Exploration of implicit theories in the formation of expert opinion in portuguese criminal law

This dissertation examines different aspects involved in the formation of psychologists’ expert opinion in the Portuguese criminal justice system, more precisely, as this opinion is reflected in assessment reports. The present dissertation is comprised of three qualitative studies, the first sought to provide a general portrait of a sample of 106 forensic psychological reports as to their overall quality as measured in terms of relevance and coherence. Results show that the formal markers of quality are present in the sample analysed, a certain number of weaknesses have been observed, notably concerning the internal coherence of the reports as well as the relevance of the information reported on. The second study explored the opinions of 17 Portuguese judges and state prosecutors concerning the use they make of this type of forensic report. It appears that they consider these reports to be useful and very credible, specially so when they have been produced under the auspices of the National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, which is the state forensic institution. Furthermore, it appears that judges and prosecutors were particularly interested in data that allowed for a personalised portrait of the assessee. The third study sought to better comprehend the conceptual bases on which psychologists construct their reports. To this end, an exploratory study was undertaken with a sample of key-actors; the analysis of their interviews shows that they define their judicial mandate as well as the basic concepts that are associated to this mandate in different ways. A theoretical framework provided by an implicit theories model was used to help understand these results.

Public Opinion and Global Justice

The concept of global justice has been developed to stress the worldwide implications of moral problems. Not much, however, has been written about the actual politics of global justice. This article focuses on public opinion and argues that attitudes about international redistribution are not a simple projection of attitudes about the domestic situation. In countries where domestic income redistribution is seen as an important priority, foreign aid is less popular; where this is less so, there is more concern for the fate of the poor in the South. Far from reflecting a lack of coherence in public opinion, these counterintuitive results need to be understood in connection with policy achievements in donor countries. The authors' empirical findings suggest that although the commitment to redistribute is stronger at the national level, relationships of solidarity do not stop at national boundaries. The achievement of justice at home in fact sustains justice abroad.