Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations
Ethics in Motion articles present complex issues with multiple, often divergent perspectives regarding important ethical issues in psychology. The current collection, Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations, represents multiple viewpoints regarding the potential conf...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Professional psychology, research and practice research and practice, 2024-06, Vol.55 (3), p.179-196 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 196 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 179 |
| container_title | Professional psychology, research and practice |
| container_volume | 55 |
| creator | Frederick, Richard I. Mikesell, James W. Otto, Randy K. Boone, Kyle Brauer Beattey, Robert A. Sweet, Jerry J. Krauss, Daniel A. Scroppo, Joe |
| description | Ethics in Motion articles present complex issues with multiple, often divergent perspectives regarding important ethical issues in psychology. The current collection, Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations, represents multiple viewpoints regarding the potential conflict between due process rights and efforts to protect sensitive information associated with forensic assessment. The first manuscript by Frederick et al. (2024) is followed by other viewpoints on this issue by Boone, Beattey, & Sweet; Krauss; and Scroppo.
Public Significance Statement
Our article argues that when psychology operates within the legal system, it is important for psychologists to recognize that the manner in which they attempt to resolve the ethical problems of their own profession can impact the constitutional rights of civil litigants and criminal defendants. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1037/pro0000581 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3081844142</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3078731120</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a212t-5eb0854c4eb06527f281de4018bc1a5bd7df5a102c49cbfac9a6472c7f8487b83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LxDAQxYMouK5e_AQFb0o1kz-b9Ci16woLXvQcpmmKWXbbmnTF_fZmqeDNubwH85sZ5hFyDfQeKFcPQ-hpKqnhhMyg4EUOnPFTMqOKy1xRps_JRYybxHDO5YysqvHDW9xmZd9F37iAo08ua_uQPbkdds3kq6_U7KzLfJct--ASbLPqG3e-myYuyVmL2-iufnVO3pfVW7nK16_PL-XjOkcGbMylq6mWwoqkC8lUyzQ0TlDQtQWUdaOaViJQZkVh6xZtgQuhmFWtFlrVms_JzbQ3vfq5d3E0m34funTScKpBCwGC_U8prTgAo4m6nSgb-hiDa80Q_A7DwQA1xzzNX54JvptgHNAM8WAxjN5uXbT7kPIYj6yR0nADquA_SnJ2xQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3078731120</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations</title><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Frederick, Richard I. ; Mikesell, James W. ; Otto, Randy K. ; Boone, Kyle Brauer ; Beattey, Robert A. ; Sweet, Jerry J. ; Krauss, Daniel A. ; Scroppo, Joe</creator><contributor>Borden, Kathi A ; Simonian, Susan J ; Younggren, Jeffrey N</contributor><creatorcontrib>Frederick, Richard I. ; Mikesell, James W. ; Otto, Randy K. ; Boone, Kyle Brauer ; Beattey, Robert A. ; Sweet, Jerry J. ; Krauss, Daniel A. ; Scroppo, Joe ; Borden, Kathi A ; Simonian, Susan J ; Younggren, Jeffrey N</creatorcontrib><description>Ethics in Motion articles present complex issues with multiple, often divergent perspectives regarding important ethical issues in psychology. The current collection, Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations, represents multiple viewpoints regarding the potential conflict between due process rights and efforts to protect sensitive information associated with forensic assessment. The first manuscript by Frederick et al. (2024) is followed by other viewpoints on this issue by Boone, Beattey, & Sweet; Krauss; and Scroppo.
Public Significance Statement
Our article argues that when psychology operates within the legal system, it is important for psychologists to recognize that the manner in which they attempt to resolve the ethical problems of their own profession can impact the constitutional rights of civil litigants and criminal defendants.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0735-7028</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1323</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/pro0000581</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Access ; Adjudication ; Codes of conduct ; Disclosure ; Due process of law ; Ethics ; Forensic Psychology ; Human ; Legal Evidence ; Legal Processes ; Legal system ; Psychological tests ; Psychologists ; Psychometrics ; Scrutiny</subject><ispartof>Professional psychology, research and practice, 2024-06, Vol.55 (3), p.179-196</ispartof><rights>2024 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2024, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Jun 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0009-0008-8008-3016</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27913,27914,30988</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Borden, Kathi A</contributor><contributor>Simonian, Susan J</contributor><contributor>Younggren, Jeffrey N</contributor><creatorcontrib>Frederick, Richard I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mikesell, James W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Otto, Randy K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boone, Kyle Brauer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beattey, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sweet, Jerry J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krauss, Daniel A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scroppo, Joe</creatorcontrib><title>Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations</title><title>Professional psychology, research and practice</title><description>Ethics in Motion articles present complex issues with multiple, often divergent perspectives regarding important ethical issues in psychology. The current collection, Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations, represents multiple viewpoints regarding the potential conflict between due process rights and efforts to protect sensitive information associated with forensic assessment. The first manuscript by Frederick et al. (2024) is followed by other viewpoints on this issue by Boone, Beattey, & Sweet; Krauss; and Scroppo.
Public Significance Statement
Our article argues that when psychology operates within the legal system, it is important for psychologists to recognize that the manner in which they attempt to resolve the ethical problems of their own profession can impact the constitutional rights of civil litigants and criminal defendants.</description><subject>Access</subject><subject>Adjudication</subject><subject>Codes of conduct</subject><subject>Disclosure</subject><subject>Due process of law</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Forensic Psychology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Legal Evidence</subject><subject>Legal Processes</subject><subject>Legal system</subject><subject>Psychological tests</subject><subject>Psychologists</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Scrutiny</subject><issn>0735-7028</issn><issn>1939-1323</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE9LxDAQxYMouK5e_AQFb0o1kz-b9Ci16woLXvQcpmmKWXbbmnTF_fZmqeDNubwH85sZ5hFyDfQeKFcPQ-hpKqnhhMyg4EUOnPFTMqOKy1xRps_JRYybxHDO5YysqvHDW9xmZd9F37iAo08ua_uQPbkdds3kq6_U7KzLfJct--ASbLPqG3e-myYuyVmL2-iufnVO3pfVW7nK16_PL-XjOkcGbMylq6mWwoqkC8lUyzQ0TlDQtQWUdaOaViJQZkVh6xZtgQuhmFWtFlrVms_JzbQ3vfq5d3E0m34funTScKpBCwGC_U8prTgAo4m6nSgb-hiDa80Q_A7DwQA1xzzNX54JvptgHNAM8WAxjN5uXbT7kPIYj6yR0nADquA_SnJ2xQ</recordid><startdate>202406</startdate><enddate>202406</enddate><creator>Frederick, Richard I.</creator><creator>Mikesell, James W.</creator><creator>Otto, Randy K.</creator><creator>Boone, Kyle Brauer</creator><creator>Beattey, Robert A.</creator><creator>Sweet, Jerry J.</creator><creator>Krauss, Daniel A.</creator><creator>Scroppo, Joe</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8008-3016</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202406</creationdate><title>Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations</title><author>Frederick, Richard I. ; Mikesell, James W. ; Otto, Randy K. ; Boone, Kyle Brauer ; Beattey, Robert A. ; Sweet, Jerry J. ; Krauss, Daniel A. ; Scroppo, Joe</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a212t-5eb0854c4eb06527f281de4018bc1a5bd7df5a102c49cbfac9a6472c7f8487b83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Access</topic><topic>Adjudication</topic><topic>Codes of conduct</topic><topic>Disclosure</topic><topic>Due process of law</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Forensic Psychology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Legal Evidence</topic><topic>Legal Processes</topic><topic>Legal system</topic><topic>Psychological tests</topic><topic>Psychologists</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Scrutiny</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Frederick, Richard I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mikesell, James W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Otto, Randy K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boone, Kyle Brauer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beattey, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sweet, Jerry J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krauss, Daniel A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scroppo, Joe</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Professional psychology, research and practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Frederick, Richard I.</au><au>Mikesell, James W.</au><au>Otto, Randy K.</au><au>Boone, Kyle Brauer</au><au>Beattey, Robert A.</au><au>Sweet, Jerry J.</au><au>Krauss, Daniel A.</au><au>Scroppo, Joe</au><au>Borden, Kathi A</au><au>Simonian, Susan J</au><au>Younggren, Jeffrey N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations</atitle><jtitle>Professional psychology, research and practice</jtitle><date>2024-06</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>179</spage><epage>196</epage><pages>179-196</pages><issn>0735-7028</issn><eissn>1939-1323</eissn><abstract>Ethics in Motion articles present complex issues with multiple, often divergent perspectives regarding important ethical issues in psychology. The current collection, Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations, represents multiple viewpoints regarding the potential conflict between due process rights and efforts to protect sensitive information associated with forensic assessment. The first manuscript by Frederick et al. (2024) is followed by other viewpoints on this issue by Boone, Beattey, & Sweet; Krauss; and Scroppo.
Public Significance Statement
Our article argues that when psychology operates within the legal system, it is important for psychologists to recognize that the manner in which they attempt to resolve the ethical problems of their own profession can impact the constitutional rights of civil litigants and criminal defendants.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><doi>10.1037/pro0000581</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8008-3016</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0735-7028 |
| ispartof | Professional psychology, research and practice, 2024-06, Vol.55 (3), p.179-196 |
| issn | 0735-7028 1939-1323 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3081844142 |
| source | EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) |
| subjects | Access Adjudication Codes of conduct Disclosure Due process of law Ethics Forensic Psychology Human Legal Evidence Legal Processes Legal system Psychological tests Psychologists Psychometrics Scrutiny |
| title | Ethical Considerations for Demands for Evidence in Forensic Examinations |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T08%3A18%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ethical%20Considerations%20for%20Demands%20for%20Evidence%20in%20Forensic%20Examinations&rft.jtitle=Professional%20psychology,%20research%20and%20practice&rft.au=Frederick,%20Richard%20I.&rft.date=2024-06&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=179&rft.epage=196&rft.pages=179-196&rft.issn=0735-7028&rft.eissn=1939-1323&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/pro0000581&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3078731120%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3078731120&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |