ONTENTS1. HISTORICAL EVENTS2. SOME OF THE SPECIALISED SUBJECTS3. FINAL REMARKS REFERENCESIn this article we shall review the historical and present-day aspects of Psychology and Law in Spain. We note that it is a specialist area in which there has been research and practice during the past five years. There are two basic orientations: academic and professional. From an historical point of view we shall indicate three key events: first,the appearance of the book by Mira y Lopez; second, the publication of an Annual on Forensic Sociology and Psychology and the publication of a book by Muñoz Sabate; finally the pivotal change produced in 1986 and the last two National Congresses of Social Psychology. From a thematic point of view, we shall indicate the following areas which received more attention in psychological research: testimony in trials, judges' sentences, juries and applications of psychology into the penitentiary system.
The field of Forensic Psychology in Spain lacks an historical continuity. Only in the past five years has it developed in a systematic way as a consequence of the acceptance of Psychology as a scientific discipline and the attainment of the status of Faculty of Psychology, grouping academic departments with similar knowledge bases that form a unit of the university administrative and academic structure.
In Spain Forensic Psychology is concerned with the creation of a curriculum and a syllabus in Psychology and to the pre-doctoral degree in Psychology (Licenciatura = 5 years). For this reason, on one hand, it is tinged with academicism -- as much in the subjects as in the methodology which is used -- and on the other hand, with professional "experiences", that is, experiential learning. The former typically handles the subjects of juries, testimony and judicial sentences; the latter presents intervention experiences in prisons and the application of psychological assessment through objective questionnaires and tests.
In this process there have been pioneers who have proposed ideas which academic psychology, clinging to the subject areas imposed by "official curricula" in psychology, have not developed further. It is curious, for example, that the subject area most studied in Forensic Psychology in Spain has been that of juries, even when they are not yet in force in our judicial system, while judicial sentences have hardly been studied. The Spanish 1978 Constitution re-established the jury but it has not yet been put into effect.
In order to indicate the historical milestones in the development of Forensic Psychology in Spain, the following will be highlighted:
1) The publication of the book by Mira-y-López: Manual of Forensic Psychology, in 1932 looks into ways of how to perceive the truth of confessions and law-suits. He studied topics such as testimony, the coroner's report, the usefulness of objective tests, as well as the prevention of delinquency and the understanding of the crime. It contains the subjects of a Modern Juridical Psychology Manual. It has been reprinted several times and it is still used as a manual by professionals who are not psychologists.
2) The appearance in 1974 of the Annual on Forensic Sociology and Psychology sponsored by the Colegio Oficial de Abogados (the Bar of Lawyers) in Barcelona is associated with the name of its director, Muñoz Sabate, lawyer and psychologist. In addition to his contribution, Munne and Bayes, among others in the field of psychology, have contributed. Throughout the thirteen annual volumes it is possible to trace the history of Spanish Forensic Psychology -- as well as a more recent volume, the penultimate edition (1986), in which studies regarding juries appear. In the 1976 edition the proceedings of "First International Convention on Forensic Psychology" were covered.It's theoretical orientation and contents are diverse.A detailed study of such contents is not the purpose of this historical note.
In 1980 Introduction to Forensic Psychology by Muñoz, Munne and Bayes appeared. Even though it is a compendium of articles from the Annual, there is also a systematic exposition of the status of Forensic Psychology which existed in Spain at that time. In this volume definition, methodology, social implications and practical applications are dealt with. There is not one single chapter devoted either to testimony or to juries. Rather the idea is propounded on Forensic Psychology as an "auxiliary" to the law, as a scientific interpreter of psychological elements that the law uses and as "help" in evidence in the clarification of facts. The suggestive concept `conduciveness' appears: "the property of a judicial norm to produce a reaction of complying with the norm in those subjects to whom the norm is addressed" (p.25). Also, Forensic Psychology is viewed as social psychology: "This is so, because judicial conduct is a conduct whose basic platform is constituted by interaction" (p. 119). Other topics are suggested by the titles of other chapters by Bayes: include `Contributions' of the laboratory of experimental psychology to the subject of punishment; which include Usefulness of research with inferior animals in the field of victimology. The volume concludes with studies applied to the "bad habit of errors and mistakes by consensus" and the professional report authoring by psychologists to the courts.
3) Development during the last five years: In 1986 the book by Jimenez Burillo and Clemente, Social Psychology and Penitentiary System, was published. Without a doubt, this turning point in Forensic Psychology in Spain is a mandatory manual for consultation by anyone who wants to get into this field in Spain. In its 19 chapters, not only professors and practitioners, but also members of the law profession and sociologists update the state of the question, and in many cases show their own research on this subject.
In the same year, the book by Morales, Blanco, Huici and Fernández: Applied Social Psychology, appeared. It devotes several chapters to Forensic Psychology: eyewitness testimony, delinquency, care and rehabilitation. In Alicante the International Congress of Forensic Psychology and Sociology was held with very significant participation by social psychologists.Psychologists must justify the theoretical and methodological legitimacy to study the legal phenomenon.
Also in 1986, the section of Psychology and Law was created in the Colegio Oficial de Psicologos C.O.P. This important fact in the history of Forensic Psychology in Spain came about because of the demand for psychological services by the organizations and agencies which administer justice, and from those centres in which sentences are served. This came about because the intervention of psychologists in Juvenile or Family Courts became obligatory. As an example of the new upsurge of Forensic Psychology in the C.O.P., "Papeles del Psicologo" the journal published bimonthly by the C.O.P. devoted a monograph in 1987 on the subject of Psychology and Law. Once again in this issue A. Avila (1987), takes up the idea of Forensic Psychology defended by Muñoz Sabate, in service to the law.
The last historical event of Forensic Psychology in Spain is that which refers to the last two National Congresses of Social Psychology (one in Alicante, 1988 and one in Santiago de Compostela, 1990). In both of them there was a section and a symposium devoted exclusively to Forensic Psychology. Work which is now being done in this field (not only by social psychologists) was presented: theoretical foundations, juries, testimony, verdicts, victimology, diagnoses, reports, instruments, methods, interventions, etc.. The location of much of this work is also identified: Barcelona, La Laguna in the Canary Islands, Madrid, Pamplona, Salamanca, Santiago de Compostela, Valencia.
Let us now address the psychology of testimony, juries, judicial sentences and penitentiary treatment. The latter is inseparable from the subjects of delinquency that, as I see it, do not belong to Forensic Psychology, because the psychology of deviation from the norm is not different --theoretically and methodologically speaking-- from behaviour adapted to the norm.
In the field of psychology of testimony, the state of the art keynote address lectured by Garrido in 1986 and Mira and Diges (1986) are noteworthy. The empirical research in this field is mainly due to Mira and Diges. They have specially worked on the recognition of people and in particular of faces. When they began making general expositions of the subject (Mira and Diges, 1984), they were concerned with the comparison of different methodologies in this field of research, reaching the conclusion that movies are the most adequate aid for the study of the recognition of people (Mira and Diges, 1984) and placing special emphasis on the practical applications of these studies with the police functions (Mira and Diges, 1987; Diges and Mira, 1988) and the influence of stereotypes. Lately they have been researching the relationship between the confidence with which a testimony is presented, the exactness of the testimony, and its influence on jury members (Prieto, Diges, Bernal, 1990).
In experimental studies of juries, the work which is being done by members of the Department of Social Psychology of the University of Santiago de Compostela, under the direction of Sobral stands out. In addition to a general review, they have looked at three types of problems. The first one regards the influence of the psycho-sociological profiles of jury members in the verdicts that they reach. Two profiles in particular were studied: one political (left wing: right wing) and the other of internal versus external locus of control.
They found significant differences in verdicts depending on the case being tried: the centre of responsibility for cases of parricide and negligence point to an internal locus of control; the degree of respect to traditional values and ideas influence the final verdict in cases of robbery, negligence and rape (Sobral, Arce, Vilán, 1988; Arce, Sobral, Fariña, 1990). They have found differences in ideological profiles as well with respect to the analysis of deliberations. For example, conservatives are more concerned about law than progressionists, because they carefully analyze the witness, the accused, available testimonies (Sobral, Arce and Fariñas 1990).
A frequently repeated idea constitutes their first hypothesis: it is not easy to demonstrate the influence of the varied psycho-social profiles (political ideology, locus of control,etc) in the verdict because we do not know how to display and prove their mediation as a "filter" of all the information that is offered in the judicial process. The second group of hypotheses that these authors have been elaborating refers to the deliberation in itself, which they note is frequently forgotten. Some of the conclusions of their different studies are: first the participation of the jury members is not balanced (Sobral, Arce and Fariña, 1990); and second, participation is greater by those who occupy the place of honour or a privileged situation, even though it will probably also depend on the ideological profile of the group (Sobral, Fariña, Miaron, 1988). Perhaps the most significant aspect of their contribution is the use of the sociographic methodology that they are trying out for the study of the deliberation in itself (Arce, 1989; Arce, Sobral and Fariña, in press) Finally, they have touched on a third subject: that of the lenity of the juries as opposed to the judges. This lenity would not arise if the jurists were permitted to establish the punishment, as is confirmed by the fact that there are juries that reach a verdict of innocence, and nevertheless establish light punishment for the "innocent".
From a theoretical point of view, these authors have effected a transition from the study of the juries in themselves, to the study of juries as a model for studying decision-making and deliberations in workgroups. From an ideological point of view they are in favour of the jury and intend to demonstrate the need for legislators to keep in mind the studies that social psychology has carried out in this field. They want to have some influence on the legislators. Garrido (1990) maintains a more critical position on this subject. All of this research is collected in a recent book called, Social Psychology in the Court of Law (Sobral and Arce, 1990).
A. Garzon of the University of Valencia has also taken up, among other judicial subjects, the subject of juries, although more as a social institution and in relation to the attitudes and values of the society (Garzon and Seoane, 1986).
There is very little psychological research carried out in Spain regarding the behavior of judges. There are, as in the previous subjects, some expositions regarding the state of the question (Martín, 1988), discussing subjects such as the methodology used and its deficiencies, and the variables that may intervene (type of crime, characteristics of the accused and of the judge). Martin (1988) concludes supporting the theory and the equation of the Integration Model of Information, (IMI).
A more empirical approximation is represented by the study of Garrido and de Elena, (1990). In this study, by means of an analysis of the content of the sentences, the positive influence which the reports of the "Guardia Civil" (a body of guards who specialize in Traffic Safety issues in the whole country) have on judicial sentences regarding traffic accidents is demonstrated along with the negligible influence of the reports made by Municipal Police (a body of guards who have competence only in the cities).
Also using a technique of a qualitative content, Fernández-Villanueva, Fernández-Cantero and Orts (1988) have studied the sentences of crimes of parricide which have been appealed and sentenced by the Supreme Court in the period from 1975 to 1983. After statistically analyzing the available data and their demographic variables, they attempt to demonstrate the different treatment, in punishments and psycho-sociological suppositions, that the judges give the accused depending on his/her sex.
Some of the work dealing with penitentiary treatment should be mentioned. In this field more than in others, there are general expositions that theoretically and critically define and establish the so-called rehabilitation of the delinquent in the penitentiary centres.
We have already mentioned Clemente, whose book Social Psychology and Penitentiary System (1986), has significant collaboration in Delinquency: Theory and Research (1987); Applied Social Psychology, (1986); Social and Penitentiary Psychology. His book Feminine Delinquency: a Psycho-social Approach, (1987) is a classic on the subject. The most interesting part of it is the explanatory model and the interview and grille methodology that is presented in the last chapter. Sancha, closely linked to the Journal of Penitentiary Studies, has co-authored a manual on Penitentiary Psychology, (1987). The third of the authors who have worked most in the area of delinquency, prison intervention, social attitudes with respect to crime, scales of prison climate, etc., is Garrido Genoves, (1982, 1987). His collaboration is also important in the books we have just mentioned, but without a doubt, what stands out is the fact that he is one of the driving forces regarding the empirical studies on penitentiary treatment. This is a subject that he is promoting and to which he is providing scientific quality through the magazine Delinquency, of which he is director, and whose first issue appeared in 1989. The fourth author is J. Valverde, from the Complutense University who is involved in action-research projects of social maladjustment among teenagers, psychological intervention in juvenile prisons as well as drug-addiction and rapes. He has published two books, the first on The process of social maladjustment, (1988) and The prison and its consequences (1991) and two chapters in the European Handbook of Psychology and Mental Health: "Juvenile Delinquency" and "Prison and Mental Health".
In the introduction we emphasized the importance of having created the Section of Psychology and Law in the Colegio Oficial de Psicologos C.O.P. Naturally the COP has been concerned with applied aspects. A good example of this is the previously mentioned special issue of Papeles del Psicologo of 1987 and the one that is now being prepared. It is not surprising that subjects such as Family Courts or Diagnosis of Responsibility appear. These subjects connect with an old tradition in Forensic Psychology and serves as an immediate bridge between what is academic and what is practical.
Finally, the applied experiences or the interventions in penitentiary centres should be considered. In this field, the most relevant experiences found are those that have been carried out in the Penitentiary Centre for Young People in Barcelona, outlined by Portero, Redondo and Roca (1987). A large series of studies and rehabilitation programs were conducted by Valverde, from the Complutense University, in several State prison in Madrid and surrounding areas in close proximity to the Capital. During the last decade several hundreds of students did their practicum in prisons under his supervision.
JOSÉ RAMÓN CORREAS GONZALEZ
Please sent comments and suggestions to:
psdife4@sis.ucm.es
LAST UPDATED Sunday 6 de August de 1995 - -