Classes are Done!

Hello Psych 203 students:


It has been a pleasure acting as peer mentors for this class. We hope you enjoyed having our presence 'around' the classroom and if you have any questions prior to your final exam.... please do not hesitate to contact any of us. 


Have a great holiday season and good luck on your final exam.

Popular Myths in Psychology

Myths about Psychology and the Law

Myth: Virtually All People Who Confess to a Crime Are Guilty of It

by Amy Webber

Image: JonBenet Ramsey

It seems strange to think that anyone would confess to a crime they didn’t commit; however, the fact is that false confessions do occur, and it happens more often than you might think.

False confessions are especially likely to happen with high profile cases.  For example, over 200 people confessed to kidnapping world-famous aviator Charles Lindbergh’s son in 1932, and in the late 1940s, over 30 people confessed to the murder of Elizabeth Short, commonly known as the “Black Dahlia.”  In another famous case, John Mark Karr confessed to the 1996 murder of 6-year-old beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey, although his DNA didn’t match what was found at the crime scene.  These false confessions can cause serious problems in crime investigations, because they detract from finding the actual perpetrator.

But why would anyone confess to something they didn’t do?  In cases like these, it seems like the motivation might be fame.  Other reasons might include feeling a need for self-punishment to make up for some other wrong they’ve done in their lives, or trying to protect the real criminal, if it’s their child or spouse, for example.  Moreover, some people may be unable to differentiate fantasy from reality and thus might actually believe they did it. 

Further, in some cases, the coercive and deceptive tactics used by police officers during interrogations can lead to false confessions by innocent individuals.  During interrogations, police often use the “good cop/bad cop” technique, where they present false, made-up evidence against the suspect, making it sound like they have heaps of evidence pointing against the individual, when in reality, they do not.  The cop will then feign sympathy and provide reasons why the person might’ve done it; for example: “It’s completely understandable that you would act out in that situation, you had every right to be angry”, and offer them some sort of “deal” of a lesser punishment if they confess.  However, when someone is backed into a corner in this way, they might see no other way out than to confess to the crime, even if they didn’t do it.  This is referred to as a “compliant confession” where someone confesses in order to avoid a threat or gain a reward.  Other times, the person may actually start to believe they did it; for example, they may have been intoxicated the night of the crime, so when a police officer presents incriminating evidence against them (even if the evidence isn’t real, cops are allowed to make this stuff up for interrogation purposes), they may start to question their own innocence.  This is called an “internalized confession,” where they come to believe they actually did something they didn’t do.

What makes matters worse is that police officers tend to be highly confident in their ability to know whether someone is falsely confession, although research shows that police officers are actually more likely that other people to believe that a false confession is actually truthful.  This suggests they have a bias to believe that an innocent person is guilty.

Research shows that certain situational and personal characteristics can increase the likelihood of false confessions.  For example, people who are relatively young, suggestible, isolated from others, and who are confronted with strong evidence against them and questioned with intimidating and manipulative tactics, with prior criminal history and lack of legal counsel are more likely to confess to crimes they didn’t commit.

So what can be done to avoid false confessions?  Police should avoid revealing specific details about crime investigation cases to the media so that those who would be tempted to falsely confess in order to gain fame won’t be able to provide the essential details about the crime.  Also, some police departments videotape their interrogation interviews in order to ensure coercive tactics are not being used, and hopefully videotaping of interviews will be implemented more broadly.

References:

Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2010). 50 great myths of popular psychology: Shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior. West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Image from:

http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/trutv.com/graphics/photos/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/Gallery/PG-Jonbenet-Ramsey%284%29.jpg

Popular Myths in Psychology

Myths about Interpersonal Behavior

Myth: There is a ‘safety in numbers’: The more people present at an emergency, the greater the chances someone will intervene

by Alicia Kassian

It is scary to think that you could be murdered in front of bystanders and have them watch rather than intervene. Unfortunately, this is a more common occurrence than the human race would like to admit, and baffles most of the people who hear of it later. I bet you are thinking right now that you would not stand by and that you would help that person in need but in truth, probably not. In situations like murder, crime and injury, most of us are just not prepared to understand the situation and then change the outcome. The classic case is of Kitty Genovese that was murdered on a city street in New York and watched by some, heard by others but ultimately helped by….none. But why?!! Most psychologists like to think this is not a reflection of people’s natural behavior and is only because people are scared to act because of the unfamiliarity with the situation. I mean, when is the last time you saw a similar situation and knew what to do, what was going on, and how to change the outcome? Kitty is not the only one that has lost a life in the presence of others, In Manitoba an elderly women fell over into a snow bank on a busy street, she was not able to get up and froze to death. Let’s not forget about the Greyhound beheading incident not too long ago, rather graphic so if you want to know…google it. Probably the most famous bystander effect/obedience to authority would be Nazi Germany and psychologists believe that unfamiliarity with this type of situation and also seeing others also not intervening is part of the reason so many Jewish people were killed. This means that this could happen again! On a better note, psychology students that learn about the bystander effect are more likely to intervene than others so now you can be the ones that make the change.

Popular Myths in Psychology

Myths about Psychological Treatment

Myth – Electroconvulsive (“Shock”) Therapy is a Physically Dangerous and Brutal Treatment

by Amy Webber

Most of you have probably heard of Electroconvulsive Therapy, commonly referred to as Shock Therapy or ECT, and you may have even seen it depicted in films, such as in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.  Many people hold negative views of ECT, believing it to be cruel, painful, harmful, and unsafe, and films often depict ECT in this negative light, often showing it as being used by staff in psychiatric hospitals as a means to control or punish misbehaving patients.  These films show ECT being forced upon people, leading to violent convulsions and causing severe memory loss and zombie-like side effects.

It’s true that in the past, convulsive therapy was indeed unsafe and often caused harmful side effects, and in some non-western developing countries today, ECT may still be administered without the proper procedures.  However, current methods of ECT have come a long way since the treatment was first introduced, and over the past five decades in the United States and most other Western countries, ECT has been administered in a way that is much more humane and much safer.  It is only administered under informed consent of the patient, and the procedure includes giving patients and general anesthetic and a muscle relaxant, and then placing electrodes on the patient’s head, and delivering an electric shock to induce a seizure, while the patient’s movements during the seizure are inhibited by the anesthetic and the muscle relaxant.  This method has been effective in treating many individuals with severe depression, and it is typically recommended as a last resort for those whose severe depression has failed to respond to other treatments.

While ECT does carry risks, the death risk is no higher than anesthesia alone.  Of course, it can have unpleasant side effects such as headaches and nausea.  Memory loss is also a risk factor for ECT, although the loss is usually of events that happened right before the therapy.

In conclusion, as with any medical procedure, ECT does have the potential for negative side effects; however, it is not the “barbaric” procedure depicted in the media, and has actually helped many individuals with severe depression and other disorders that have no responded to other treatments.  In fact, patients who have undergone ECT actually hold less negative views of ECT than the general public, and most of them actually report it to be “less frightening than a trip to the dentist.”  (Lilienfeld, Lynn, Ruscio, & Beyerstein, 2010, p. 241).

References:

Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2010). 50 great myths of popular psychology: Shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior. West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Study Sessions

November 23, 2011

Study Review

Peer Mentor: Alicia Kassian

Time: 2:00 – 4:00 pm

Room: A248

November 24, 2011

Study Review

Peer Mentor: Amy Webber

Time: 1 – 3:00 pm

Room: A247B

December 1, 2011

Study Review

Peer Mentor: Sylvia Tsang

Time: 2 – 4:00 pm

Room: A051

December 5, 2011

Study Review

Peer Mentor: Kat Nipcon

Time: 12 noon – 2:00 pm

Room: A247B

December 6, 2011

Study Review

Peer Mentor: Kent Bastell

Time: 1:30 – 3:30 pm

Room: A247B

December 8, 2011

Study Tips and Review                                   

Peer Mentor: Amy Webber

Time: 1 – 3:00 pm

Room: A247B

Popular Myths in Psychology

Myths about Emotion and Motivation

Myth: The Validity of the Polygraph Lie Detector Test

by Alicia Kassian

I was watching Maury the other day and a women was featured because she believed her husband was cheating on her. She was desperate to find out if he was lying to her so he was asked to take the polygraph lie detector test. In fact, he was lying and he had slept with over ten women since their relationship started. Now, that seemed true because his face said “uh oh” and he stormed off the stage, but most polygraph tests are not very valid. This particular guy was definitely guilty because he was caught cheating on his wife on camera at the filming of Maury (yikes). But, polygraphs in general are given heavy importance with a ton of flaws and many false positives (a non liar is given failing grade). Polygraphs only really work if the people being tested don’t know how they work. They measure changes in blood pressure and respiration and these supposedly go up if you are lying…unless you’re a “good liar” which means you do not get stressed or experience fear responses after or during a lie. So why do we still use them in the court of law? Because it can benefit either the defense or state depending on the results and then you can always dispute the reliability of the test. If you know of the movie Meet the Parents I’m sure you remember the father giving his future son-in-law a lie detector test to get into his “circle of trust.” Of course, he is rather a failure of a son-in-law in the movie and doesn’t do very well in his father in law’s opinion. The movie portrays the polygraph as a pretty accurate lie detector; which it isn’t! Also, a great number of people administering polygraphs are intimidating and use intimidation techniques to try and force a confession when that person may be innocent. This means that the person is likely stressed and fearful when the question is asked not because they are lying but because they are scared that they might go to jail or that people might not believe them, how sad is that? This happens to 40% of innocent people that are required to take a polygraph lie detector test. So, the next time you are watching Maury just know that polygraphs may not be so confirmatory, regardless of how guilty that alleged cheater may look.

Meetings Canceled

Please note that the peer mentor meeting schedule for November 8, 2011 at The Den is canceled. We will return next week complete with plenty of study tips for your upcoming exams. 


Thank you for your input on the surveys. Your opinions help us understand how to assist you better.


Check back soon to see upcoming study sessions.
Thanks!