This study examined the differences in facial emotion processing related to psychopathic traits. On the basis of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised (Lee & Park, 2008), students were divided into psychopathic trait (n=15) and control (n=15) groups. Participants performed two tasks consisted of negative(angry, fear, sad) and neutral faces. Event-related potentials(EPRs) were recorded when participants categorized gender in the implicit task and emotion in the explicit task. We analyzed the late positive potentials(LPP) amplitude to investigate differences in emotion processing between psychopathic trait group and control group. In the implicit task, there was no significant difference in both groups. However, there was a significant interaction between emotion and group at the frontocentral region in the explicit task. The psychopathic trait group showed greater LPP amplitudes for the neutral faces than for the negative faces, whereas the control group showed similar LPP amplitudes for the neutral and negative faces at the frontocentral site. These results might reflect the abnormalities in emotional processing in individuals with psychopathic traits.
Statement Validity Analysis (SVA) is utilized in criminal investigations and the court to assess the credibility of given statements. During this procedure, the criteria for Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) are used to evaluate whether statements include the characteristics reflecting actual experiences about the event in question. Various studies had been conducted on the efficacy (classification rates) of CBCA criteria, yet the consistency of the findings was not investigated. In the current study, a meta-analysis was conducted with Korean CBCA studies reported from 2004 to 2020 (a total of fourteen studies). As a result, the total score of CBCA was found to successfully discriminate truth and fabrication. A significant positive (+) effect size was found with four criteria (3, 4, 10, and 12), all of which are classified as cognitive criteria. However, contrary to the underlying assumption for CBCA, criterion 18, classified as one of the motivational criteria, showed a significant negative (-) effect size. Meanwhile, moderator analyses were possible for eleven criteria (2~9, 12, 13, 15) and the results showed the significant effects of potential moderator variables such as the gender and status of the participants, study types and designs, number of raters, and publication status. The current results suggests that more careful attention is required to each criterion―especially the cognitive criteria―rather than the total CBCA score as well as the possible moderator effects in order to assess truthfulness of the statements. The implication, limitations, and suggestions for future studies were discussed.
In the P300-based concealed information test, most commonly used methods to detect whether a subject is lying are the bootstrapped amplitude difference (BAD) and the bootstrap correlation difference (BCD). Previous studies comparing the accuracy of the two methods reported inconsistent results. Most studies showed that the BAD is more accurate than the BCD, but some studies found that the BCD had a higher accuracy rate than the BAD. The purpose of the study is to identify conditions where the each method has higher accuracy compared to the other. In the result of Monte Carlo study, the false alarm rate of the BAD was generally higher than that of the BCD, and the hit rate of the BAD was higher than that of the BCD. Compared to the condition where the P300 latencies of probe and irrelevant were similar, the hit rate of the BCD was decreased when the P300 latency of probe was about 100 ms faster, and the hit rate of the BCD was increased when the P300 latency of probe was about 100 ms slower. When the P300 amplitude of the probe was slightly larger than that of the irrelevant and the P300 latency of probe was longer than that of target, the hit rate of the BCD was higher than that of the BAD. The reason why the false alarm rate of the BAD is higher than that of BCD and why the hit rate of the BCD is affected by the P300 latency of the probe were discussed.
The purpose of this study is to examine empirically how the lay people judge self-defense and what factors could affect it. A total of 651 participants aged 20 years and over were asked to answer, attitude toward interpersonal violence, and legal attitude questionnaire, all divided by the type of self-defense. Participants were assigned one of the three types of situations that were claimed to be self-defense, and were given articles and scenarios related to each type of self-defense before making self-defense judgments. In addition, the impact of personal factors on self-defense judgment was analyzed after the legal attitude, and the attitude toward interpersonal violence, which are personal factors, was also measured. The results showed that the rate of recognition of self-defense was the highest in the type of self-defense for oneself, but the rate of denial of self-defense against state agencies was much higher, indicating the opposite. Furthemore, negative articles on self-defense were found to affect the judgment of self-defense. In addition, it was found that the level of the attitude toward interpersonal violence and legal attitude of individual participants could affect the judgment of self-defense. The general public's judgment process and the factors that affect self-defense judgment may be considered to prevent biased judgment in actual jury trials. Finally, influence, and limitations of this study and suggestions of subsequent study were also discussed.
The purpose of this study is to examine some factors affecting the decision-making process of white-collar crime. In a between-subject experiment, 102 adult white-collar workers were randomly assigned to a financial pressure condition or tit for tat strategy condition. Participants went through a decision-making process in a modified iterated prisoner’s dilemma for a white-collar crime scenario to earn points. The obtained score indicated the risk of committing a crime. The lower the score, the higher was the risk of participating in a crime. The results showed that participants who received only tit for tat strategy information without financial pressure instructions showed the lowest risk of participating in a crime, and those who received only financial pressure without the strategic information had the highest risk of participating in a crime. In addition, those who received the financial pressure instructions were more likely to participate in a crime than those who did not receive financial pressure instructions regardless of the provision of strategic information. The results of this study propose the need for measures to legally relieve financial pressure, the need for education on white-collar crimes for office workers, and the need for a decision-making structure within the enterprise that is not dogmatic but cooperative and mutually verifiable.
Statement analysis is a technique that examines the credibility of a statement by scientifically analyzing problems and psychological characteristics that appear in the content of the statement. The statement analysis report is prepared, submitted, and used for legal judgments when there is a suspicion of sexual abuse for children(under 13 years of age) and persons with disabilities since it is usually difficult to secure physical evidence nor eyewitnesses. However, the criteria for evaluating the quality of a statement analysis report or testimony are not available in Korea. Although forensic experts and professional organizations in North America and Europe are providing recommendations and guidelines for preparing forensic assessment reports, qualitative analysis research studies for forensic reports revealed a number of problems such as missing or poorly described essential information and lack of logical connection between evaluation results and forensic opinions. Therefore, forensic evaluation guidelines and forensic reports submitted to the courts in the United States, as well as the Structured Quality assessment of eXpert testimony (SQX-12) developed in Sweden were examined to suggest the Korean version of quality evaluation criteria for statement analysis report and testimony. This criteria can be used to improve effectiveness of forensic reports within criminal justice system and used as a guideline to assess the quality forensic reports or expert testimony prepared by experts. However, this criteria do not guarantee the reliability of the statement itself.