skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 156317 Find in a Library
Title: Use and Then Prove, or Prove and Then Use? Some Thoughts on the Ethics of Mental Health Professionals' Courtroom Involvement
Journal: Ethics and Behavior  Volume:3  Issue:3 and 4  Dated:(1993)  Pages:359-380
Author(s): D Faust
Date Published: 1993
Page Count: 22
Type: Survey
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: The use of psychologists in the courtroom is explored.
Abstract: Psychologists' courtroom involvement and testimony should not be dictated solely by what the judge or court allows, but also should require the application of personal or professional standards. This article explores various standards that might be used to determine whether psychological evidence is ready for courtroom application, whether or which evaluative procedures should be performed prior to courtroom use, and the potential tensions between personal validation or impression and formal scientific evidence. The author argues that although determining just how tough the professional standards ought to be involves complex issues, the field should take a strong stance against testimony that is based largely on personal validation and that lacks scientific support or conflicts with research evidence. The article concludes that much of current testimony violates this minimal standard. References
Main Term(s): Courts
Index Term(s): Criminology; Expert witnesses; Forensic psychology; Psychology
Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.