Richard W. Wooten, Ph.D. Clinical Forensic Psychologist

1. Neutrality in an Adversarial Legal Landscape: Understanding the Shared Role of Psychologists and Attorneys in Complex Legal Matters Richard W. Wooten, Ph.D. Clinical Forensic Psychologist

2. Goals • 1.) Making connections between our professions • 2.) Identifying perception as a stumbling block • 3.) Historical shift in law and psychology; walls instead of collaboration • 4.) The role of testing: often misunderstood, but making it work for everybody • 5.) Recognizing pitfalls, and combatting stressors when facing complex issues • 6.) Concluding thoughts

3. 1.) The connection between law and psychology • Both professions tend to deal fundamentally with human behavior.  • Both are driven by thechoices people have made – to do right or wrong, to lie or tell the truth.  • Both are entrenched in decision making – What do I do now that a choice is made? Focus is on long-term resolution? • Both deal with perceptions of the circumstances at hand– was it really an assault? Is he/she as bad as the information suggests? • Bottom line, our jobs affect people’s lives, and the decisions we make can alter the course of an individual’s, or a family’s future

4. 2.) Our perceptions can sometimes fail us • Plays a role in how well we work together. • The way we enter a situation, sometimes with preconceived ideas, will skew our ability to make sound decisions. • Lends credibility to the idea of implicit bias • According to psychologists, the brain is able to see two images almost simultaneously - but one will stand out more depending on your experiences and thoughts.

5. Who’s who?

6. Judging a book by its cover? Not always effective • The previous slide illustrates that outward appearances are often misleading. • From left to right: • Kenneth Bianchi, aka “The Hillside Strangler”; American serial murderer/rapist; 12 known victims • Karla Faye Tucker, convicted murderer (two victims); first woman to be executed in Texas since the Civil War (135 years) • Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D., world renowned memory researcher; Cognitive psychologist and Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the University of California-Irvine

7. How is this for cognition? Can you read it? • fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid too. Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can. • i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!

8. 3.) Historical shift to exploit gaps in consciousness: A wall is built • Became a source of contention in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s • The focus became cognition, and the application of computer models to predict things such as social behavior and decision making. • “Extralegal” refers to a decision making process that is either irrelevant to the legal or factual issues of a case, or is considered by the law to be an otherwise improper basis for decision making. • Courtroom style techniques involve body movement, physical appearance, demeanor toward the jury, and use of language. • Courtroom style is also an extralegal basis for decision making because the demeanor of lawyers or witnesses usually has no connection to the legal or factual issues that should be considered.

9. “Gold standard” • “Covert advocacy: reflections on the use of psychological persuasion techniques in the Courtroom” • Victor Gold, J.D. Professor of Law, Loyola University, Los Angeles • Frowned upon the use of psychologists in legal proceedings with advent of research • Fear of creating “super attorneys” with an unfair advantage • Felt that the use psychological experts was a form of “Covert Advocacy” • His article argued that covert advocacy threatened the legitimacy of both the jury, and adversary systems in a way, and to a degree, never before posed by conventional advocacy methods.

10. Origins of collaboration between Attorneys and Psychologists • Better trials through science: A defense of psychologist-lawyer collaboration • J. Alexander Tanford, J.D. Professor Emeritus, Maurer School of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington • Sarah Tanford, Ph.D. in social psychology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison • She drew from her graduate work and studied extra-legal influences on justice through social psych principles • Testing can also offer answers to difficult, often unanswered questions

11. 4.) Fear of testing: what can go wrong • It should never be used as a means of intimidation, or punishment toward a litigant. • An explanation should be offered about the process in an effort to ease the individual’s fears about an often misunderstood process • Is meant to help guide treatment, or find a long-term solution to a present issue. i.e. custody, detention placement, need for psychotherapy • Always reinforce the positive attributes of the process • Example of ”J’s” criticisms vs. a modified approach

12. Categories of psychological tests • Personality/Mood(Anger; Anxiety; Depression; Normal personality; Stress; Trauma, etc.) • Forensic/Legal (Parenting; Competency; Malingering, Feigning, Response style, etc.) • Neuropsychology (Executive functioning; Memory; Attention; Cognitive impairment; Perceptual abilities; perseveration, etc.) • Achievement/Development (Academic skills; Functional skills; Learning disabilities; Social skills; Visual-Motor skills, etc.) • Behavior/Health (SA; Behavior problems; Coping; Family; Parent-Child stress, etc.) • Intelligence/Cognitive (Aptitude; Deficits; Verbal/Non-verbal reasoning; Abilities, etc.) • Career Development/Business (Motivation; Suitability, etc.)

13. What constitutes a good psychological assessment? 1.) It should contain a thorough clinical interview (determines which test approach to apply) 2.) It should be unbiased 3.) It should be balanced (if testing more than one party) 4.) It should answer the questions asked by the requesting party or parties 5.) The examiner should use relevant test kits, inventories, or other tools required to create a comprehensive picture of the individual, or individuals, under consideration 5.) It should serve to formulate recommendations toward a long-term solution 6.) Those recommendations should contain contingency programs

14. Factors in a psychological assessment • There are a number of things at play when we are working with litigants that we may overlook to include: • 1.) cognitive processes (thinking) • 2.) emotions • 3.) Personality factors • 4.) Potential health issues or outside stressors • 5.) Perception

15. Reasons why we might use psychological assessments in the Court • 1.) Assess for psychopathology • 2.) Look at the person’s capacity to do something (i.e. parenting) • 3.) Substance abuse • 4.) Risk assessment • 5.) To test truthfulness • *this is not a comprehensive list

16. Personality Assessments (tests) Goal of a personality test • -to measure observable (overt) traits and behaviors, as well as unobservable (covert) characteristics • Can be used to: 1.) identify personality problems 2.) look for psychological disorders 3.) predict how a person may behave in the future

17. Two broad categories of testing 1.) Projective assessments (primarily for personality assessment) 2.) Inventories (can be used across test types; more than just personality tests)

18. Personality Assessments (tests) Projective tests -these assume that the individual will project both their conscious and unconscious feelings, needs, and motives onto ambiguous stimuli, pictures of events unfolding, or any combination of assessments meant to find unconscious motivations or drives

19. Thematic Apperception Test

20. Rorschach Test (a.k.a. Inkblot Test)

21. Criticisms of projective testing Hard to empirically assess • Need reliability (gives a consistent score at different times) • Need validity (measures what it is supposed to measure) • Open to subjective interpretation • No right or wrong answers • Clinician must specialize in this testing protocol

22. Advantages of projective testing • Great way to elicit information • Difficult to fake because there are no right, or socially desirable answers

23. Inventories, questionnaires, face-to-face testing • Empirically validated (i.e. MMPI-2, PAI, Wechsler series, Millon, etc.) • More objective • Greater statistical weight • Standardized scoring procedures

26. 5.) Stressors can impact all of us • The stress placed on attorneys can often be overlooked due to the adversarial process, as well as the expectation that they maintain their role as advocates for their client to the exclusion of outside consultations (mental health). • Attorneys who work in the area of divorce, which includes those who serve in the role of a GAL, are often viewed as crisis counselors. • Increased demands bring increased stress • The psychologist can aid this process by addressing the impact of stressors, and offer ways to combat this phenomenon. • Remember to control “BEPP”

27. Signs of Psychological stress(affects our ability to cope) • Memory problems • Inability to concentrate • Indecisiveness • Trouble thinking clearly • Anxious or racing thoughts • Constant worry • Poor judgment • Loss of objectiveness • Fear or negativity

28. Signs of Emotional Stress • Moodiness • Impatient • Irritable • Inability to relax • Short tempered • Agitated • Feeling overwhelmed • loneliness or isolation • Depression • General unhappiness

29. Signs of Behavioral Stress • Eat to much or too little • Sleep to much or too little • Procrastination • Alcohol usage • Cigarettes • Illicit drugs • Nail-biting • Pacing • “Overdoing” activities • Picking fights

30. Signs of Physiological Stress • Muscle tension. Headaches Dizziness • Stomach upset Diarrhea Insomnia • Chest pain Fatigue Loss of sex drive • Skin rashes Colds Numbness/tingling in extremities

31. “Confession” aka “collaboration” is good for the mind • 1.) This is why religion can be good for some individuals • 2.) This is why having a confidant can be good • 3.) This is why psychotherapy is good • 4.) This is why collaboration is effective • Research suggests that it is more powerful than social supports • Is physiologically taxing to “hold on” to things

32. 6.) Concluding thoughts: advocacy through collaboration • We have a shared role, and the goals that should focus on problem solving, as well as sustainable outcomes • We need to know where the parties are in the process, and where they are willing to bend to get things accomplished • Ask them to define the big issues vs the small issues • What do they envision in five years, and how willing are they to prove that this is what they really want to do…..make them own the outcome

33. Thank-you, RWW • Richard W. Wooten, Ph.D. • Executive Director, Matrix Psychological Consulting, LLC • 24060 W. Ten Mile Rd. Suite 200 • Southfield, MI 48033 • Office: 248-450-3200 • Fax: 313-960-4646 • Cell: 313-779-8400