MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Psychology and Law

2013· reference-entry· en· W2791299977 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kirk Heilbrun, Edie Greene

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology · 2013
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForensic psychologyLaw enforcementPsychologyLegal psychologyCriminologyLawPolitical sciencePublic relationsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of psychology and law involves the application of scientific, clinical, and policy aspects of psychology to issues that arise in the legal system. Diverse perspectives are encompassed within psychology and law, including most of the major subdivisions in psychology (e.g., cognitive, developmental, industrial/organizational, and clinical). So, for example, cognitive psychologists may examine the reliability of eyewitness memory; developmental psychologists may assess the impact of maltreatment and abuse on social and cognitive development; industrial/organizational psychologists may investigate how workplace conditions contribute to the incidence of sexual harassment; and clinical forensic psychologists may provide assessment and treatment services to courts and attorneys, law enforcement agencies, or offenders in correctional settings or under court supervision. In each of these instances, psychologists use research and/or treatment protocols relevant to their specialization to address specific questions that emerge in the law. This article is organized around the intersection of those traditional subdivisions of psychology and the law. The field of psychology and law values contributions from professionals in a variety of different settings including university and research organizations, clinical practice, law enforcement agencies, correctional institutions, and other governmental and nonprofit agencies. It also values the contributions of professionals from across the globe, and associations devoted to psychology and law now exist in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Several specialized journals and book series are devoted exclusively to psycholegal matters. Undergraduate courses in psychology and law are increasingly common on college and university campuses. Various training programs prepare graduate and postgraduate students to address mental health issues in a variety of legal settings and to become the next generation of researchers, scholars, and practitioners. The American Board of Forensic Psychology and comparable organizations in other countries credential psychologists who specialize in clinical forensic issues, and an updated set of ethical guidelines has been developed specifically for their use. Psychologists have been involved in appellate court decisions by testifying in hearings and by making their research findings and policy analyses available to judges through amicus briefs submitted to the US Supreme Court and to lower courts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.011

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychologySame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207