COURSE MANUAL

Legal Psychology

Spring 2024
(AY 2023-24)

Name of Faculty

Chetan Sinha (CC)

Dr Nizamuddin Ahmad Siddiqui
Surabhi Bhandari
Dhyuthi Velugula
 CONTENTS

PART I

General Information………………………………………………………………………………
Page

PART II

a. Course
Description………………………………………………………………………………………
Page

b. Course
Aims……………………………………………………………………………………..Page

c. Intended Learning Outcomes…………………………………………………………...Page

d. Grading of Student Achievement………………………………………………….......Page

PART III
a. Keyword Syllabus……………………………………………………………………………
Page
b. Course
Policies………………………………………………………………………………..Page

PART IV

a. Weekly Course Outline ………………………………………………………….............Page

b. Readings…………………………………………………………………………………………
Page
 PART I

General Information

General Information on, Legal Psychology, offered by Jindal Global Law School

of the AY 2023-24

The information provided herein is by the Course Coordinator. The following information
contains the official record of the details of the course.

This information shall form part of the University database and may be uploaded to the
KOHA Library system and catalogued and may be distributed amongst ____ year Law
students for B.A.LL.B. (Hons), B.B.A.LL.B. (Hons); B.Com. LL.B. (Hons), B.A. (Hons)
Legal Studies, B.A. (Hons) Criminology and Criminal Justice; LL.B.; and LL.M. courses if
necessary.

Course
Title:
Course
Code:
Course
Duration: One Semester
No. of Credit
Units: 4
Level
:
Medium of
Instruction: English
 PART II

a. Course Description

Legal psychology is a systematic attempt to scientifically study the consequence of law on

individuals and society, and vice versa. This course on legal psychology makes a case for the
importance of psychological knowledge in informing law. Currently, the legal domain has
extended its approach to the application of psychological models. Many psychological theories
and models are not only helping in legal decision-making, but law students aptly embrace new
developments in psychology. The legal system is duly understood by psychologists interested in
human thought and social behaviour. Students of varied disciplinary cultures further appreciate
this confluence. This is one of the promising interdisciplinary enterprises that are flexible to
psychological evidence, insights, and techniques, together with the insights from the judges who
made landmark decisions and sometimes dissented from the popular understanding of human
psychology. Integrating psychological knowledge into the legal domain brings about a mutually
beneficial relationship. This course helps in the informed legal decision making

b. Course Aims

1. Informed Legal Decision-Making:

a. Psychological theories and models enhance legal decision-making by better
understanding human behaviour, cognition, and emotions.
b. Judges and legal professionals can leverage psychological insights to make more
informed judgments, especially in cases involving complex human motivations or mental
health issues.
2. Educational Impact on Law Students:
a. Law students benefit from embracing psychological knowledge as it equips them with
a broader perspective on human behaviour, making them more well-rounded
professionals.
b. Exposure to psychological insights helps students develop critical thinking skills and a
nuanced understanding of the factors influencing legal cases.
3. Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
a. The interdisciplinary nature of this approach fosters collaboration between legal and
psychological experts. This collaboration can lead to innovative solutions and a more
holistic approach to legal challenges.
b. It encourages a culture where professionals from different disciplines collaborate,
enriching the overall understanding of legal issues.
4. Flexibility to Psychological Evidence:
a. The flexibility to consider psychological evidence allows the legal system to adapt to
the evolving understanding of human behaviour.
b. Courts and legal professionals can stay abreast of new developments in psychology,
ensuring that legal practices remain relevant and effective in addressing the complexities
of human behaviour.
5. Appreciation of Diversity:
a. The confluence of legal and psychological knowledge promotes an appreciation for
diversity among students of varied disciplinary backgrounds.
 b. This diversity of thought and approach contributes to a more inclusive and dynamic
legal education environment.
6. Learning from Judicial Perspectives and Insights:
a. Including insights from judges who have made landmark
decisions and sometimes dissented from popular understanding of human
psychology provides valuable practical wisdom.
b. Understanding how judges interpret and apply psychological evidence in their
decisions adds a layer of real-world applicability to the theoretical knowledge gained
through academic study.

The objective is to see the tie-up of psychological knowledge and legal practice which presents a
promising avenue for interdisciplinary exploration. It enriches legal education and enhances the
effectiveness and fairness of the legal system by incorporating a deeper understanding of human
psychology. Both the domain is complementary.

c. Intended Learning Outcomes

Course Intended Learning Weightage Teaching and Assessment Tasks/ Activities

Outcomes Learning
Activities
By the end of the course, students
should be able to: Working on the meaning of
Understand the basics of legal evidence and data through
psychology Case, article analysis, presentations,
Applying psychological example, and debates, dialogues, and
knowledge for the effective field vignette-based approach
decision making in the approach, if
courtroom fulfilling the agenda needed
of justice
Critically appreciating
interdisciplinarity and relevant
metatheory
Going beyond the biases and
prejudices rising due to faulty
interpretations

d. Grading of Student Achievement

To be decided along with students
• MID-SEM (50 Marks):
• MCQs (20 Marks): 21st March
• Research Paper (20 Marks): 1st April
• Presentations (10 Marks): 8th and 11th April
END-SEM (50 Marks): Sit Exam
To pass this course, students must obtain a minimum of 40% in the cumulative aspects of
coursework, e.g. moot, and final examination. End of semester exam will carry 50 marks
out of which students have to obtain a minimum of 15 marks to fulfil the requirement of
passing the course.

The details of the grades as well as the criteria for awarding such grades are provided below.

Letter Percentage Grade Definitions

Grade Of marks
O 80% and above Outstanding Outstanding work
with strong
evidence of
knowledge of the
subject matter,
excellent
organizational
capacity, ability to
synthesize and
critically analyse
and originality in
thinking and
presentation.
A+ 75 to 79.75% Excellent Sound knowledge
of the subject
matter, thorough
understanding of
issues; ability to
synthesize
critically and
analyse
A 70 to 74.75% Good Good
understanding of
the subject matter,
ability to identify
issues and provide
balanced solutions
to problems and
good critical and
analytical skills.
A- 65 to 69.75% Adequate Adequate
knowledge of the
subject matter to
go to the next level
 of study and
reasonable critical
and analytical
skills.
B+ 60 to 64.75% Marginal Limited knowledge
of the subject
matter, irrelevant
use of materials
and poor critical
and analytical
skills.
B 55 to 59.75% Poor Poor
comprehension of
the subject matter;
poor critical and
analytical skills
and marginal use
of the relevant
materials.
B- 50 to 54.75% Pass “Pass” in a pass-
fail course. “P”
indicative of at
least the basic
understanding of
the subject matter.

NEW COURSE LETTER GRADES AND THEIR INTERPRETATION

Letter Percentage Grade
Interpretation
Grade of Marks Points
Pass 1: Pass with Basic understanding of the
P1 45 - 49 2
subject matter.
Pass 2: Pass with Rudimentary
P2 40 - 44 1
understanding of the subject matter.
Fail: Poor comprehension of the subject
matter; poor critical and analytical skills and
F Below 40 0
marginal use of the relevant materials. Will
require repeating the course.
“Extenuating circumstances” preventing the
student from taking the examination; the Vice
I Absent
Dean (Examinations) at their discretion assign
the “Ab” grade.

PART III

a. Keyword Syllabus
 Psycholegal Research, legal socialization, social cognition, Eyewitness Testimony, deception,
decision making

b. Course/Class Policies

Cell Phones, Laptops and Similar Gadgets

Academic Integrity and Plagiarism

Learning and knowledge production of any kind is a collaborative process. Collaboration

demands an ethical responsibility to acknowledge who we have learnt from, what we have
learned, and how reading and learning from others have helped us shape our own ideas. Even our
own ideas demand an acknowledgement of the sources and processes through which those ideas
have emerged. Thus, all ideas must be supported by citations. All ideas borrowed from articles,
books, journals, magazines, case laws, statutes, photographs, films, paintings, etc., in print or
online, must be credited with the original source. If the source or inspiration of your idea is a
friend, a casual chat, something that you overheard, or heard being discussed at a conference or
in class, even they must be duly credited. If you paraphrase or directly quote from a web source
in the examination, presentation or essays, the source must be acknowledged. The university has
a framework to deal with cases of plagiarism. All form of plagiarism will be taken seriously by
the University and prescribed sanctions will be imposed on those who commit plagiarism.

Disability Support and Accommodation Requirements

JGU endeavours to make all its courses accessible to students. In accordance with the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities Act (2016), the JGU Disability Support Committee (DSC) has
identified conditions that could hinder a student’s overall well-being. These include physical and
mobility related difficulties, visual and hearing impairment, mental health conditions and
intellectual/learning difficulties e.g., dyslexia, dyscalculia. Students with any known disability
needing academic and other support are required to register with the Disability Support
Committee (DSC) by following the procedure specified at https://jgu.edu.in/disability-
support-committee/

Students who need support may register any time during the semester up until a month before the
end semester examination begins. Those students who wish to continue receiving support from
the previous semester, must re-register within the first month of a semester. Last minute
registrations and support might not be possible as sufficient time is required to make the
arrangements for support.

The DSC maintains strict confidentiality about the identity of the student and the nature of their
disability and the same is requested from faculty members and staff as well. The DSC takes a
strong stance against in-class and out-of-class references made about a student’s disability
without their consent and disrespectful comments referring to a student’s disability.
All general queries are to be addressed to [email protected]

Safe Space Pledge

This course may discuss a range of issues and events that might result in distress for some
students. Discussions in the course might also provoke strong emotional responses. To make sure
that all students collectively benefit from the course, and do not feel disturbed due to either the
content of the course or the conduct of the discussions. Therefore, it is incumbent upon all within
the classroom to pledge to maintain respect towards our peers. This does not mean that you need
to feel restrained about what you feel and what you want to say. Conversely, this is about
creating a safe space where everyone can speak and learn without inhibitions and fear. This
responsibility lies not only with students, but also with the instructor.

P.S. The course instructor, as part of introducing the course manual, will discuss the scope of the
Safe Space Pledge with the class.
PART IV

a. Weekly Course Outline

1. Introduction to Psycholegal Research

 Development of Psycholegal field
 Bridging the gap
Week 1 and 2  Psychology and law in India and abroad

2. Eyewitness Testimony
 Legal aspects of Eyewitness Testimony
 Human attention, perception, and memory
 Methodological Consideration
Week 2 and 3  Factors affecting Eyewitness Testimony

3. Judges and Jury

 Who are judges and what they do?
 Impartiality and Fairness in Judgement
 Arguments for and against jury
 Methods for studying judges
 Issues of diversity in decision making
 Models of jury decision making
 Reforming Jury
Week 5 and 6
 4. Sentencing and Justice
 Disparities in sentencing
 Variations in sentencing
 Extra-legal factors that influence sentences
 Models of Judicial Decision making
 Victims
 Restorative Justice

Week 7 and 8

5. The role of Psychologists

 Rule for admitting expert evidence
 The impact of expert testimony by psychologists
 Appearing as expert witness

Week 9 and 10
6. Deceptions and lies
 What is deception and lie?
 Detecting deception
 Paper and Pencil tests
 The social psychological approach
 Accuracy of lie detectors
 Statement Reality/Validity Analysis
 Insanity Defence

Week 11
Week 12 and 13 Tests

Week 15 Revision

b. Readings
Essential Reading
1. Psychology and law by Andreas Kapardis
Supplementary Readings
1. The Routledge international handbook of legal and investigative psychology
by Ray Bull and Iris Blandon-Gitin
2. Psychology and Law: Bridging the Gap by David Canter
3. Psychology and Law: Theory, Research, and Application.
Thomson/Wadsworth by Bartol, C.R. and Bartol, A.M
4. Rethinking Indian Jurisprudence by Aakash Singh Rathore and Garima
Goswamy
5. Sahni S. P., Bhadra P. ( 2021) Criminal Psychology and the Criminal Justice
System in India and Beyond. Springer Publications, Singapore
6. Blau, T.H. (2001). The Psychologist as Expert Witness (3rd edn). New York:
Wiley.
7. Ogloff, J.R.P. (2000). Two steps forward and one step backward: the law and
psychology movement(s) in the 20th century. Law and Human Behavior,
24(4), 457–83.
8. Zimbardo, P. (2004). A Situationist Perspective on the Psychology of Evil:
Understanding How Good People Are Transformed into Perpetrators. In A.
G. Miller (Ed.), The Social Psychology of Good and Evil (21-50). New
York: Guilford Press.
9. Loftus, E. F. (1997). Creating false memories. Scientific American, 11, 70 –
75.
10. Wells, G.L. (1993). What do we know about eyewitness identification?
American Psychologist, 48, 553- 571.
11. Donohue, J.J., & Wolfers, J. (2005). Uses and abuses of empirical evidence
in the death penalty debate. Stanford Law Review, 58(3), 791-845.
12. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the
story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 62, 189-206
13. Kassin, S.M., Tubb, V.A., Hosch, H.M. and Memon, A. (2001). On the
‘general acceptance’ of eyewitness testimony research. American
Psychologist, 56, 405–16.
14. Ceci, S.J. and Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the Courtroom: A Scientific
Analysis of Children’s Testimony. Washington DC: American Psychological
Association
15. Devine, D.J. et al. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical
research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(3),
622–727.
16. Kassin, S.M. (2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put
innocents at risk? American Psychologist, 60, 215-228.
17. Sommers, S. R. (2007). Race and the decision making of juries. Legal and
Criminological Psychology, 12, 171-187.
18. Myers, B., Latter, R., Arena-Abdollahi, M.K. (2006). The court of public
opinion: Lay perceptions of polygraph tests. Law and Human Behavior, 30,
509-523.
19. Math SB, Kumar CN, Moirangthem S. Insanity Defense: Past, Present, and
Future. Indian J Psychol Med. 2015 Oct-Dec;37(4):381-7.
20. DePaulo, B.M., Lindsay, J.J., Malone, B.E., Muhlebruck, L., Charlton, K.
and Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1),
74–118.
21. McQuiston-Surrett, D., Malpass, R.S. and Tredoux, C.G. (2006). Sequential
vs. simultaneous lineups: a review of methods, data, and theory. Psychology,
Public Policy and Law, 12(2), 137–69.
22. Moghaddam, F.M. and Marsela, A.J. (2004). Understanding Terrorism:
Psychological Roots, Consequences and Interventions. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
 23. Kapardis, A., & Farrington, D. P. (1981). An experimental study of
sentencing by magistrates. Law and Human Behavior, 5(2-3), 107-121.
24. Bruce A Arrigo (ed)(2004). Psychological Jurisprudence: Critical
explorations in law, crime, and society. State University of New York Press.