Review of: Police psychology: New trends in forensic psychological science
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Before discussing Police Psychology: New Trends in Forensic Psychological Science, the reviewer has a disclosure. I am a forensic psychiatrist, not a forensic psychologist. In addition, I have been an operational forensic psychiatrist, with law enforcement, for over three decades. The stated aim of this book is to bridge the gap between research in the different disciplines of police psychology and those practitioners in the field. It is directed not just at psychologists but policymakers, patrol officers, and crisis negotiators who respond to individuals in crisis, and those who investigate interpersonal violent crimes including sexual assault. The text explores the four distinct components of psychology, as applied to law enforcement: the selection and assessment of officers, crisis intervention, operational support, and organizational consultation. To accomplish this goal, the book is divided into three very broad sections addressing the role of psychology in police culture, psychology as applied to special topics in law enforcement, and the application of psychology in criminal investigations. This is a daunting task but is accomplished because the book, for the most part, is structured on evidence-based policing. I say for the most part because although the chapter addressing police traumatization is excellent, and the authors try to provide a balanced view of the efficacy of Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD), it falls short because they ignore the evidence that it can do more harm than good. Despite the evidence, CISD is still practiced by a good proportion of police psychologists in North America. In reading some chapters as a knowledge seeker, I was impressed by the chapters that covered topics that I had little, if any, knowledge of, such as the selection and screening of recruits; the role of psychological science in crowd control and public order policing; the introduction and incorporation of psychological skills in the recruit academy and psychological jurisprudence, to name a few. As a practitioner of operational police psychiatry, I was equally impressed with the chapters on police suicide; communications with persons in crisis—whether it is with a subject suffering from a major mental illness or a barricaded person and/or hostage taker. The chapter examining both risk assessment and threat assessment was well-balanced and current with the “state of the art” regarding the subjective judgment tools utilized in police threat assessment units that encounter criminal harassment and stalking, domestic violence, workplace violence, and extremist threats. The chapter on how to think like a detective was interesting and informative because it was written by a senior detective who is also a psychologist. The chapter on offender profiling was also excellent and covers the current state of research and the limitations of profiling. Individuals trained by the FBI or the International Criminal Investigative Analysis Fellowship to become profilers are aware of the strengths and limitations of crime scene analysis and offender profiling but, unlike its portrayal on American TV and movies, much of the work conducted by profilers is not determining the identity of the unknown subject. In practice, profilers are consulted to conduct crime scene analysis, investigative strategies, interview strategies, undercover strategies, and much more. The training to become a profiler is an intensive endeavor and candidates who are accepted must have at least eight to ten years of violent crime investigative experience. Despite the interest of profiling as an undergraduate course or online program, I have never met anyone who has worked with the police in that capacity. Psychiatrists and psychologists cannot be profilers; however, there are a few who are members of the profiling team as in-house behavioral consultants. I agree with the author of the chapter on profiling that further research must be undertaken to lift offender profiling into the area of evidence-based policing. Likewise, the chapter on communication as a “weapon” in resolving barricades and hostage situations is clear and concise, providing a succinct overview on the basics of active listening utilized by trained police crisis/hostage negotiators. The purpose of any textbook is to give a sense of a field by presenting key questions, concepts, and theories. In my professional opinion, Police Psychology: New Trends in Forensic Psychological Science accomplishes this. Police psychology has evolved in diverse areas of study, and practice, and is a growing field. This book is a major contribution to that field and is highly recommended.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».