August 5, 2010
The CSI Effect: An infographic
Pierce Martin of the new site, Forensic Science, just sent me this cool infographic he made about the CSI Effect, which relates to my recent post, "To catch a liar: Don't watch Fox-TV." Enjoy.
Source: Forensic Science
Websites worth checking out
- Psychology and Crime News is B-A-C-K! Emma B. was hosting this excellent source of news and information in the United Kindom back when I began blogging in 2007. She went on hiatus for a while, so I am happy to see she is back on the Web, even if in a somewhat abbreviated form. (She recommends you follow her on Twitter.) She's got especially strong resources in the area of lie deception research. Check her out (HERE). Welcome back, Emma!
- Sex offender laws are becoming so out of proportion in terms of their financial cost and the number of people they are ensnaring, including teens and even children, that calls for reason are mounting. Among the more interesting sites of this counter-movement is Citizens for Change, which is jam-packed with news stories, links, and other resources. I recommend that anyone working in the sex offender field give it a look-see (HERE).
- Finally, as I've mentioned before, if you want to keep up with psychological science and be entertained at the same time, Mind Hacks is the place to go. Psychologist Vaughan Bell's weekly "spike activity" columns give comprehensive lists of new research, while his in-depth daily reports provide eclectic perspectives on select news (e.g., new research on the "booty call" and the "poker face").
August 3, 2010
Two forensic posts at University of Surrey

Senior Lecturer in Forensic Psychology:
The successful applicant will teach at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels and will also develop the forensic psychology research program.Lecturer in Social Psychology, Crime, and Law:
The department is looking for a social psychologist with active research projects and expertise in crime and law.Click on the above links or contact Peter Hegarty, Senior Lecturer and Deputy Head of the Psychology Department, for more information.
August 2, 2010
Global alarm mounts: "Will anyone be normal?"

Due to their important public policy implications, the Journal is making the lineup of commentaries available to the public for free. In a press release, the Journal points out that the previous DSM revision led to a wave of false "epidemics" of such conditions as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autistic disorder, childhood bipolar disorders, and that the new edition may lead to more of the same.
"The publication of the fifth edition of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) is one of the most highly anticipated events in the mental health field," explains Managing Editor Daniel Falatko. "This is the first major rewrite of DSM in 16 years and history has warned us that even small changes to this manual can have extraordinary repercussions in the diagnosis and treatment of mental health issues."

At a joint briefing, mental health experts expressed particular fear over the proposed "psychosis risk syndrome" diagnosis, which could falsely label young people who may only have a small risk of developing an illness.
"It’s a bit like telling 10 people with a common cold that they are 'at risk for pneumonia syndrome' when only one is likely to get the disorder," said Dr. Til Wykes of the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College London.
The free articles, some by psychiatric patients, include:
- Diagnosis, diagnosis, diagnosis: towards DSM-5 by Til Wykes and Felicity Callard
- Are psychiatric diagnoses of psychosis scientific and useful? The case of schizophrenia by Jim Van Os
- Misdiagnosing normality: Psychiatry's failure to address the problem of false positive diagnoses of mental disorder in a changing professional environment by Jerome C. Wakefield
- DSM-V and the stigma of mental illness by Dror Ben-Zeev, Michael A. Young, and Patrick W. Corrigan
- Conceptualisation of mental disorder and its personal meanings by Derek Bolton
- Patients can diagnose too: How continuous self-assessment aids diagnosis of, and recovery from, depression by Peter C. Groot
- Diagnosing Clapham Junction syndrome by Terry Pratchett
- What my diagnosis means to me by Mike Shooter
- Depression and recovery by Sarah Mitchell
- Personal Reflections on Diagnosis by Mark Vonnegut
- On the impact of being diagnosed with schizophrenia by Frederick J. Frese
- Tackling Depression by Geoff Gallop
- Psyche, soma, and science studies: New directions in the sociology of mental health and illness by Martyn D. Pickersgill
- Globe and Mail (UK): Mental health experts ask: Will anyone be normal? Binge eating, temper tantrums may become new diagnoses
- BBC News: Mental health: are we all sick now?

Hat tip: Jane
July 29, 2010
Race salience and juries: It’s complicated
Samuel R. Sommers of Tufts University is one of the leading experts on "race salience," or the study of under what conditions defendant race influences white jurors. In the decade since he and colleague Phoebe Ellsworth first published on this topic, their research has garnered widespread interest both among researchers and in the courts. In the current issue of The Jury Expert, he clarifies some misconceptions about the theory, including:
Sam Sommer's excellent blog, The Science of Small Talk
- Misconception #1: "Race salient" means simply informing mock jurors of the defendant's race.
- Misconception #2: White juror bias cannot occur when racial issues are salient at trial.
- Misconception #3: Salient racial issues at trial always lead to White juror leniency.
- Misconception #4: All race-salience manipulations have equal impact.
- Colorful juries more competent (January 3, 2008)
- Are juries fair? Beliefs race-dependent, poll finds (January 22, 2008)
- On police, profiling, and Henry Gates (guest essay by Sam Sommers, July 28, 2009)
- Not this time, high court rules in Snyder v. Louisiana (March 21, 2008)
- Persuading with Probability: The Prosecution of O.J. Simpson by statistician Daniel J. Denis
- The Convoluted Spectrum of White Guilt Reactions: A Review of Emerging Literature by Alexis A. Robinson
- The Reptile Brain, Mammal Heart and (Sometimes Perplexing) Mind of the Juror: Toward a Triune Trial Strategy by Jill Holmquist
- Tattoos, Tolerance, Technology, and TMI: Welcome to the land of the Millennials (aka Generation Y) by Douglas L. Keene, Rita R. Handrich
- Presumed Prejudice, Actual Prejudice, No Prejudice: Skilling v. U.S. by Thaddeus Hoffmeister
- Emotions in the courtroom: "Need for affect" in juror decision-making by Desiree Adams Griffin, Emily Patty
Sam Sommer's excellent blog, The Science of Small Talk
July 27, 2010
Victim race still central to death penalty
The more things (appear to) change, the more they stay the same
The odds of getting a death sentence for killing a white person is about three times higher than for killing an African American with the race of the defendant virtually irrelevant, according to a new study out of North Carolina that echoes earlier findings on capital punishment.
Researchers Michael Radelet of the University of Colorado and Glenn Pierce of Northeastern University in Boston combed through three decades of death sentences for the study, to be published next year in the North Carolina Law Review.
The study will be used in capital appeals, according to an article in the Daily Camera of Boulder, Colorado. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that statistical evidence of racial bias could not be considered in individual cases, but states could pass their own legislation to do so. North Carolina has 159 people now awaiting execution. As Brittany Anas reports:
Of related interest:
Race and the death penalty, Death Penalty Information Center data clearinghouse
Death penalty news in California:
The odds of getting a death sentence for killing a white person is about three times higher than for killing an African American with the race of the defendant virtually irrelevant, according to a new study out of North Carolina that echoes earlier findings on capital punishment.
Researchers Michael Radelet of the University of Colorado and Glenn Pierce of Northeastern University in Boston combed through three decades of death sentences for the study, to be published next year in the North Carolina Law Review.
The study will be used in capital appeals, according to an article in the Daily Camera of Boulder, Colorado. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that statistical evidence of racial bias could not be considered in individual cases, but states could pass their own legislation to do so. North Carolina has 159 people now awaiting execution. As Brittany Anas reports:
Leading up to the study, legislators in North Carolina had raised concern about the racial disparities of those on death row -- but there was no hard evidence…. The state became the second in the nation, following Kentucky, to allow murder suspects and those already on death row to present statistical evidence of racial bias. The law is intended to make sure that the race of the defendant or victim doesn't play a key role in sentencing. The study by Radelet and Pierce is the first to be released since North Carolina passed the Racial Justice Act.

Race and the death penalty, Death Penalty Information Center data clearinghouse
Death penalty news in California:
- New poll shows Californians support death penalty (San Diego Union Tribune, July 21, 2010)
- California death penalty: A hollow promise? (San Diego Union Tribune, April 25, 2010
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)