Unpacking insanity defence standards: an experimental study of rationality and control tests in criminal law

The present study investigated the impact of different legal standards on mock juror decisions concerning whether a defendant was guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity. Undergraduate students (N = 477) read a simulated case summary involving a murder case and were asked to make an insanity determination. The cases differed in terms of the condition of the defendant (rationality deficit or control deficit) and the legal standard given to the jurors to make the determination (Model Penal Code, McNaughten or McNaughten plus a separate control determination). The effects of these variables on the insanity determination were investigated. Jurors also completed questionnaires measuring individualism and hierarchy attitudes and perceptions of facts in the case. Results indicate that under current insanity standards jurors do not distinguish between defendants with rationality deficits and defendants with control deficits regardless of whether the legal standard requires them to do so. Even defendants who lacked control were found guilty at equal rates under a legal standard excusing rationality deficits only and a legal standard excluding control and rationality deficits. This was improved by adding a control test as a partial defence, to be determined after a rationality determination. Implications for the insanity defence in the Criminal Justice System are discussed.

Cognitive-behavioral group therapy for girls victims of sexual violence in Brazil: Are there differences in effectiveness when applied by different groups of psychologists?: effectiveness of group therapy for girls victims of sexual violence

The effectiveness of a cognitive-behavioral group therapy model for the treatment of girls victims of sexual violence (SV) was investigated when applied by different groups of practitioners: researchers/psychologists who developed it (G1) and psychologists from the public social care network trained by the first group (G2). A quasi-experimental study was carried out, in which the group therapy model was applied by the two groups. A total of 103 girls victims of sexual violence (SV), aged between seven and 16 years (M=11.76 years, SD=2.02 years) were included, with 49 attended by G1, and 54 by G2. The results indicated a significant reduction in the symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD. The comparison between the results obtained by the two groups of practitioners in the application of the model indicated no significant differences in the rates of improvement of the participants. These results indicate the effectiveness of the cognitive-behavioral group therapy model evaluated and the possibility of it being used as a care strategy by psychology practitioners working in public services.