Psychologists fighting national-security ban
Expert cites over-reaction to U.S. scandal
Canada’s police forces are increasingly calling on psychologists to help them get into the minds of criminals — seeking advice on how to talk to suspects or deciding whether they are being truthful.
But this growing relationship has invited scrutiny, especially after a damning report last year uncovered severe ethics violations by prominent U.S. psychologists who had helped Washington develop torture and other coercive techniques to question terrorism suspects. The American Psychological Association( A PA) subsequently prohibited all its members, including about 800 Canadians, from participating in any national security- related interrogations.
Now a leading Canadian forensic psychologist has entered the fray. Stephen Porter penned a column this month in the journal Canadian Psychology, calling the blanket ban a “knee- jerk” overreaction and making the case for expanding psychologists’ roles in criminal investigations.
The University of British Columbia professor says while the actions of the American psychologists were reprehensible, the ban could create the wrong impression that psychologists have nothing to contribute to law enforcement or national security.
“It suggests we don’ t have knowledge t hat is meaningful … and that we can’t be expected to act ethically,” said Porter, who is regularly called on by police to help in cases.
“Psychological science has really l ed to a l ot of great knowledge that is relevant to interviewing suspects, including terror suspects — interviewing them in humane but also effective ways.”
The controversy erupted last July, after an independent report found senior APA members had worked with the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency in developing “enhanced interrogation” methods and manipulating ethical guidelines.
At a meeting in Toronto the following month, the association’s governing body voted to ban members from conducting, supervising or assisting in any nationalsecurity interrogations. The ban did not extend to domestic law-enforcement.
Porter, who is not an APA member, is not affected by the decision. Still, he says he worries the scandal and its fallout could undermine the work that has been done to build relations between police and psychologists.
“There traditionally was a general distrust (by police) that we had valid knowledge to contribute to police investigations. … It was kind of like a turf issue,” he said.
“It’s a much more positive relationship over the last few years than it has been before.”
Porter’s column, written with UBC behavioural analysts Katherine Rose and Tianna Dilley, highlights the myriad ways psychological science has benefited law enforcement.
Some police agencies are now moving away from accusatory styles of interviewing suspects after studies showed these can lower the likelihood of obtaining a complete account or valid confession.
Psychologists are also helping investigators figure out the best approach to interviewing a suspect based on behavioural traits. If the person shows signs of psychopathy, for instance, a psychologist will know not to appeal to the suspect’s conscience or sense of remorse. A better approach would be to appeal to the suspect’s grandiosity, maybe play up how cl ever t he crime was.
“If you use the wrong strategy with a particular individual from the get- go, that’s going to pretty much doom the entire interrogation,” Porter said.
Psychologists can also help police figure out when a suspect may be lying. Too often, police rely on stereotypical — and false — beliefs about how to detect when someone is lying, such as the notion they will avoid eye contact or appear nervous.
As psychologists’ roles widen, one question that looms is whether they can be held liable if a case they consulted on goes sideways. Porter said it’s a question t hat has not been t hor- oughly examined and one that makes him anxious, especially given he is often called to help in volatile emergency response situations, such as hostage takings or barricade incidents.
“I’m really encouraging psychology ( authorities) in Canada, because of these expanding roles, to start thinking more about that and giving us specific guidance on how to proceed,” he said.
A spokeswoman for the Canadian Psychological Association said in an email the association has no plans to develop guidelines on working relationships between psychologists and police.
“Canadian psychologists are expected to follow our Code of Ethics and maintain respect and commitment to human rights,” the email said.
The RCMP said Friday psychologists, psychiatrists and counsellors are used on an ad hoc basis for various “policing matters,” but would not elaborate.
Consultations can happen over the phone or in person, but the experts are never face to face with suspects.
Meanwhile, the Pentagon has asked the APA to reconsider its ban on the involvement of psychologists in national- security cases, The New York Times reported last month.
A s pokeswoman s ai d Wednesday there are no plans to modify the ban. However, APA officials are hoping to meet Pentagon officials soon to discuss their concerns.
PSYCHOLOGY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH POLICE IS ‘MUCH MORE POSITIVE.’