جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "psychology of testimony" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

Referring to the testimony of witnesses as one of the proofs is not a new phenomenon in legal systems, so that the testimony of eyewitnesses is often considered the only evidence or one of the main evidences in criminal cases to be a reason that is more or less associated with errors or mistakes. It should be kept in mind that false testimonies can have a negative impact on investigations and judicial proceedings. A topic that numerous psychological researches have confirmed the possibility of its realization. The proof of this issue is the issuing of wrongful convictions that were later canceled. Therefore, judges should be aware of the factors that can challenge such an argument. Nevertheless, to what extent is the knowledge of judges in this field? In this survey, the awareness of Iranian judges regarding the indicators related to the cognitive psychological aspect of witness testimony was examined and then a comparison was made with the views of their counterparts in the United States and Norway. The present research method is descriptive-analytical. The research community included 72 judges of Mashhad prosecutor's office and courts in 1400. The data collection method was using a researcher-made questionnaire with 33 questions that evaluated four indicators of memory, nervous stress, unconscious transference, and expectations. Data analysis was done using SPSS 24 version. Finally, the results obtained from this research have been compared with the results of the survey conducted in the countries of America and Norway. The average scores obtained from this research showed that Iranian judges' awareness of the impact of the expectations component (3.78) in witness testimony was higher among the respondents than other components. After that, the components of unconscious transfer (3.66), memory (3.13) and stress (3.02) are placed. In general, the views of Iranian judges were at a lower level than Norwegian and American judges.

Compared to experimental and human sciences، law has never been productive but it has always utilized the results and information obtained through other sciences، psychology in particular. Therefore، new psychological findings about memory and age could both and must be taken into account in law as concerns interpretation and making judgment. Psychological findings show Judges rely on the testimony of older people because their situation (Memory and Perception) is undefinable. Radical skepticism of lawyers، regarding children''s testimony should be balanced by new findings about the psychology of children''s memory. And yet، it is suggested that problems of testimony of the child which is resulting from his indoctrination must be resolved by measures of psychology.