Since the 1970s there has been a rising trend in South Africa for legal professionals to use the services of psychologists in legal proceedings. Psychologists have therefore increasingly started to appear as expert witnesses in court cases. Despite this, the field of forensic psychology in South Africa has yet to be defined and delineated. Currently there are no set guidelines or regulations regarding who is qualified to do forensic work, and no standards against which this work can be measured. Psychology in the courtroom has begun to receive a notorious reputation as a result of this. The Professional Board for Psychology (PBP) of the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) is investigating the creation of a new category of registration, that of Forensic Psychologist, partly in an effort to manage and address this problem. However, to date little, if any, research has been conducted on the scope of the work presented to the courts by psychologists appearing as expert witnesses. This research aimed to address this gap by analysing a sample of forensic psychological reports. The following aspects were investigated: <ul><li>Who (category or registration, length of registration, etc.) is doing sentencing reports;</li> <li>How (interviews, collateral information, psychometric tests, etc.) these reports are compiled; and</li> <li>Whether these reports measure up to professional expectations as well as adhere to the guidelines of the HPCSA.</li></ul> It is clear from the results of this research that some of the psychologists doing forensic assessments and writing reports do so in an idiosyncratic way. Besides the fact that no uniformity exists, forensic work is sometimes done by psychologists who are not qualified to do so in terms of their registration category and thus their scope of practice. The reports analysed did not always measure up to guidelines or professional standards from abroad (in lieu of local standards or guidelines for reports) and/or transgressions were made in terms of HPCSA policies and guidelines. This situation is understandable in the light of two shortfalls in this field, namely training and regulation. The following recommendations can be made on the basis of this study: <ul><li>That psychologists who are adequately trained and have the proven experience in forensic work, be accredited by the PBP;</li> <li>That guidelines and standards for forensic work be drawn up by the PBP; in addition, that more complete ethical guidelines than those contained in chapter 7 of the PBP’s Rules of Conduct Pertaining Specifically to Psychology also be drawn up;</li> <li>That adequate training at MA level in basic forensic issues be made compulsory, with the option of advanced training for those wishing to specialise in the field; and</li> <li>That lawyers be trained in basic concepts of psychology so as to allow for better selection of an appropriate psychologist to assist them and also to assure effective cross-examination regarding psychological issues in court.</li></ul> If these recommendations were implemented, they could aid in regulating the field, thus producing forensic work of a consistently high quality. This will hopefully help to narrow the gap between the expected and actual interaction between law and psychology. Copyright / Dissertation (MA)--University of Pretoria, 2008. / Psychology / unrestricted

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. / Cette thèse présente trois études qualitatives qui concernent différents aspects de la formulation de l’opinion experte chez des psychologues forensiques, tel que cette opinion se révèle dans leurs rapports d’expertise psycho-légale. La première étude porte sur la qualité d’un vaste échantillon de rapports d’expertise en se concentrant sur des critères de pertinence et de cohérence comme mesures de leur qualité générale. Cette étape a permis de dresser le portrait de 106 rapports forensiques produits au Portugal et d’établir qu’ils rencontrent les critères de qualité formelle établis tout en présentant certaines faiblesses en ce qui concerne la pertinence des informations utilisées et la cohérence interne du rapport La deuxième étude explore les opinions de dix-sept juges et procureurs de la République portugaise et s’interroge plus particulièrement sur leurs perspectives concernant l’utilité ce type de rapports d’experts dans leur travail en cour criminelle. Il appert que ces derniers leur accordent une grande crédibilité en particulier lorsqu’ils ont été produits par les experts de l’Institut portugais de médicine légale et sciences forensiques, l’institution forensique nationale affiliée au Ministère de la Justice. De plus, il se dégage des entretiens que les juges et les procureurs sont particulièrement intéressés par les données qui permettent de dresser un portrait individualisé de la personne évaluée. La troisième étude vise à mieux saisir les bases conceptuelles sur lesquelles les psychologues experts construisent leurs rapports. Pour ce faire, une étude exploratoire auprès d’un échantillon d’acteurs-clés a été menée qui a permis de dégager un certain nombre de constats, notamment que ceux-ci définissent leurs mandats judiciaires ainsi que les concepts fondamentaux qui y sont associés de manière différente. Un cadre théorique basé sur le modèle des théories implicites a été utilisé pour mieux comprendre ces résultats.