Psychology involves and contributes to the process of behavioral analysis, thoughts, feelings, perceptions, as well as emotions within personalities and the general society. The lawyers concern for psychology as well as psychologist’s involvement in law is traceable back in a lengthy period. It is critical to observe that questions of psychological basis were being asked in law before psychology grew as a distinct discipline. For example, the 1833 England Commissioners were happy to acknowledge their debt to Cesare Beccaria (Collins, 2011). However, they were not confident that “all appropriate conditions as well as aggravations would be articulated sufficiently in the legal process.” Consequently, unlike to Beccaria, the elements they were ready to assume cognizance of in differentiating among “gradations of felony, shades of culpability, as well as alternatives of punishment”. These embodied several offenders’ individual characteristics which of course Beccaria could have neglected “as probably to result into bias or inequality.” From this, it is notable that even in the ancient days; the legal system had to be grappled with nascent psychology. Moreover, it is observable that the law didn’t discover its conclusions adequately palatable (Turtle, Read, Lindsay & Brimacombe, 2008).
The present linkage between psychology and law remains intertwined. For instance, Psychology underpins several legal decisions. In addition, it remains at the foundation of several legal principles. Legal evidence might rest upon psychological state and extent of harm, particularly on concerns of duress and trauma, or questions might emerge concerning the extents of provocation (Collins, 2011). This might specifically apply to the several infamous cases in which battered females have killed their violent husbands. Additionally, legal decisions can also rely on the forecasting of future behavior. For example, finding out which position lies in the child’s interests.
References
Collins, H. (2011). Modern Law Review. The Modern Law Review Limited, vol. 27(6), 656-668.
Turtle, J., Read, J., Lindsay, D. & Brimacombe, C. (2008). Toward a more informative psychological science of eyewitness evidence. Applied Cognitive Psychology, vol. 22, 769–778.