigated the extent
to which forensic psychology journals addressed issues of race in empirical arti-
cles during the period between 1998 and 2003. The researchers found that out
1 History of Forensic Psychology 7

of the total 493 empirical articles analyzed, 47.5% (234) made no mention of
race or culture, 43% (212) identified the race/ethnicity of their study sample but
did not address race or culture in any other section of the article, and 9.5%
(47) of the articles addressed race and culture in depth. While the authors found
that between 40 and 80% of published research over the past three decades in
psychology as a whole across the range of subspecialties failed to report the
race/ethnicity of study participants and those studies that did address race or
culture, used White comparison groups, racially/culturally invalid measures, and
failed to address within-group differences.
The historical lack of attention to race in the field of forensic psychology is
of critical importance considering the disproportionately high representation of
Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) within the criminal justice sys-
tem (Crutchfield et al., 2010; Kovera, 2019; Krohn & Fox, 2020). These results
suggest that this lack of attention to the issue of race in the history of foren-
sic psychology has left theoretical and empirical blind spots that hinder nuanced
understanding of BIPOC. In forensic psychology, the use of forensic instruments
that have not been validated for BIPOC that utilize collateral data that leave open
the possibility for racial bias in forensic assessment instruments and evaluations.
Thus, while forensic psychology as a field has seen enormous growth, histori-
cally there have been considerable gaps between APA policy and practice where
issues of race and culture are concerned that have critical implications for foren-
sic psychology. Forensic psychologists increasingly play a role in informing legal
decisions that have implications for individual liberty in criminal justice systems
rooted in systemic racism.
As a result of increased attention in recent years for the need for research
focusing on race and intersectionality, the APA Task Force on Re-envisioning
the Multicultural Guidelines for the twenty-first century produced the report,
“Multicultural Guidelines: An Ecological Approach to Context, Identity, and
Intersectionality,” which was developed out of a need to update the 2003 guide-
lines and from a “need to reconsider diversity and multicultural practice within
professional psychology at a different period in time, with intersectionality as
its primary purview” (APA, 2017). The 2017 guidelines call on psychologists
to recognize many of the gaps such as assessment tools that are not validated
with diverse populations, reliance on primarily White samples in research, and
the need for culturally adapted interventions that have particular implications for
forensic psychology.
8 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

Media and Pop Culture

The motivations and inner-workings of the “criminal mind” is a frequent topic

of attention that has brought forensic psychology center stage. People are eager
to understand the “whys” of criminal offending and despite many explanations
within the body of research and theory of criminal behavior, extreme and violent
criminal behavior is often culturally understood by orienting them within psy-
chological theories and explanations. Common depictions of the psychology of
criminal behavior within crime media portray mental illness, insanity defenses,
and psychological histories, as well as the forensic professionals who profile,
assess, investigate, and apprehend them. Rise in popularity of television shows
such as Mindhunter, Criminal Minds, and Law & Order, documentaries such as
Night Stalker, American Murder, and Killer Inside, films such as Copycat, Taxi
Driver, Cape Fear, and Silence of the Lambs, and podcasts such as Serial and
Dr. Death has cultivated public awareness of criminal psychopathology. Crime
podcasts, in particular, such as My Favorite Murder, Serial, Criminal, and oth-
ers have gained particular traction with female audiences (Boling & Hull, 2018;
Moskowitz, 2020). These media depictions are important to the extent that they
have the potential to influence jurors and public perceptions that may impact men-
tal health and criminal justice-related decisions, legislation, and policy and have
the potential to increase interest in forensic psychology academic programs. For
example, content analysis research examining depictions of psychopathy on the
television show Dexter emphasizes the potential of crime television to influence
public perception of psychopathy (Berryessa & Goodspeed, 2019).
Much of the popularity of forensic psychology over the last 30 years can in
part be attributed to media and popular culture depictions in the 1990s. The film
Silence of the Lambs (Demme, 1991) which followed its precursor Manhunter
(Mann, 1986), based on the novels The Silence of the Lambs and Red Dragon by
Thomas Harris (1981, 1988) depicting the work of FBI profilers who served as
consultants for the film (Jenkins, 1994), was arguably one of the most popular
films in history that brought attention to the intersection of psychology, crime,
and criminal justice. While the main characters in Silence of the Lambs—Clarice
Starling (an FBI agent) and Hannibal Lecter (a forensic psychiatrist), were not
forensic psychologists, The Silence of the Lambs popularized the use of psycho-
logical theories used by the behavioral sciences unit of the FBI, most recently
depicted in the Netflix series Mindhunter (Kono et al., 2017–2019) based on
the books Mind Hunter: Inside the FBI’s Elite Serial Crime Unit (Douglas &
Olshaker, 1996), Crime Classification Manual (2006), and Sexual Homicide: Pat-
terns and Motives (1992). Other popular films and television shows that followed
1 History of Forensic Psychology 9

portrayed forensic psychologists engaged in applied work in criminal justice such,

Dr. Helen Hudson in the film Copycat (Amiel, 1995), Dr. Tara Lewis in the TV
series Criminal Minds (Gordon et al., 2005–2020), and Dr. Alex Cross in the film
Kiss the Girls (Fleder, 1997).
The proliferation of media attention to forensic psychology has affected the
way jurors listen to evidence and make decisions about verdicts and has influ-
enced the views held by students interested in pursuing academic education and
careers in forensic psychology. Media accounts of what forensic psychology is,
what forensic psychologists do, and the roles played by forensic psychologists
and other professionals such as criminal investigators and medico-legal death
investigators are often confused in the media and impact students’ expectations
as they embark on career pathways. While raising attention to the field of forensic
psychology and to subjects such as criminal psychology, psychopathy, forensic
assessment, and criminal profiling, media depictions often do not reflect real-
ity. The number of films, TV programs, memorabilia, and true crime novels
depicting serial killers and profiling in the 1980s disproportionately surpassed the
actual number of serial murder cases and embellished the effectiveness and role
of criminal profilers in serial murder investigations (Jenkins, 1994). “Through
a proliferation of forensic programs, from Law and Order to C.S.I. to Crimi-
nal Minds, the mass media have offered the public a haphazard education about
forensic investigation. While audiences have gained greater sophistication in how
crimes are solved, they have also formed erroneous ideas and expectations that
can negatively affect the judicial process (Ramsland, 2009, p. 38).

Key Theories and Research

While media depictions of forensic psychologists have potentially spurred

increased interest in the field of forensic psychology, the growth of the field
has largely been the result of enormous growth in theory and research in the
intersection of psychology, law, criminology, and criminal justice. Theoretical
constructs provide orientations through which to make sense of psychological
processes and behavior. Legal psychology, criminal psychology, police psychol-
ogy, and victimology are the four key subfields of forensic psychology examined
in this chapter. Research and theory are also discussed to provide deeper insight
into each of these interdisciplinary orientations.
10 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

Legal Psychology

Legal psychology is the scientific study and practice of psychology in the legal
system. Research and application of this interdisciplinary topic are valuable at
all stages and all forums of the court system. The wide variety of subjects
involved include family law, child custody, child testimony, competency, foren-
sic assessment, jury psychology, interpersonal violence, eyewitness memory, and
false confessions. Research, assessments, and opinions can be proffered at court
through testimony or written reports. Forensic psychologists are able to provide
expertise not otherwise attainable from other legal actors that can help determine
need, guilt, and innocence, ultimately creating lasting impacts on people’s lives.

Criminal Psychology

Criminal behavior has long captivated both scholars and society alike. Those who
struggle to fathom what drives one to commit crime, violent and heinous acts
especially, are fascinated by the inner-workings of the criminal mind. Consider-
able effort has been devoted to elucidating the motivations of criminals. Criminal
psychology is the study that delves into the psychological complexities and moti-
vations of the criminal mind and the related practices within the criminal justice
system. Unraveling the criminal mind is complex work that demands the expertise
of psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, criminology/criminal justice schol-
ars, and others alike, which taken together, may explain some criminal behavior
for some people at some time (Helfgott, 2013). Within the body of work that
has been devoted to criminal psychology, there are seemingly limitless theories
about criminal behavior that range from psychopathological, physiological, bio-
logical, neurological, environmental, sociological, developmental, political, and
situational, to name a few. Many of these theories are complex in their own
right and are often interwoven with one another. Although some have been pro-
posed (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990), there is no universal theory that explains all
crime. Criminal behavior is the product of chain of events influenced by an infi-
nite possibility of variables and individual-environment interactions that can be
closely examined and deliberately interrupted (Helfgott, 2008). Criminal behavior
is diverse; it varies across time, culture, circumstances, and by characteristics of a
person such as age, gender, location, and ability. The duality of criminal behavior
is that it is both unique and universal at once.
Modern criminology was born in the mid-1700s and this period marks the
early origins of the study of criminal behavior and the role of psychology in
1 History of Forensic Psychology 11

understanding the criminal mind. Classical criminology of the 1700s that located
the roots of crime in free will and utilitarian motives drawing from the works
of Jeremy Bentham and Cesare Beccaria shifted to positivist criminology in
the 1800s and into the 1900s and the search for deterministic causes of crime
(Jones, 1986). With this shift, psychologists played an increasing role in the
study and treatment of criminal behavior. Recognition and evolution of the con-
struct of psychopathy (Shipley & Arrigo, 2001a, 2001b), discourse about the
demarcation of madness from badness and the law of insanity (Elliott, 1996),
and early correctional reform efforts (Barnes, 1972; Foucault, 1995) laid a mul-
tidisciplinary pathway for theory, research, and practice in criminal psychology
today. The psychology of crime and criminal behavior has gained increased atten-
tion over the past century. Hervey Cleckley’s seminal 1941 work The Mask of
Sanity, Krafft-Ebing (1906) Psychopathia Sexualis, and other work set the foun-
dation for discourse and debate over the terminology and classification criteria
for sociopathy, antisocial personality disorder, and psychopathy in editions of the
American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders. Later works—including Menninger’s (1968) The Crime of Punish-
ment; Yochelson and Samenow’s (1976) Criminal Personality; Groth’s (1979)
Men Who Rape; Kernberg’s (1984) Severe Personality Disorders; Meloy’s (1988)
The Psychopathic Mind; Marshall et al. (1990) Handbook of Sexual Assault;
Raine’s (1993) The Psychopathology of Crime; Blackburn’s (1993) Psychology
of Criminal Conduct, Johnson’s (1995) Hard Time: Understanding and Reform-
ing the Prison, and correctional psychology scholars including Paul Gendreau,
Susan Turner, Doris MacKenzie, Ed Latessa, Frank Cullen, Patricia Van Voorhis,
and others (Cullen, 2005)—were among those responsible for reviving empirical
interest in psychological theories of crime that had been criticized during the
anti-psychology/psychiatry movement of the 1960s and 1970s spurred by writers
such as Szasz (1961) and Kittrie (1971) and the demise of the correctional reha-
bilitation era originating in part from Martinson’s (1974) article in The Public
Interest, “What Works?—Questions and Answers about Prison Reform.” These
scholars and works were instrumental in laying the foundation for increasingly
sophisticated empirical research in criminal psychology and criminal behavior
and growth of the field.
12 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

Psychological Theories of Crime

Criminal behavior has been of great curiosity to psychologists since the inception
of psychology and continues to sustain robust interest and relevance today (Black-
burn, 1993). Psychological theories offer micro-level explanations of criminal
behavior that look to early psychodynamic development, information processing
and cognition, and conditioning processes. In the pursuit of explaining violent
and shocking crime, psychological theories have been heavily drawn upon with
emphasis on personality and mental disorders. More specifically, research has
applied a composite of cognitive, behavioral, and psychodynamic orientations to
analyze the development of functional concepts of psychopathy and criminality
(Meloy, 1988; Walters, 1990).

Psychopathy

Psychopathy (Chapter 15) is recognized as one of the most important clini-

cal constructs in the criminal justice system (Babiak et al., 2012; Hare, 1993,
1998). Psychopathy is a unique clinical condition characterized by the “jux-
taposition of affective interpersonal traits with antisocial behavior” (Hare &
Neumann, 2006, p. 84) along with an inability to form human attachment and
aggressive narcissism (Meloy, 1992). Early definitions of psychopathy often mis-
characterized the condition as “insanity” or “psychosis,” of which it is neither
(Helfgott, 2019). Classic personality traits of psychopathy include superficial
charm, grandiosity, pathological lying, and lack of remorse. Behavioral features
of the disorder include poor behavioral controls, impulsivity, irresponsibility, and
criminal versatility.
Historically, the assessment and treatment of psychopathy have been a central
topic area for the field of forensic psychology given the high prevalence of psy-
chopathy in criminal populations. Research on psychopathy has provided strong
support for its association with criminal recidivism, violence, and dangerousness.
The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) (Hare, 1991, 2003) has provided a
critical standardized and validated tool for the forensic assessment of psychopa-
thy as attention has been directed to ethical issues in the use of the construct
of psychopathy in criminal justice decisions in particular in using the label as
applied to youth (Boccaccini et al., 2008; Jones & Cauffman, 2008) and in high
stakes decisions in the criminal justice system such as capital sentencing (DeMat-
teo et al., 2020). The PCL-R is an unparalleled measure of psychopathy that is
widely utilized throughout the criminal justice system for clinical assessment and
1 History of Forensic Psychology 13

research (Hare, 1998). Comprised of a 20-item checklist that measures the affec-
tive, interpersonal, and behavioral features of the disorder, the PCL-R is now used
around the world (Sullivan & Kosson, 2006). The PCL-R has been established
as a valid and reliable measure of psychopathy and a strong predictor of violent
recidivism, dangerousness (Gacono, 2000; Hare, 2001, 2003; Harris et al., 1991;
Hare, 1998; Hemphill et al., 1998; Hodgins, 1997; Litwack & Schlesinger, 1998;
Salekin et al., 1996; Serin & Amos, 1995) and determinant of high criminogenic
offender risk/needs (Simourd & Hodge, 2000).

Biological and Neuropsychological Theories

Adrian Raine’s (1993, 2013) neuropsychological perspective has given new life
to theories exploring the biological roots of crime (Chapter 3). Raine asserts that
criminal behavior is a clinical condition based on brain scan studies of convicted
murderers that reveal striking deficiencies in prefrontal cortex activity when com-
pared to noncriminal scans. Further, Raine contends that brain imaging affirms
that the roots of criminality stem from inherited genes and an individual’s partic-
ular neuroanatomy, which raises important questions about culpability. However,
this neuroscience is controversial, as some associate it with antiquated biological
theories of the past. Early theorists who looked to biology for the explanation of
criminal behavior, such as Lombroso’s (1911) study of inferior atavistic traits in
his 1876 book Criminal Man, were later critiqued as racist and obsolete. Never-
theless, researchers continue to explore the link between the brain and criminal
behavior.

Behavioral Theories

Behavioral theories form a logical foundation for the explanation of criminal

behavior (Chapter 10). The two behavioral theories considered here are condition-
ing and learning theories. Conditioning theories aver that behaviors are shaped
through stimulus pairing (classical conditioning) and reinforcement and punish-
ment (operant conditioning). Conditioning theories are rooted in the research of
early behavioral theorists B. F. Skinner (operant conditioning) and Ivan Pavlov
(classical conditioning). As applied to crime, these theories posit that exposure
14 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

to positive and negative reinforcement will increase or decrease criminal behav-

ior. In learning theory, criminal behavior is produced by social learning in which
one’s decision to commit crime is achieved through observation and association
with others.

Interdisciplinary Theoretical Perspectives

Understanding the underlying causes of criminal behavior is complex and there

has been recognition among scholars that explanation and prediction of criminal
behavior lies in theoretical and disciplinary integration. Forensic psychological
theories are an important piece in interdisciplinary theories of criminal behav-
ior. A number of key theories in criminology rely on integrating psychological
and sociological theories to explain criminal behavior including Gottfredson and
Hirschi’s (1990) General Theory of Crime, Sampson and Laub’s (1993) Adult
Social Bonds theory, and Moffitt’s (1993) Adolescent-Limited and Life-Course
Persistent Theory of Antisocial Behavior.

Police Psychology

Police psychology is the study and application of psychological knowledge and

clinical practice to law enforcement to enhance police and public safety and
well-being. The exact origins of police use of psychologists are unclear (Bar-
tol & Bartol, 2013), however, there is documentation that German police agencies
were using psychologists as early as 1919 (Viteles, 1929). The application of
clinical forensic psychology in police work involves psychological screening of
law enforcement candidates, fitness-for-duty assessments, and police counseling.
Policing is a highly stressful occupation that can exact severe mental and physical
tolls such as burnout, compassion fatigue, post-traumatic stress disorder, depres-
sion, and anxiety. For these reasons, psychologists play an integral role in police
work. Going forward, police psychologists can use clinical forensic psychology to
play a critical role in informing sound hiring decisions that are inclusive of diver-
sity and reflective of the community, leading crisis intervention and de-escalation
training, guiding community engagement, and providing mental health services
to police personnel.
1 History of Forensic Psychology 15

Victimology and Restorative Justice

A central role of forensic psychologists is facilitating victim healing and recovery.

The experiences of crime victims are diverse and complex and can have both
short- and long-term effects. Many traditional mental health therapies are utilized
by forensic psychologists to help victims through this process in victim services
and in restorative justice programs.
Victimology is the study of those who have experienced real or threats of phys-
ical, psychological, social, or financial harm related to an attempted or actual
crime. Victimology examines how victims are socially perceived and defined,
why some are more vulnerable to victimization, why victims behave in cer-
tain ways, how victims are treated within the criminal justice system, the costs
and consequences of being harmed, and how victim healing can be facilitated.
Application, practice, research, and training may focus on child abuse, elder
abuse, intimate partner violence, mass casualty violence, workplace violence,
sexual violence, stalking, hate crime, sex trafficking, prison rape, and other
crime. Assessment, treatment, research, training, victim advocacy roles, crime
prevention, and legislative, law, and policy change are just some of the roles
victimologists fill.
Restorative justice is a model of justice that focuses on crime as harm, cen-
tralizes the victim, and works to balance victim, offender, community needs,
and interests in an attempt to repair harms and restore justice. The restorative
justice model of justice process is a striking shift from retributive traditions
that is aligned with North American Indigenous practices (Hand et al., 2012).
Restorative justice borrows concepts of reconciliation, mediation, negotiated res-
olution, community justice, peacemaking, and reintegrative shaming for purposes
of reconciliation, closure, accountability, harm reduction, community building,
and destigmatization (Noll, 2003). Restorative justice principles and practices
are embedded in many forums including victim-offender mediation (Umbreit &
Greenwood, 2000), prison-based encounter programs (Helfgott, et al., 2000a,
2000b, 2002; Lawrence et al., 2004; Lovell et al., 2002a, 2002b; Liebmann &
Braithwaite, 1999; Swanson, 2009), and other initiatives across the criminal
justice process (Van Ness & Strong, 2015).

Forensic Assessment

Forensic assessments conducted by clinical psychologists aid legal fact-finders

and practitioners in decision-making processes (Chapter 25). Forensic assessment
16 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

tools published and made available for widespread use in the 1990s contributed
to an explosion of empirical research on forensic assessment of dangerousness.
Specialized forensic assessment tools brought research and practice in the inter-
section of psychology and criminal justice to a new level providing a means for
researchers to arrive at consensus on the construct of psychopathy and to provide
criminal justice practitioners with tools to make critical risk assessment decisions
at all stages of the criminal justice process. These forensic assessments included
among others the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) (Hare, 1991, 2003)
and Quinsey et al.’s (1998) Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing Risk
and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG). Forensic assessment has become
one of the most common applications of psychology within legal settings and is
applicable to a variety of civil and criminal legal situations such as investigation,
testimony, sentencing, corrections, treatment, and reentry.
In the 1990s, a new domain of law emerged which required the use of such
instruments: sexually violent predator (SVP) civil commitment laws. First enacted
in Washington State in 1990 by the Community Protection Act, SVP laws are a
unique reincarnation of old sexual psychopath law from the 1900s (Helfgott,
2008). The statutory criteria in Washington State define an SVP as “any per-
son who has been convicted of or charged with a crime of sexual violence and
who suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder which makes the
person likely to engage in predatory acts of sexual violence if not confined in a
secure facility” (RCW 71.09.020). In these cases, forensic psychologists interview
and assess the respondent, submit forensic evaluations, testify at trial, and con-
duct annual assessments of SVPs. In the United States, 20 states, the District of
Columbia, and the federal government have adopted similar statutory measures.
Across the criminal justice system, forensic psychological assessment continues
to be an invaluable tool in civil and criminal proceedings alike.

Academic Programs and Training

Forensic psychology has emerged as a distinct scholarly discipline with aca-

demic and training programs that have flourished in recent decades as student
interest has grown and as demand has increased for forensic assessments, treat-
ment, expert opinions, and testimony. In the 1970s, few psychology and law
courses were offered (Najdowski et al., 2015). However, an increasing number of
courses and degrees in forensic psychology have emerged (Fulero et al., 1999).
Academic opportunities today range from certifications, courses, specializations,
undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral curriculum, courses, and degrees, as well as
1 History of Forensic Psychology 17

postdoctoral specialization and continuing education. In the United States, 58 col-

leges and universities offer forensic psychology programs to date (National Center
for Education Statistics, 2021) and forensic psychology scholarship continues to
develop on the international level.

Roles and Careers in Criminal Justice and Forensic Practice

Trial Consultant

Trial consultants use psychological expertise to assist trial attorneys by preparing

witnesses for trial, participating in jury selection, and identifying issues within a
case. Trial consultants can assist with all types of civil and criminal proceedings.

Forensic Evaluator and Expert Witness

Forensic psychologists may be hired to provide a forensic evaluation of a party

to a case and expert testimony in civil and criminal trials and other legal pro-
ceedings. Within this area of expertise, specializations include child psychology,
competency, abuse, hostage or kidnapping, eyewitness accounts, false confes-
sions, and sexually violent predators. Opposing parties in a case will typically
retain experts within the same specialization but with differing opinions.

Victim Service Provider and Victim Advocate

Forensic psychologists who work as victim service providers and victim advo-
cates assist victims with their diverse experiences and specialized needs. Navi-
gating the criminal justice system can be challenging, especially for victims who
have never done so before, may be experiencing trauma, loss, abuse, or lack of
resources. Providers can support victims by accompanying them to court, provid-
ing counseling, assisting with safety planning, filling out forms and paperwork,
finding shelter, transportation, and childcare, as well as providing information
about their rights and protections.
18 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

Correctional Psychologist

Correctional psychologists provide counseling, treatment, and rehabilitation ser-

vices to individuals incarcerated in correctional facilities, civilly committed
sexually violent predators in commitment facilities, and adolescents in juvenile
justice centers. Individual therapy, group therapy, relationship and family coun-
seling, life skills training, crisis intervention, and release recommendations are
just some of the services these positions provide. They may also offer counseling
services to institutional staff as well. The rapid expansion and privatization of the
US correctional system, as well as the destigmatization of mental health services
over time, has created an unprecedented demand for institutional psychologists,
providing many opportunities to work with this specialized population in need of
services.

Police Psychologist

Police psychologists fill a variety of different roles and responsibilities that range
from psychological assessments of police applicants, fitness-for-duty evaluations,
evaluation of deadly force incidents, individual and group therapy, crisis inter-
vention, stress management, to substance abuse treatment. Police psychologists
may or not be a peace officer but must be well versed in police culture.

Criminal Profiler

Criminal profiling is a type of investigative psychology that applies psycholog-

ical research and principles to the investigation of criminal behavior. Criminal
profiling has been widely popularized in the media and pop culture after being
formally recognized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the early
1970s (Ressler et al., 1986). Criminal profiling entails classifying behavioral,
cognitive, emotional, and demographic characteristics of an offender by analysis
of features of crimes and crime scenes in order to focus the suspect pool more in
an informed manner with the aim of identifying and apprehending a suspect
(Ressler et al., 1986). Criminal profiling can be utilized for rapists, murder-
ers, arsonists, burglars, bank robbers, domestic and international terrorists, mass
shooters/bombers, and so on. Victim profiling is an emerging subfield aimed to
prevent victimization, such as by using a typology of cyberscam victims (Whitty,
2020).
1 History of Forensic Psychology 19

This overview of professions within forensic psychology is just a glimpse

into some of the careers one can pursue. Most any application of psychology
to a legal setting within the criminal justice system falls within the purview of
forensic psychology, including educators, researchers, and many more.

The Future of the Field

Diverse Populations

Forensic assessment instruments must become increasingly sophisticated and

must account for differences in measurement risk assessment by gender, age,
culture, ability, and sexual orientation. Evaluation of female risk for violence,
dangerousness, sexual offending, and recidivism remains relatively uncharted.
BIPOC and female offenders possess risk factors and psychological needs distinct
from their White male counterparts (the populations within which the majority
of risk assessments instruments have been validated). This should be recognized
by the profession in order to strive to appropriately assess risk across all groups.
Differing populations will also present differently in treatment and may be more
amenable to different types of treatment based on their distinct needs.

Ethics of Labeling

Increased awareness of the powerful effects that labeling has for both victims and
offenders alike may prompt changes in the treatment and assessment of these indi-
viduals. Labeling can be transformative and influence the identity and behavior
of individuals within the criminal justice system.
The ethics of labeling in correctional treatment settings of those who have
been convicted has gained considerable attention (Willis, 2018). Labeling can
have profound effects and can affect one for life. In particular, the labels “sex
offender,” “psychopath,” and “pedophile” have the potential to harm individu-
als through the stigma, shame, ostracization, and humiliation these labels carry,
which may lead to isolation and avoiding prosocial behavior; behaviors that are
counterproductive to treatment and reintegration (Willis, 2018). Empirical evi-
dence now shows that the “sex offender” and “pedophile” labels are associated
with increased stigma compared to neutral, non-labeling language (Harris &
Socia, 2016; Imhoff, 2015). Labels based on one’s convictions, past behav-
ior, or psychological characteristics may also increase recidivism (Willis, 2018).
20 J. B. Helfgott and J. K. Wallenborn

Labeling is just one of many barriers to reentry and reintegration and has partic-
ularly negative impacts on youth (Mowen et al., 2018). Labeling that can reduce
recidivism, remove stigma, encourage reintegration, and empower victims has
profound implications for the future of the field. Forensic psychologists should
seek increased awareness of labeling and its affects so that it may be integrated
into their practice.

Technology

Technological advances and their influence in our lives are a driving force pro-
pelling the future of forensic psychology in a multitude of pivotal ways. Thus, it is
imperative that forensic psychology too keeps current. For instance, information
from social media sites is now being leveraged by forensic psychologists, likely
due to its widespread use, wealth of personal information, and ease of acces-
sibility. Recent research revealed that forensic psychologists now utilize social
networking sites frequently in forensic mental health assessments and perceive
these sites as useful sources of information about individuals to inform psyc-
holegal evaluations, opinions, and reports (Coffey et al., 2018). This underscores
ethical concerns, such as consent, accuracy, and authenticity of the information.
Traditional methods of conducting forensic psychological assessments con-
tinue to evolve with the rise of technology. Many facilities now utilize video-
conferencing technology to connect forensic psychologists with incarcerated and
committed individuals in order to carry out assessments and treatment. Though
we are not likely to see artificial intelligence replace forensic psychologists
anytime soon, forensic psychological assessments via videoconference reveal
technology as a vital and evolving asset to the field.

References

American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, train-

ing, research, practice, and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychol-
ogist, 58, 377–402. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.5.377
American Psychological Association. (2006). Guidelines and principles for accreditation of
programs in professional psychology. https://www.apa.org/about/policy/accreditation-arc
hived.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2017). Multicultural guidelines: An ecological
approach to context, identity, and intersectionality. http://www.apa.org/about/policy/mul
ticultural-guidelines.pdf
Amiel, J. (Director). (1995). Copycat [Film]. Warner Bros.