User:KillerKlownzilla/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * "Bias blind spot"
 * This article is rated as a start class article. There are some pieces of information that lack citations (e.g. "Most people appear to exhibit the bias blind spot. In a sample of more than 600 residents of the United States, more than 85% believed they were less biased than the average American. Only one participant believed that they were more biased than the average American."). This particular section could also be framed better, considering a sample size of 600 Americans does not necessarily generalize to "most people." The concept of the illusion of objectivity could also be discussed more broadly. There is currently no content specific to forensic psychology on this page, but much could be added. There is a large literature available about the bias blind spot for experts within legal domains and some recent research relevant to judicial decision making. The role of introspection is briefly discussed in this article, but more information could be added. Other potential bias mitigation strategies could be added to the article as well.


 * Sources
 * https://dictionary.apa.org/bias-blind-spot
 * Armor, D. A. (1999). The illusion of objectivity: A bias in the perception of freedom from bias. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 59(9-B), 5163.
 * Kukucka, J., Kassin, S. M., Zapf, P. A., & Dror, I. E. (2017). Cognitive bias and blindness: A global survey of forensic science examiners. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 452–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.09.001
 * Vredeveldt, A., van Rosmalen, E. A. J., van Koppen, P. J., Dror, I. E., & Otgaar, H. (2022) Legal psychologists as experts: guidelines for minimizing bias, Psychology, Crime & Law, https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2022.2114476

Option 2

 * "Competence to refuse an insanity defense"
 * This article does not yet exist so it would be useful to create this page. A section about this competence could also be added to the Insanity defense page and to the Competence (law) page. The insanity page includes a brief sentence or two about the "guilty but mentally ill" verdict option, but not Arizona's "guilty except insane" so this could be added as well.


 * Sources
 * https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/00502.htm
 * Frendak v. United States, 408 A.2d 364 (D.C. 1979)
 * Melton, Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., Slobogin, C., Otto, R. K., Mossman, D., & Condie, L. O. (2017). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
 * Whalem v. United States, 346 F.2d 812 (1965)
 * Whalem v. United States, 346 F.2d 812 (1965)

Option 3

 * "Behavioural genetics"
 * A section could be added to this article regarding the use and perceptions of behavioral genetic evidence in court. This type of evidence, when introduced, is done so with the intent to dispute the defendant's criminal responsibility or their capacity to act deliberately. This could be discussed in the context of attribution theory (causes of a person's behavior) and the stability of these causes of behavior, as well as the backfire effect. Some specific cases (e.g. Waldrop v. Thomas, 2015) could be cited as examples where behavioral genetic evidence was introduced in court.
 * Sources
 * McSwiggan, S., Elger, B., & Appelbaum, P. S. (2017). The forensic use of behavioral genetics in criminal proceedings: Case of the MAOA-L genotype. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 50, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.09.005
 * Farahany, N.A., & Coleman, J.E. (2006). Genetics and responsibility: To know the criminal from the crime. Law and Contemporary Problems, 69(1/2). https://www.jstor.org/stable/27592126
 * Waldrop v. Thomas, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13609.
 * Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548
 * Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: An attributional approach. Psychology Press.
 * Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: An attributional approach. Psychology Press.