Keywords
Legal Psychology
ethics
ethical issues
bibliometric
How to Cite
Abstract
Forensic psychologists confront a myriad of ethical issues and are presented with special challenges to professional training and performance in the field. This study aims to identify the primary ethical issues facing forensic psychology and to carry out a bibliometric study focused on specialized literature ranging from 2010 to 2019. Furthermore, this study examines the state of forensic psychology from an international perspective. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA standard recommendations. The search began from a pool of 7889 publications, from which were extracted 197 articles, selecting 16 for this study. A total of 124 ethical issues were identified, and they were resumed in 77, which were then classified into six categories: 1) objectivity, 2) intervention, 3) conflict of interest, 4) obtaining and use of information, 5) consent, and 6) professional competence. The bibliometric analysis identified that half of the manuscripts originated from the United States of America with none published in Latin America. Similarly, 87% were published in the English language with 12.5% published in Spanish. However, the Annals of Legal Psychology (Anuario de Psicología Jurídica) published most of the identified dilemmas. Psychology Injury and Law represented the journal with the most publications; the greatest number of articles were published in 2014. The bibliometric analysis suggests studies focused on dilemmas in forensic psychology are scarce and none were found to have been carried out in Mexico.
References
*Ackerman, M. J., y Pritzl, T. B. (2011). Child Custody Evaluation Practices: A 20-Year Follow-Up. Family Court Review, 49(3), 618–628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01397.x
*Allan, A. (2013). Ethics in Correctional and Forensic Psychology: Getting the Balance Right. Australian Psychologist, 48(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-9544.2012.00079.x
American Psychotherapy Association, Inc. (2016). Annals of Psychotherapy y Integrative Health, 1. https://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/command/detail?vid=11ysid=cb207c5f-9683-4bee-a5c1-4c2d7d74bf3c%40sdc-v-sessmgr01ybdata=Jmxhbmc9ZXMmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl#db=asnyjid=GDFN
Arrigo, B. A. (Ed.). (2016). Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 16, 1-60. https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/wfpp20/16/1?nav=tocList
American Psychological Association (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. American Psychologist, (68) 1, 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029889
American Psychological Association (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
American Psychological Association (2021). Manual de publicaciones de la American Psychological Association. Manual Moderno.
Babb, B., y Kline, M. (Eds). (2020). Editorial Note. Family Court Review, 58(3), 635-638. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12436
Bailey, T.D., Rocchio, L. (2020). (Eds). Evaluating the Effects of Repeated Psychological Injury: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Psychol. Inj. and Law 13, 105–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-020-09386-7
*Barnao, M., Robertson, P., y Ward, T. (2012). Ethical Decision Making and Forensic Practice. The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 14 (2) 81-91. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280215658_Ethical_decision_making_and_forensic_practice
Brodsky, S. L., y Gutheil, T. G. (2016). The Expert Expert Witness: More Maxims and Guidelines for Testifying in Court (2da ed.). Asociación Americana de Psicología. https://doi.org/10.1037/14732-000
*Bush, S.S., Heilbronner, R.L. y Ruff, R.M. (2014). Psychological Assessment of Symptom and Performance Validity, Response Bias, and Malingering: Official Position of the Association for Scientific Advancement in Psychological Injury and Law. Psychological Injury and Law, 7, 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-014-9198-7
*Candilis, P. J. y Neal, T. M. S. (2014). Not Just Welfare Over Justice: Ethics in Forensic Consultation. Legal y Criminological Psychology, 19(1), 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12038
Chen, H., Feng, Y., Li, S., Zhang, Y. y Yang, X. (2019). Bibliometric Analysis of Theme Evolution and Future Research Trends of the Type A Personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109507
Darby, W. C y Weinstock, R. (2017). Resolving Ethics Dilemmas in Forensic Practice. En Ezra Griffith (Ed.). Ethics Challenges in Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology Practice. Columbia University Press.
Davies, J., Black, S., Bentley, N. y Nagi, C. (2013). Forensic Case Formulation: Theoretical, Ethical and Practical Issues. Criminal Behaviour y Mental Health, 23(4), 304–314. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.1882
Esbec, E. y Echeburúa, E. (2016). Mala praxis en psicología clínica y forense a la luz de los tribunales de justicia españoles. Behavioral Psychology / Psicología Conductual, 24(1), 179-196. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-20205-010
Ewing, C. P., Slobogin, C. y Feltous, A. (Eds). (2020). Behavioural Sciences and the Law, 38(1), 3-76. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10990798
*Fromberger, P., Jordan, K. y Müller, J. L. (2018). Virtual Reality Applications for Diagnosis, Risk Assessment and Therapy of Child Abusers. Behavioral Sciences y the Law, 36(2), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2332
García-López, E., Mercurio, E., Nidjam-Jones, A., Morales, L. A. y Rosenfeld, B. (2019). Neurolaw in Latin America: Current Status and Challenges. International Jorunal of Forensic Mental Health, 18(3), 260-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2018.1552634
Geffner, R., Shaw, M. y Crowell, B. (2018). Ethical Considerations in Forensic Evaluations in Family Court. In M. Leach y E. Welfel (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Applied Psychological Ethics (pp. 452-473). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417287.023
Goldstein M. (2016) Ethical Issues in Child Custody Evaluations. En: Goldstein M. (eds) Handbook of Child Custody. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13942-5_1
González, J., Martínez, Y. y Bravo, D. (2017). Empleo de indicadores bibliométricos para la realización de un estado del arte. Un enfoque práctico. Revista Publicando, 3(9), 81-97. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5833536
Gunn, J., Taylor, P. J., Farrington, D. y McMurran, Mary. (Eds). (2020). Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 30(2-3), 53-152. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2163
Horcajo, P. (2018). Contrainforme. https://psicologia-forense-madrid.es/contrainforme
Horton, A. M. y Soper, H. V. (2019). Forensic Psychology: Practice Issues. En G. Goldstein, D. N. Allen y J. DeLuca (Eds.), Handbook of Psychological Assessment (pp. 533–550). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802203-0.00017-1
Ireland, C.A. y Gredecki, N. (Eds.). (2012), “Editorial”, The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/bjfp.2012.54314daa.001
Isard, J. (2017). Under the Cloak of Brain Science: Risk Assessments, Parole, and the Powerful Guise of Objectivity. California Law Review, 105, 1258. http://www.californialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/5Replacement-Isard-34.pdf
Juárez, J.R. y Álvarez, F. (2018). Evaluación psicológica forense de los abusos y maltratos a niños, niñas y adolescentes. Guía de buenas prácticas. Asociación de Psicólogos Forenses de la Administración de Justicia. https://www.copmadrid.org/web/comunicacion/noticias/926/guia-buenas-practicas-la-evaluacion-psicologica-forense-los-abusos-maltratos-ninos-ninas-adolescentes
Juárez, J.R. y Lira, G. (2020). Buenas prácticas, tensiones y desafíos ético-deontológicos en la evaluación psicológica forense del maltrato y abuso sexual infantil. Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 49, 41-58. https://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/RBD/article/view/28610
Kangas, M. (2020). (Ed). Australian Psychologist, 55(4), 293-422. https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12414
Kharoshash, M. (Ed.) (2020). Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 10, Articles 1-26. https://ejfs.springeropen.com/articles?query=yvolume=10ysearchType=ytab=keyword
Ludici, A., Salvini, A., Faccio, E. y Castelnuovo, G. (2015). The Clinical Assessment in the Legal Field: An Empirical Study of Bias and Limitations in Forensic Expertise. Frontiers in Psychology. 6, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01831
Manzanero, A. (2015). (Ed). 25 años de Anuario de Psicología Jurídica. Anuario de Psicología Jurídic, 25(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apj.2015.04.001
Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G y The PRISMA Group. (2010). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Int J Surg, 8(5), 336-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007
*Molina, A.., Arch, M. y Jarne A. (2012). Conocimiento y aplicación de los principios éticos y deontológicos por parte de los psicólogos forenses expertos en el ámbito de familia. Anuario de Psicologia Juridica, 22, 77–93. https://doi.org/10.5093/aj2012a8.
Morales, L., García, E., Vaca, J. y Carrillo, R. (2017). Psicología jurídica, criminológica y forense en México: estado del arte. En E. Norza, y G. Egea. (Eds), Con-Ciencia Criminal: Criminología, Psicología Jurídica y Perfilación Criminal (pp. 34-42). Manual Moderno.
Naharit, G. (Ed.). (2020). Legal and Criminological Psychology, 25(1), 1-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12153
*Neal, T. M. S y Brodsky, S. L. (2014). Occupational Socialization's Role in Forensic Psychologists Ojectivity. Journal Of Forensic Psychology Practice, 1(14) 24-44 https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2013.863054
Otto, R. K., Goldstein, A. M. y Heilbrun, K. (2017). Ethics in Forensic Psychology Practice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
*Pirelli, G., Hartigan, S. y Zapf, P. A. (2018). Using the Internet for Collateral Information in Forensic Mental Health Evaluations. Behavioral Sciences y the Law, 36 (2), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2334
Quevedo, M. L. (2017). La buena práctica pericial, el camino hacia la excelencia profesional en Psicología Forense. Información psicològica, 114, 98-104. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6350813
*Richards, P.M., Geiger, J.A. y Tussey, C.M. (2015). The Dirty Dozen: 12 Sources of Bias in Forensic Neuropsychology with Ways to Mitigate. Psychological Injury and Law, 8, 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-015-9235-1
*Richards, P.M. y Tussey, C.M. (2013). The Neuropsychologist as Expert Witness: Testimony in Civil and Criminal Settings. Psychological Injury and Law, 6, 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9148-9
Rocchio, L.M. (2020). Ethical and Professional Considerations in the Forensic Assessment of Complex Trauma and Dissociation. Psychol. Inj. and Law 13, 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-020-09384-9
Ruíz-Cano, J., Cantú-Quintanilla, G., Ávila-Montiel, D., Gamboa-Marrufo, J.D., Juárez-Villegas, L.E., Hoyos-Bermea, A.D., Chávez-López, A., Estrada-Ramírez, K.P., Merelo-Arias, C.A., Altamirano-Bustamante, M.M., Vega-Morell, N.D., Peláez-Ballestas, I., Guadarrama-Orozco, J.H., Munoz-Hernandez, O. y Garduño-Espinosa, J. (2015). Revisión de modelos para el análisis de dilemas éticos. Boletín médico del Hospital Infantil de México, 72, 89-98. http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/bmim/v72n2/1665-1146-bmim-72-02-00089.pdf
SCImago Journal y Country Rank. (2019). https://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php
Su, Y. S., Lin, C. L., Chen, S. Y. y Lai, C. F. (2020). Bibliometric Study of Social Network Analysis Literature. Library Hi Tech, 38(2), 420-433. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-01-2019-0028
*Thomson, D. (2013). Creating Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychology. Australian Psychologist. 48, 28-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-9544.2012.00092.x
*Urra, J. (2010). Criterios Éticos para Psicólogos Jurídicos. Anuario de Psicología Jurídica, 20, 93–104. https://doi.org/10.5093/jr2010v20a9
*Vaisman-Tzachor, R. (2014). Psychological Assessment Protocol for Asylum Applications in Federal Immigration Courts. Annals of Psychotherapy y Integrative Health, 34-49. https://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0ysid=b657fced-e725-4e96-b2cb-70c03ecc7ac6%40pdc-v-sessmgr04
*Yadav, P.K. Ethical Issues cross Different Fields of Forensic Science. (2017). Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 7, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-017-0010-1
Young, G. (2016). Psychiatric/psychological Forensic Report Writing. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 49, 214-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.10.008
Younggren, J. N., Gottlieb, M. C. y Boness, C. L. (2020). Forensic Consultation. In C. A. Falender y E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Consultation in Psychology: A Competency-based Approach (p. 239–251). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000153-014
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021