Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

Critical Review Of The Use Of The Rorschach In European Courts, Igor Areh, Fanny Verkampt, Alfred Allan

Research outputs 2014 to 2021

In relation to the admissibility of evidence obtained using projective personality tests arose in F v. Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatam (2018). The Court of Justice of the European Union has held that an expert’s report can only be accepted if it is based on the international scientific community’s standards, but has refrained from stipulating what these standards are. It appears timely for European psychologists to decide what standards should be applied to determine whether or not a test is appropriate for psycholegal use. We propose standards and then apply them to the Rorschach because it was used in this case …

The Impact Of Voluntariness Of Apologies On Victims’ Responses In Restorative Justice: Findings Of A Quantitative Study [Dataset], Alfred Allan, Justine De Mott, Isolde Larkins, Laura Turnbull, Tracey Warwick, Lacey Willett, Maria M. Allan

Research Datasets

Combined data of three studies (N=164; 121 and 236 respectively) that investigated whether the voluntariness of apologies influenced recipients’ perception of the sincerity of apologies; acceptance of apologies; willingness to forgive offenders; and intended retributive behavior towards offenders.

The Profession's Role In Helping Psychologists Balance Society's Interests With Their Clients' Interests, Alfred Allan

Research outputs 2014 to 2021

Objective:

Psychologists find it difficult to balance their clients' and society's interests when these interests differ from each other, such as when their clients pose a risk of harm to others. Society's increasing preoccupation with harm makes their task even more difficult. The first aim with this article is to determine the reactions of those who make, enforce, and use law to address society's concerns and how they impact on psychologists. The second aim is to propose how the profession can assist psychologists deal with the competing demands prompted by these reactions.

Method:

A legal-ethical analysis was used to identify …

The Acceptance Of Apologies In The Corrective Process: Implications For Research And Practice, James Strickland, Alfred Allan, Maria M. Allan

Research outputs 2014 to 2021

Apology scholars and researchers in psychology, law, and justice commonly conceptualise the corrective process that follows wrongful behaviour as an apology-followed-by-forgiveness sequence. In this paper, however, we suggest on the basis of our analysis of the research literature that a more suitable conceptualisation of the corrective process is one that includes the acceptance of an apology as an additional discrete step that is distinct from forgiveness. We begin with a brief discussion of the psychological view of apologies as a process of negotiation between offending and offended parties, and how psychologists conceive peoples’ responses to apologies. We also review the …

Interpersonal Apologies: A Psychological Perspective Of Why They Might Work In Law?, Alfred Allan, James Strickland, Maria M. Allan

Research outputs 2014 to 2021

Apologies have become an accepted feature in many fields of law and there is evidence that they make a constructive contribution to the resolution of disputes. The reason for this might be that they address the intangible needs of parties after adverse events that law otherwise find difficult to address. Legal reformers introduced apologies into law primarily on the basis of deductive reasoning without being able to refer to a comprehensive psychological theory that explains the apology process; in part because apology was only identified as a psychological construct worthy of empirical research during the last quarter of the 20th …

The Requirement To Be Fit And Proper: What Does It Mean To Australian Psychologists?, Francesca A. Bell

Theses: Doctorates and Masters

The phrase fit and proper is used in the Health Practitioners Regulation National Law Act (Qld), 2009, which came into effect nationally in 2010 and governs psychologists. As with previous legislation that used the phrase, the legislator does not define fit and proper, leaving it up to each profession to determine its exact meaning and inform the courts accordingly. A review of the literature established that to date no Australian psychologist has attempted to define the construct. This means that Australian lawyers do not get any guidance from psychologists regarding how they should interpret the phrase fit and proper in …