Investigative psychology and law: towards collaboration by focusing on evidence and inferential reasoning

Abstract

Abstract Introducing a special issue of this journal, Youngs discussed the desirability of, but problems in realising, greater collaboration between psychology and the criminal investigation and trial processes. This paper acknowledges the value of investigative psychology's potential contribution but argues that the alleged incompatibilities, between psychology and law, are based upon too narrow a conception of law and legal action. A direct approach, with considerable potential for productive, principled, and practical research, already exists. It involves focusing on the evidence, assessing it along each of its three credentials, and identifying the nature of the inferential reasoning involved. This paper identifies a number of ways in which practical, inter‐disciplinary and collaboration could and should be developed to ensure that the courts receive quality evidence. It also argues that more attention should be paid to abductive inferential reasoning, both by researchers and courts. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.