030391 KU Psychology and Law (2020S)
This class presents the psychology of law. Law is fundamentally a human endeavour. It is deeply impacted by the way in which people (e.g., plaintiffs, lawyers, and judges) think , feel and behave. As a result, Psychology is an important framework for understanding most legal issues. In particular, psychology illuminates why people get into conflicts and how humans create and apply laws.
- Anmeldung von Di 04.02.2020 00:01 bis So 15.03.2020 23:59
- Abmeldung bis Mo 04.05.2020 23:59
Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert
Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung
Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel
(1) class participation in discussion and exercises (20%) and
(2) an original essay on any class topic (80%).
This essay is a legal-psychological research article about an issue in which law and psychology collide. The students may choose any topic covered in the course, or other relevant topic subject to approval by the professor. The professor will assist in ensuring the students can use these finished works to further their interest in the topic (e.g., expanding on it an submitting it to journals). The word limit is 3,000 words, excluding citations.
Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab
• Demonstrates understanding of fundamental concepts in psychology
• Applies psychological theories and findings to legal issues, doctrines and rules
• Develops or adapts convincing arguments and provides strong justification
• Communicates information and ideas clearly and fluently
• Shows consistent originality in generating arguments
Keith E Stanovich, How to Think Straight About Psychology (Pearson, 2012), Chapter 1 Psychology is alive and well (and doing fine among the sciences) 1-18.
Kathleen A Kennedy & Emily Pronin, ‘Bias Perception and the Spiral of Conflict’ in Jon Hanson and John Jost (eds), Ideology, Psychology, and Law (Oxford University Press, 2012
Jesse Graham, Jonathan Haidt & Brian A Nosek, ‘Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations’ (2009) 96:5 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1029.Class 2: The credibility revolution in psychology and beyond
Jason M Chin, ‘Psychological Science’s Replicability Crisis and What It Means for Science in the Courtroom’ (2014) 20:3 Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 225.
Jason M Chin, Gianni Ribeiro & Alicia Reardon, ‘Open Forensic Science’ (2019) 6:1 The Journal of Law and the Biosciences 255.
Leif D Nelson, Joseph Simmons & Uri Simonsohn, ‘Psychology’s Renaissance’ (2017) 69 Annual Review of Psychology 17.Class 3: Expert evidence
Jason M Chin, Michael Lutsky & Itiel E Dror ‘The biases of experts: An empirical analysis of expert witness challenges’ (2019) 42:4 Manitoba Law Journal 21Class 4: Psychology and wrongful convictions
Jason M Chin & William E Crozier, ‘Rethinking the Ken Through the Lens of Psychological Science’ (2018) 55:3 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 625Class 5: Judicial decision making, juries, and eyewitnesses
Lee Epstein et al, ‘Ideology and the Study of Judicial Behavior’ in Jon Hanson and John Jost (eds), Ideology, Psychology, and Law (Oxford University Press, 2012).
Steven E Clark et al, ‘Eyewitness Identification and the Accuracy of the Criminal Justice System’ (2015) 2:1 Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences 175-186.Class 6: Neurolaw, punishment, and the emerging science of happiness
Christopher Slobogin, ‘Neuroscience Nuance: Dissecting the Relevance of Neuroscience in Adjudicating Criminal Culpability’ (2017) 4:3 Journal of Law & the Biosciences 577.
Avani Mehta Sood & Kevin M Carlsmith, ‘Aggressive Interrogation and Retributive Justice: A Proposed Psychological Model’ in Jon Hanson and John Jost (eds), Ideology, Psychology, and Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).
Lawrence S Krieger & Kennon M Sheldon, ‘What Makes Lawyers Happy?: A Data-Driven Prescription to Redefine Professional Success’ (2015) 83:2 The George Washington Law Review 554.