• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >A qualitative study exploring the factors that contribute to stress in women forensic psychologists who testify in court as expert witnesses.
【24h】

A qualitative study exploring the factors that contribute to stress in women forensic psychologists who testify in court as expert witnesses.

机译：一项定性研究，探索了在法庭上作为专家证人作证的女性法医心理学家中造成压力的因素。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Forensic psychologists face a significant amount of stress when they work with legal professionals. The stress is accentuated when the expert testifying in court is a woman. This study explored the factors that create stress for women forensic psychologists who work as expert witnesses. Fifteen female forensic psychologists (10 Caucasian women and 5 women of color) were interviewed. Experiences of child custody evaluators were contrasted with those of women conducting insanity, dangerousness, and competency evaluations. Data was collected through a semi-structured interview and included questions about role conflict, interactions with legal professionals, psychological tests, experience as a woman, and one's ethnicity as a stressor.;Results indicated that women conducting insanity and dangerousness evaluations experienced role conflict in the form of the legal system not recognizing their ethical standards. All participants experienced a pull to provide case specific answers. Both groups reported negative experiences with attorneys. Issues raised included attorneys (1) being focused on their own agenda, (2) putting psychologists in ethical doublebinds, (3) demanding unexpected knowledge of latest research, and (4) threatening with malpractice suits. Both groups experienced pressure to answer the ultimate question. Women conducting insanity and dangerousness evaluation reflected on having to educate jury members about psychological concepts as stressful.;While the Rorschach and other projective tests were identified as supplementary tools, MCMI-3 was reported to be more useful than MMPI-2 to defend in court. A pull to use psychological tests to answer the legal question was identified. Child custody evaluators identified being a woman as advantageous. Women conducting insanity and dangerousness evaluations reported being questioned rigorously about their expertise. While women of color identified feeling discriminated due to their ethnicity, all participants identified being subjected to difficult cross examination when evaluating people from an ethnicity different from their own. Emotional burnout as a cause and effect of this work was discussed.;Limitations of this study relevant to generalizability of results due to the relatively small sample were discussed. Recommendations for new aspirants, current professionals, and legal professionals were discussed. Rewards of the work and potential for future research were provided.
机译：法医心理学家在与法律专业人士合作时面临巨大的压力。当出庭作证的专家是女性时，压力会加重。这项研究探讨了为作为专家证人的女性法医心理学家造成压力的因素。采访了15名女性法医心理学家（10名白人女性和5名有色女性）。将儿童监护人评估员的经验与进行精神错乱，危险和能力评估的妇女的经验相对照。通过半结构化访谈收集的数据包括角色冲突，与法律专业人士的互动，心理测验，女性经历以及作为压力源的种族等问题;结果表明，进行精神错乱和危险评估的女性经历了角色冲突。法律制度的形式不承认其道德标准。所有参与者都经历了提供案例特定答案的吸引力。两组都报告了律师的负面经历。提出的问题包括律师（1）专注于他们自己的议程，（2）使心理学家陷入道德双重束缚，（3）要求对最新研究有意外的了解，以及（4）面临渎职诉讼的威胁。两组都面临回答最终问题的压力。进行精神​​错乱和危险评估的妇女反映出必须向陪审团成员介绍有关心理观念的压力。虽然罗尔沙赫（Rorschach）和其他投射测试被确定为辅助工具，但据报道MCMI-3比MMPI-2更为有用。确定了使用心理测试来回答法律问题的吸引力。儿童监护权评估人员认为，女性是有利的。据报告，进行精神错乱和危险评估的妇女受到严格询问，询问其专业知识。虽然有色女人确定由于种族而感到歧视，但所有参与者都认为，在评估与自己种族不同的人时，他们会经历艰难的交叉检查。讨论了情绪倦怠作为这项工作的起因和结果。讨论了由于样本量相对较小而导致的研究结果局限性。讨论了对新求职者，现有专业人员和法律专业人员的建议。提供了工作奖励和未来研究的潜力。

著录项

  • 作者

    Dixit-Brunet, Aparna.;

  • 作者单位

    Alliant International University, San Francisco Bay.;

  • 授予单位 Alliant International University, San Francisco Bay.;
  • 学科 Psychology Clinical.
  • 学位 Psy.D.
  • 年度 2006
  • 页码 174 p.
  • 总页数 174
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号