• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.109-142
• /
• 2005

This study was conducted to suggest the research domains of Criminal Psychology, which is needed to improve the disciplinary identity of the Korean Criminal Psychology. Some major textbooks of Criminal Psychology, Forensic Psychology, Legal Psychology are written by korean and foreign psychologists. Major definitions and research domains of Criminal Psychology was compared and reviewed. For aggregating the criminal psychological researches were studied by korean psychologists, a total of 211 articles and papers, which was published by Korean Psychological Association, 5 Sub-psychological Associations, and Korean Law Psychological Association, were reviewed. Several the major research domains in Criminal Psychology was suggested as follows: General psychological theories, aggression·anger·morality, adolescent delinquency, mind and motivations of criminals, victims, investigation techniques, testimony, assessment·counseling·correction·rehabilitation of criminals, prediction and prevention of crime.

• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.323-341
• /
• 2021

This study examined public perceptions of the reasons underlying sentence reduction for defendants convicted of sex crimes against persons with intellectual disability. An online survey was conducted among 522 adults in South Korea. Respondent endorsement of 20 reasons underlying sentence reduction, which were embedded within the respective rulings, and the perceived appropriateness of statutory sentence for the crimes committed were assessed. The results showed that most respondents endorsed the sentence; moreover, those who disagreed underscored the need for more severe punishment. Almost all the respondents perceived the following reasons and explanations unfavorably: impulsiveness caused by sexual arousal or alcohol consumption; an accidental occurrence; and personal characteristics such as defendant age, health condition, socioeconomic status, developmental history, and family background. However, there was a relative agreement in that the damage caused by the incident was relatively minor, or the defendant's reflection and attitude to recover the damage were used as reasons for the reduction. Differences in respondent perceptions of the reasons underlying sentence reduction as a function of gender and educational background were relatively small. However, younger respondents held harsher attitudes toward sentence reduction. The present findings underscore the need to be mindful of victims' statements and the characteristics of persons with intellectual disability while sentencing.

• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.223-251
• /
• 2021

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.

• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.215-234
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to explore linkages between stress and a range of individual difference factors on children's memory for a potentially stressful event. Children (N=63) aged from 4 to 10 years, who undergone a minor dental operative procedure were evaluated. Overall, the results of this study replicated and extended previous findings of the related literature, providing some further evidence for a negative relation between stress and children's recall. More considerable variation in individual difference variables, in particular, children 's stress coping strategies, quality of previous experiences, amount of the advanced parental preparation were existed among the children, influencing the relation between the level of stress and children's remembering of a stressful event. Future inquiries for understanding theoretical, clinical, and forensic issues in children's remembering of a stressful event were discussed.

• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.121-149
• /
• 2021

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.