See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/369067733

Forensic Psychology in Practice

Chapter · March 2023

CITATIONS READS

0 791

1 author:

Jimmy Petruzzi

148 PUBLICATIONS 26 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jimmy Petruzzi on 08 March 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

Forensic Psychology: Manual

Unit 7: Forensic Psychology in Practice

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

 Explain the principles and objectives of the criminal system

 Describe and quantify recidivism and risk factors
 Highlight effective therapy interventions to reduce recidivism
 Explain the roles of the Forensic Psychologist in crisis management


'What works' Literature in Reducing Re-offending

Recidivism, or the rate of reoffending that is measured by re-arrest rates, is one of the

main concepts in criminal justice. Recent studies in the U.S. suggest that more than two-

thirds of offenders released from prisons were re-arrested within three years (Langan &

Levin, 2002). Similar rates were reported in England and Wales. Of those given a community

punishment or sent to prison, 74% are convicted of another crime within nine years (Ministry

of Justice, 2012).

Recidivism is an important indication of the success of the criminal system,

determined by the three main objectives of incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilitation (the

other two objectives of criminal sanctions are community-centered, namely retribution and

restoration). Incapacitation refers to preventing an offender from committing another crime

by their removal from society by incarceration. However, this comes at a cost and investors

in facilities and programs, especially state sponsors, would like to ensure that their

investment has acceptable returns in terms of public safety and productivity. Deterrence is

linked to the principle that a specific sanction stops offenders from re-offending after its

completion or makes it less attractive for people to offend in the first place. Rehabilitation is
 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 2

an intervention by drug treatment, psychotherapy, and/or skills and vocational training that

addresses his or her needs and deficits in order to reduce the need to offend. Retribution as a

philosophy of punishment is an unpleasant and proportionate imposition designed to satisfy

the community’s need for moral justice in retrospect, which can be compared to the Judeo-

Christian tradition of “an eye for an eye”. As one of the most recent goals of criminal justice,

restoration attempts the rebalancing of all conditions and all parties as they were before the

crime. In a theoretical sense, the offender takes responsibility for his or her crime and

restitution to the victim is done in a collaborative way.

All these principles have a single aim: To prevent the offender from repeating or

committing another crime, thereby lessening the impact on the victim and community. In the

process, there are various risk factors that determine the likelihood of reoffending and should

be addressed holistically by any intervention if present, namely:

 unemployment (or employment instability)

 extensive and diverse criminal history

 lack of social and financial support

 substance abuse (heroin, amphetamine, and injection drug use rather than

alcohol)

 poor living conditions or lack of stable accommodation

 family and marital problems

 antisocial personality traits

 difficulty controlling violent behavior

The Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) is a 54-item quantitative survey

based on the risk factors above that has proved useful to predict parole outcome, success in

correctional halfway houses, institutional misconducts, and recidivism among criminal

offenders. It also assists in compiling an individual offender needs and risk assessment to
3 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

determine appropriate interventions that have the best chance to prevent reoffending. These

interventions are mostly provided in prisons, but also as inpatients in treatment centers,

outpatients in community facilities and clinics, to which offenders are often mandated by

court, especially offenders of lesser crimes, first-time offenders, and juvenile delinquents.

Interventions to Reduce Risk of Re-offending

As already mentioned, there are various types of interventions that are aimed at

reducing recidivism based on risk and needs focused assessments and programs in order to

ensure that the offender successfully reenters his or her community and is deterred from

reoffending. In line with the scope of Forensic Psychology, emphasis will be placed on the

role of the Forensic Psychologist in this endeavor, which mostly takes place in prisons, but

also in private facilities by court-mandated treatment. Although research studies generally fail

to provide controlled outcome evidence of a consistent rate of reduction in recidivism among

offenders, a meta-analysis found that psychotherapy decreased general recidivism by 15%,

while cognitive-behavioral-based treatment caused an average reduction of almost 30%

(Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005). However, the results are strongly dependent on the presence

and strength of risk factors as discussed previously, especially antisocial personality traits,

denial of guilt, anger, substance use, and a belief system that supports criminal thinking.

In most countries correctional departments are the largest employers of Forensic

Psychologists who are involved in the assessment and treatment of prisoners, many of whom

are violent and mentally disordered (see Unit 4). Therapy is given individually and in group

settings, with the most appropriate approach determined by the psychological profile of the

individual in the context of his or her cultural beliefs and values.

There are literally hundreds of different types of theoretical orientations and practical

approaches that are used in psychotherapy. However, the following discussion is limited to
 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 4

three different types that are the most relevant in prison settings, namely Cognitive-

Behavioral Therapy (CBT), Reality Therapy, and Psychoanalytic Therapy.

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy. A common objective of correctional therapy is to

change behavior, and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) has proved effective in

eliminating or reducing maladaptive behaviors by changing the dysfunctional thought

processes that it is based on. In many cases the prison therapist’s function is to socialize the

offender which necessitates a re-orientation of his or her core beliefs. CBT and its more

recent derivate approaches—the so-called third wave therapies—identify core beliefs that

typically developed as a response to adverse life experiences and are the cause of problematic

behavior. These are either challenged or accepted, but functional alternatives are developed in

collaboration with the client, which forms the foundation of positive changes in attitudes and

behavior.

As discussed in Unit 4, a large proportion of violent offenders have personality

disorders and other comorbid mental health conditions. During Cognitive-Behavioral

Therapy (CBT) a goal-oriented, systematic procedure is applied to solve behavioral problems

caused by dysfunctional emotions, thoughts, and beliefs. The CBT methodology is based on

theoretic and applied cognitive and behavioral research, and is a blend of behavior therapy

and cognitive therapy. It is technique-driven, structured, direct, and time-limited and applied

in individual and group settings. The nature of personality disorders is consistent and

pervasive traits that cause dysfunction in daily life and maladaptive behavior. It is therefore

widely considered to be difficult to treat, but combined treatment modalities such as CBT and

its recent derivative approaches have proven potential in positively changing behavior, risk,

and recidivism in offender populations (Sperry, 2006). As mentioned, generally the basic

process and goals involve “identifying early maladaptive schemas, validating the client’s

unmet emotional needs, changing dysfunctional beliefs and maladaptive schemas to more
5 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

functional ones, changing maladaptive life patterns and coping styles, and providing an

environment for learning adaptive skills” (p. 28).

Some of the typical CBT-based programs adapted for use in prison settings and

aftercare are Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT), Reasoning and Rehabilitation, Thinking for

a Change, Strategies for Self-Improvement and Change, Relapse Prevention Therapy, and

Aggression Replacement Training. These programs differ in length between 22 sessions and

one year, and are targeted at specific problem areas that are relevant to each offender. They

appear have promise for offenders who may be resistant to change, including antisocial,

narcissistic, self-centered, and self-hatred traits that are common among violent offenders.

Among the theoretically framed derivative approaches, Jack Apsche’s Mode

Deactivation Therapy (MDT), Steven Hayes’ Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT),

and Marsha Linehan’s Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) are all third wave cognitive-

behavioral therapies that already proved effective in treating a wide range of offender

populations and disorders. In general, cognitive-behavioral therapies are not concerned with

the patient’s past, but is centered on his or her cognitive processes. The exception is MDT,

which also explores the roots of the patient’s core beliefs and its direct links to their fears,

avoids, and behavior.

Reality Therapy. A second possible approach is Reality Therapy, which was

developed by William Glasser in the 1960s. According to Schmideberg (2005), Reality

Therapy is useful to view the offender’s assets and handicaps, environmental conditions,

interests and ambitions in real time in order to understand and counter his or her criminal

tendencies. As such, it focuses on the three principles of realism, responsibility, and right-

and-wrong instead of symptoms of mental disorders. Reality Therapy does not concern itself

with the patient’s past, or unconscious cognitive processes, but addresses the here-and-now

social and psychological needs to achieve his or her life goals.

 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 6

An important part of every therapy approach is to make clients aware of their reality

and provide the skills and training to cope with it. As with all other therapy systems, in

Reality Therapy the first step is to establish a healthy and trusting therapeutic relationship,

which may be especially challenging with an unwilling, uncooperative, defiant, or

manipulative offender. The relationship is used constructively for purposes of the therapy, to

increase motivation and cooperation, and in the case of Reality Therapy, to face their reality

and consider remedies in order to adjust to society and achieve their life goals. This is

achieved by examining their deep concerns and worries and by confronting their fears in the

current moment. As such, rather than focusing on the patient’s psychopathology, Reality

Therapy concentrates on his or her present behavior and individual responsibility. The

patient’s needs and motivations are considered, as well as how he or she makes choices to

achieve these goals. As the approach focuses on the present reality of the patient and more

acceptable choices instead of their psychological condition, it is more suitable for clients

without significant mental disorders.

Psychoanalytic Therapy. A third option is Psychoanalytic Therapy. As there is also

a recent renewed interest in criminological theories that stress inner emotional experiences

and self-understanding as factors in criminal behavior, individual and group psychoanalytic

therapy, both in- and outside the prison walls, has also proved effective. Psychoanalytical

therapy approaches are commonly used with sexual offenders in prison populations where the

primary emphasis is on developing the patient’s awareness and understanding of the

psychodynamics (and its past roots) of sexual offending, usually through individual treatment

sessions. Psychoanalysis is both a theory of behavior and personality organization, and a

method of counseling. As a therapy approach it is comprehensive, lengthy, intensive, and

based on the assumption that all behavior is motivated and a product of past experiences. In

dealing with offenders, the psychoanalytic therapist focuses on “conscious and unconscious
7 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

desires that motivate criminal behavior, anger, aggression, and ego strengths and

weaknesses” (Lester & Van Voorhis, 2009, p. 43). The principal objective of psychoanalytic

therapy is to make the client aware of unconscious ideas that affect his or her behavior in

order to adjust or eliminate them.

To recap: The basic theoretical approaches that appear to be most relevant and

effective in reducing risk and recidivism in offender populations and correctional settings are

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT), Reality Therapy, and Psychoanalytic Therapy. Mode

Deactivation Therapy (MDT) was specifically developed for family-based and individual

treatment of adolescents and has proved to be effective in reducing problem behaviors and

delinquency for this important and high-impact population (read more at

http://www.apschecenter.com).

Incident Management (Crisis Negotiation)

There are three areas where a police Forensic Psychologist can make a contribution in

crisis situations in a direct, training or consultative capacity, namely hostage negotiations,

terrorist profiling, and early trauma intervention.

Hostage negotiation. Hostage negotiation requires specialized skills that have a lot in

common with the expertise of an experienced Forensic Psychologist, including an ability to

analyze situations, understand human behavior, and conduct an effective bilateral

communication where information is elicited. In fact, the skilled psychologist is such an

effective observer that many practitioners believe that the most appropriate role for a

psychologist in a hostage negotiation team is that of an observer-analyst instead of primary

negotiator (Ebert, 1986; Fuselier, 1988). In a hostage negotiation team the psychologist then

acts as internal consultant and proposes the best course of strategy and actions based on his or

her objective analysis of the situation and the individuals involved. Such a systematic and

multistep process that is directed toward the peaceful and nonlethal resolution of critical
 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 8

incidents is the most appropriate approach to effectively manage hostage negotiations with

the least losses. Aside from participating in a hostage negotiation team, the police

psychologist can also contribute to officers’ skills by facilitating training exercises such as

role-playing, and assess risk and strengths among officers.

In recent years hostage negotiation techniques have become more specialized in terms

of a differentiated decision tree to facilitate and guide the process effectively. All role-players

have to be familiar with these technical protocols and procedures. The structure of crisis

teams and the role of each member, as well as the objective(s) of the management of a

hostage situation, have to be considered in the context of the appropriate (re)action before

tactical and operational decisions are made.

To reiterate: The ideal role for a psychologist in hostage situations is often thought to

be as consultant to the response team, provider of information to assist in the negotiation, and

post-trauma counselor. Therefore, it is increasingly accepted that the optimal function of the

police Forensic Psychologist is not as a primary negotiator. However, this setup has both

advantages and disadvantages. Behavioral observation of all aspects of a hostage situation,

including actions, reactions, motivations, and mental state of the hostage taker, interaction

with the response team, primary negotiator, and hostages, is critical to conclude a hostage

situation successfully. Thus, it can be argued that the most valuable contribution of a

psychologist will be as objective observer and consultant rather than an active operational

participant.

On the other hand, a Forensic Psychologist is already experienced in the skills

required to communicate effectively and pro-actively with an offender. Ebert (1986) believes

therefore that a psychologist trained in hostage negotiation skills is most suitable as primary

negotiator. According to Grubb (2010), “there are six major types of hostage taker: the

emotionally disturbed, political extremist, religious fanatic, criminal, prison inmate” (p. 342),
9 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

and any combination of these in the context of a specific situation. Interestingly enough, the

majority of hostage takers are previous criminal offenders or mentally disordered, which is

another argument for a more direct involvement of a psychologist. However, any specific

psychologist will not necessarily be suitable as primary negotiator. Beyond psychological

skills, he or she has to have specialized hostage negotiation training, be able and willing to

operate under significant stress, and be objective and adaptable. Grubb (2010) also highlights

the importance of identifying and managing mental health problems in a hostage taker, which

further supports the growing role of psychologists in hostage response teams. It is also vital

that police psychologists continue to actively contribute to research and training in hostage

negotiation techniques and best practices. In conclusion, there is no “single blueprint” which

can be used to handle a specific hostage situation, and therefore qualified personnel is

required to efficiently analyze all the factors involved, and adapt accordingly. The specific

role of a police Forensic Psychologist, whether as a primary negotiator or consultant, may

therefore be determined on a case-by-case basis. Canter (2010) explains that forensic

psychologists tend to be “bridesmaids” in the traditional role of advisers, but that the situation

is changing quickly to a more involved and primary role as more qualified specialists enter

the different forensic arenas.

Furthermore, it is important to be aware that police officers are often weary of

negotiation strategies and their ultimate value, and are therefore reluctant to allow negotiators

too much time to communicate instead of using a more forceful approach. We need to keep in

mind that hostage situations are managed by a crisis team of which the Forensic Psychologist

is one member. He or she may be the prime negotiator, but most likely will be contributing in

a supportive role as observer, information analyst, and consultant. The objective and manner

that various members feel comfortable in dealing with the situation will vary according to the

leader and each team member’s or overall group’s specialization. A hostage negotiation team
 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 10

is similar to a business corporation, where each part has to operate in their own area of

competence (but together) in order to reach the best single goal. Although there will often be

agreement, there typically will be conflict among factions in the team as well, and as long as

this is overcome (or utilized) by interaction, sharing of information, cooperation, and

leadership, the common goal should be achieved in the most efficient way. Generally, it is the

duty of the Forensic Psychologist to deescalate a hostage situation with minimal damage to

all involved (including the hostage taker) through negotiation, either as primary negotiator or

consultant (Ebert, 1986; Fuselier, 1988). The impetus of the SWAT, Police Department, or

Specialized Unit team will be to resolve the confrontation operationally with force, also

hopefully with minimal harm to hostages and bystanders. Logically, resolution through

negotiation will cause less physical harm to the hostage taker (and presumably less risk to

everyone else, officers and hostages alike), whereas force will significantly reduce the

likelihood of a “perfect” outcome.

The decision between the two options, including timing, has to be taken by the team

leader, and utilizes operational, behavioral, and other intelligence. Depending on the hostage

takers’ level of organization and planning, motivation, behavior, and other situational factors

such as spatial aspects, weapons, number of perpetrators, and demands, the team leader will

do a risk analysis based on all members’ inputs. Beyond the actual negotiation, the Forensic

Psychologist therefore has an essential role in analyzing the hostage takers’ behavior and

mental status, their willingness to negotiate and adjust demands, and their risk of escalating to

violence. Often collateral information from sources such as medical records and family

statements are useful in the process. In summary, it is the ability of the Forensic Psychologist

to conceptualize a hostage situation, gather behavioral information, utilize his or her own

strengths to engage with the hostage taker(s) and other crisis team members, and disseminate

relevant analyses, that will contribute most effectively in management of a hostage situation.
11 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

As a final note: Similar to the reluctance of police officers to negotiate, the psychologist

should also not be weary to accept an ultimate decision to use force when appropriate as a

last resort or calculated risk.

Early trauma intervention. The next role that a Forensic Psychologist can fulfill in

the management of crisis situations is in early trauma intervention. Critical incident stress

debriefing is the most effective if applied within 24 to 72 hours of a traumatic event, which

allows the affected individual, whether victim or first-responder, the opportunity to process

the event, reflect on its impact, and vent associated emotions—all important processes to

decrease the possibility of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The main steps of a trauma

debriefing process is situational assessment, ensuring safety and security, defusing events and

experiences, anticipate future reactions, conduct emotional, physical, and cognitive reviews,

facilitate anchoring and closure, and facilitate re-entry into normal daily lives and duties. As

traumatic events can cause considerable psychological distress over time for most people,

critical incident debriefing soon after a traumatic experience proved very effective in

dissipating these reactions, and disrupting the posttraumatic stress disorder development

process (Roberts, Kitchiner, Kenardy, & Bisson, 2009). Hobfoll et al. (2007) believes that

crisis debriefing can be equally effectively applied as an individual or collective process,

which can adequately address the aftermath of mass disasters and violence. Essentially crisis

debriefing has the objective to restore a sense of security and confidence, thereby preventing

the affected individuals to withdraw and become isolated, which is conducive to the

development of PTSD. Crisis intervention is an emerging practice field for forensic

psychologists, and has significant potential in- and outside of the police agency structure.

Terrorist profiling. The third area where a Forensic Psychologist can make valuable

contributions in the police management of crisis situations is terrorist profiling. If sufficient

intelligence can be gathered quickly, the Forensic Psychologist may be able to translate this
 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 12

information into predictive data that may provide insight into the terrorists’

organizational/cell structure, leadership profile(s), resource and supply chain, behavior

patterns, and movements. The objectives are that such input will enable law enforcement

agencies and their specialized units to concentrate their operational focus on a more

manageable geographical area and number of suspects, while better interpret their

motivation(s) and behavior. According to Vaisman-Tzachor (2007), evidence of their actions,

selection of means, delivery systems, and targets in the context of public statements and

historical activities, can provide their psychological makeup and motivations, which is

valuable in counterterrorism strategies. However, Dean (2006) warns that profiling terrorists

may not necessarily be simple or helpful, and can even be deceiving, especially if not done in

the appropriate cultural context. Instead of profiling individual terrorists, it may be more

valuable and helpful to profile their processes and organizational transformations—including

multilevel leader-follower profiles. A typical terrorist organizational structure is extremely

adaptive to changes in members and situations, with links between members, leaders, cells,

and affiliates often loosely arranged to protect the identities and whereabouts of leaders, and

therefore the continued survival of the structure. This multi-context model thus fosters a

wider and deeper appreciation of terrorism as a “systemic phenomenon” rather than an

individual process, with the possible exception of the “lone wolf” terrorist type. As a result,

the Forensic Psychologist can utilize his or her analytical skills and understanding of human

behavior and motivation to contribute to a proactive approach to identify and disrupt terrorist

plans.

This Unit (7) addressed two very important roles that a Forensic Psychologist can

(and should) play beyond legal assessments, criminal profiling, and expert testimony, namely

(1) a psychotherapist for forensic populations in correctional, in- and outpatient facilities, and

(2) a negotiator, analyst, and counselor in crisis situations. With knowledge and expertise of
13 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

both legal and psychological issues, the Forensic Psychologist is a valuable resource in teams

and settings that require a solution in a criminal justice context, whether in the field,

courtroom, prison, health care facility, or research institution. Whereas Forensic

Psychologists in practice roles provide analyses to answer legal questions and affect criminal

outcomes across the spectrum of the criminal justice system, their peers in research roles

provide the evidence-based support in terms of instruments and methodologies that are

validated and reliable for use in practical applications.

KEY CONCEPTS

 Recidivism (reoffending) counters the objectives of the criminal system.

 Recidivism within three years of release is typically 66% and more.
 Risk factors for reoffending is criminal history, antisocial personality traits,
substance abuse, and lack of support after release.
 Therapy approaches such as CBT, Reality Therapy, and Psychoanalytic
Therapy reduce recidivism by about 30%.
 Forensic Psychologists act as consultants or primary negotiators in hostage
situations by analyzing or communicating with hostage takers.
 Forensic Psychologists also conduct therapy with offenders in prison, in- and
outpatient facilities, and trauma victims.

References

Canter, D. (2010). Forensic psychology: A very short introduction. New York, NY: Oxford

University Press.
 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 14

Dean, G. (2006). Criminal profiling in a terrorism context. In R. N. Kocsis (Ed.). Criminal

profiling: International research, theory, and practice (pp. 169-188). Totowa, NJ:

Humana Press.

Ebert, B. W. (1986). The mental health response team: An expanding role for psychologists.

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17(6), 580-585.

Fuselier, G. D. (1988). Hostage negotiation consultant: Emerging role for the clinical

psychologist. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19(2), 175-179.

Grubb, A. (2010). Modern day hostage (crisis) negotiation: The evolution of an art form

within the policing arena. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 341-348. DOI:

10.1016/j.avb.2010.06.002

Hobfoll, S. E., Watson, P., Bell, C. C., Bryant, R. A., Brymer, M. J., Friedman, M.

J.,…Ursano, R. J. (2007). Five essential elements of immediate and mid-term mass

trauma intervention: Empirical evidence. Focus, 7(2), 221-242.

Landenberger, N. A., & Lipsey, M. W. (2005). The positive effects of cognitive-behavioral

programs for offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective

treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(4), 451-476.

Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Bureau of

Justice Statistics Special Report NCJ 193427. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Justice.

Lester, D., & Van Voorhis, P. (2009). Psychoanalytic therapy. In P. van Voorhis, M. C.

Braswell, & D. Lester (Eds.), Correctional counseling and rehabilitation (7th edn.),

(pp. 43-62). New Providence, NJ: Matthew Bender & Company.

Ministry of Justice. (2012). Compendium of re-offending statistics and analysis. London, UK:

Author.
15 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual

Roberts, N. P., Kitchiner, N. J., Kenardy, J., & Bisson, J. I. (2009). Systematic review and

meta-analysis of multiple-session early intervention following traumatic events.

American Journal of Psychiatry, 166(3), 293-301.

Schmideberg, M. (2005). Reality therapy with offenders. British Journal of Criminology,

5(2), 168-182.

Sperry, L. (2006). Cognitive behavior of DSM-IV-TR personality disorders (2nd edn.). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Vaisman-Tzachor, R. (2007). Profiling terrorists. Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations, 7(1),

27-61. DOI: 10.1300/J173v07n01_03

 Forensic Psychology: A Short eManual 16

Assessment questions

• Explain the principles and objectives of the criminal system?

• Describe and quantify recidivism and risk factors?

• Highlight effective therapy interventions to reduce recidivism?

• Explain the roles of the Forensic Psychologist in crisis management?

View publication stats