About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


30 Psychol. Pub. Pol'y & L. 1 (2024)

handle is hein.journals/psypbclw30 and id is 1 raw text is: A- F A.MERICAN S PSYCOOGICAL Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 2024, Vol. 30, No. 1, 1-6 https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000414 © 2024 American Psychological Association ISSN: 1076-8971 Open up and Let Us in: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Emerging Issues in Correctional Policy, Research, and Practice Ashley B. Batastinil, Jennifer Eno Louden2, and Virginia Barber-Rioja3 1 Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology 2 Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at El Paso 3 Department of Psychology, New York University Correctional psychology tends to receive less attention in the psychology-law literature than topics more often associated with forensic psychology. While these subfields overlap to some extent, correctional psy- chologists encounter unique issues related to practice, policy, research, ethics, and training. In addition to the lack of attention within psychology, correctional institutions and departments can be slow to embrace new ideas and methods to advance these systems. Issues such as institutional overcrowding, limited financial resources, geographical remoteness, low staff recruitment and retention, safety and security constraints, and administrative philosophies that favor punishment over rehabilitation can keep correctional systems from moving beyond the status quo. However, correctional agencies are facing increased pressures to explore alternative solutions that balance crime reduction with humane care and commonsense policies. This special issue includes eight articles highlighting a wide range of topics, including the impact of working conditions on correctional staff well-being and burnout, self-harm and suicide prevention services, interventions for high-risk populations, and novel data collection strategies. We hope the work presented in this special issue reinforces the need to not only conduct but also publish more corrections-focused research in leading psychology-law outlets, even when (and perhaps especially when) such work is done in the field. Keywords: corrections, research, prison, jail, community supervision Correctional psychology is an often-misunderstood field. Although the distinction between correctional and forensic psychology has evolved, they have more recently been conceptualized as distinct but overlapping subdisciplines that fall under the umbrella of psychology-law (Neal, 2018). Although both subfields pertain to psy- chology's involvement in legal systems and stem from similar histor- ical roots, they often have differing goals, training needs, and ethical considerations (Brodsky, 2018; Neal, 2018). Correctional psychology has been defined as the application of psychological practice and research to the classification, treatment, and management of individ- uals involved predominantly in the criminal legal system, whereas forensic psychology broadly refers to the application of psychological practice and research to help resolve legal, contractual, and adminis- trative matters (Neal, 2018). The issues addressed by correctional psychologists can be relevant at the pre-adjudication stage when applied to individuals in pretrial Ashley B. Batastini ' https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6725-676X Ashley B. Batastini served as lead for conceptualization, writing-original draft, and writing-review and editing. Jennifer Eno Louden and Virginia Barber-Rioja contributed equally to conceptualization, writing-review and editing, and writing-original draft. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ashley B. Batastini, Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, 1/582 Heidelberg Road, Alphington, VIC 3078, Australia. Email: abatastini@swin.edu.au detention (or on remand) and at the post-adjudication stage when applied to those who have been convicted and are either incarcerated or supervised in the community (Barber-Rioja et al., 2023; Neal, 2018). Although encouraged, correctional psychologists are not cur- rently expected to have specialized training experiences in the same way clinical forensic psychologists are (Magaletta & Patry, 2020; Neal, 2018). Psychologists working in corrections also often need to toggle between practice standards of the profession of psychology (e.g., American Psychological Association [APA], 2017) and guide- lines specific to correctional environments (e.g., the National Commission on Correctional Health Care's Standards for Mental Health Services in Correctional Facilities, 2015), which do not always align (see Weinberger & Sreenivasan, 1994 for a discussion of ethical conflicts in correctional psychology). Criminal legal issues addressed by forensic psychologists are pre- dominantly relevant at the pre-adjudication stage such as adjudicative competency or mental state at the time of the offense (Neal, 2018). Forensic psychologists are also often involved in civil matters such as parental fitness or disability claims. However, the tasks correctional and forensic psychologists are asked to perform may overlap to some extent, for example, using reoffense risk tools to assist with sentenc- ing or supervision placement and release decisions, or civil ligation related to harms caused by incarceration or negligence of care. Furthermore, clinical work as a forensic psychologist at least in the United States is guided by the APA's Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (APA, 2013) and is considered a specialty area, meaning it requires specific predoctoral and/or postdoctoral experience. The Specialty Guidelines (APA, 2013) unfortunately