Richard
Wiener -- Dr. Wiener’s research group is most interested
in studying the ways in which deviations from a rational decision making
model influences judgments of law. Most centrally, the team is actively
collecting data examining the impact of recent U.S. court decisions
on the evaluation of allegations of sexual harassment law in the workplace.
These data will test some components of a social cognitive model of
sexual harassment that Wiener has written about extensively. The team
is also studying jury decision making in death penalty cases, examining
the role of jury instruction incomprehensibility in the jury’s
willingness to invoke the death penalty. In addition, several members
of the team are examining the role of emotional appraisal theory in
worker reactions to sexual harassment allegations, juror and jury bias
against general categories of offenders (e.g., sexual abusers), judges’
decisions in abuse and neglect cases, and symbolic hate speech. As a
member of the Coalition for Consumer Bankruptcy Debtor Education, Dr.
Wiener studies financial literacy training programs for debtors. Dr
Wiener’s group is beginning to make use of internet research.
One study looks at the influence of drug courier profiles on case evaluations
and a new study will test the role of experienced and anticipated emotion
in limiting the efficacy of proposed credit disclosure laws among bankruptcy
filers.
Brian
Bornstein– Dr. Bornstein’s research group applies
principles from cognitive and social psychology to real-world contexts,
particularly within the legal system. The bulk of this work concerns
juror decision making, in both civil and criminal domains. For example,
current civil jury projects address the effect of a plaintiff’s
own fault (i.e., comparative negligence) on punitive damage awards;
the effect of varying instructions on what factors to consider in the
awarding of compensation, such as how much a plaintiff’s injuries
should be worth for each day that she has to endure pain and suffering;
and the perception of corporate defendants. A current criminal jury
experiment explores the impact on jurors of graphic evidence, such as
autopsy photos and explicit testimony about a murder victim’s
wounds. Another criminal project is investigating the effect of attorneys’
statements, such as arguing that a murder defendant deserves a death
sentence in order to pay “an eye for an eye.” Other projects
span civil and criminal trials, such as the impact of different kinds
of expert testimony and jurors’ perception of their jury service.
The team also conducts research on eyewitness memory. Within this domain,
a large-scale meta-analysis of the face recognition/eyewitness identification
literature is underway, and experimental studies of specific topics
(e.g., the cross-race effect) are presently in the planning stages.
Finally, Dr. Bornstein conducts research on justice, especially people’s
perceptions of what is fair in allocating limited resources, such as
income or healthcare.
Will
Spaulding - As a member of both the clinical and law-psychology
programs, Dr. Spaulding researches various aspects of schizophrenia
and other severe mental disorders. Recent law-psychology projects in
his research group have focused on law and social policy related to
severe mental illness, especially from the perspective of therapeutic
jurisprudence (i.e., using the law for therapeutic purposes). For example,
one current project seeks to identify the characteristics of psychiatrists
and other clinicians that influence their judgments when evaluating
patients for the purposes of civil commitment. Previous research has
suggested that such judgments are influenced by diverse factors, and
a greater understanding of this process would have a significant impact
on the selection, training, education and supervision of mental health
clinicians. Another current project is developing and testing "Understanding
Hospitalization," a psychoeducational modality designed for people
with severe mental illness who are receiving involuntary treatment.
The modality is intended to help patients understand why they were hospitalized,
their remaining rights and responsibilities, criteria for progress and
release, and ways of cooperating with their caregivers to optimize clinical
outcome and the restoration of rights. Dr. Spaulding also conducts research
on neuropsychological impairment in schizophrenia, cognitive and neuropsychological
predictors of success in treatment and rehabilitation, social cognition
in psychosis, and state hospital reform.
Mario
Scalora - Dr. Scalora is currently performing research
in a variety of areas related to risk and threat assessment. Concerning
sexual offending, he and his colleagues are investigating a range of
personality and other risk factors related to sexual recidivism. He
also performs treatment outcome research related to the response and
subsequent recidivism of juvenile and adult sexual offenders to cognitive-behavioral
treatment. Dr. Scalora also collaborates with local, state, and federal
law enforcement on threat assessment research assessing predictive risk
factors concerning threatening and violent activity toward public officials
and institutions. On a related note concerning targeted violence, his
research team is also investigating various risk-related issues (e.g.,
the nature of mental illness, predictive value of precious threatening
behavior) concerning multiple samples of workplace violence. Dr. Scalora
also maintains an active research interest in juvenile delinquency,
currently investigating the impact of treatment programs upon juvenile
recidivism as well as the predictors of such treatment response. Dr.
Scalora currently supervises graduate students performing clinical service
and research within the state's Forensic Mental Health Service. His
graduate teaching activity currently includes courses on forensic assessment,
personality assessment, and the supervision of clinical practica.
Cynthia
Willis-Esqueda - Dr. Willis Esqueda and her students concentrate
on research that examines how the law defines race and ethnicity and
the presence and impact of discrimination within the legal system. In
the broadest sense, the research focuses on culpability decisions concerning
minorities and how such decisions are connected to historical and current
legal and societal notions about race and ethnicity. In one program
of research, Dr. Willis Esqueda has examined the biases that are present
in domestic violence culpability assignment, based on stereotypes concerning
women of color. In a series of studies, Dr. Willis Esqueda and her students
have shown that, due to stereotypes about African American women, biases
exist in domestic violence culpability assignment, regardless of the
race of the abuser. This research is currently being extended to examine
unique biases against American Indian women and Latinas, particularly
where there is perceived provocation or mutual battering. Another on-going
area of research focuses on aversive racism as an explanation for biases
against Mexican American male defendants, when considering socio-economic
status, and how such biases affect perceptions of an attorney’s
representation. American Indian law and issues of criminal jurisdiction
are an area for future research, particularly for inter-racial crime
where alcohol is a factor.
Robert
Schopp - Bob Schopp completed the Ph.D. in clinical psychology
and practiced clinically for approximately 10 years in a variety of
clinical settings that raised a series perplexing legal and ethical
questions. He turned to the study of law and philosophy in order to
better understand those questions. He completed the J.D. in 1988 and
the Ph.D. in philosophy in 1989. His work emphasizes issues that fall
at the intersection of law, psychology, and philosophy. These include,
for example, questions addressing criminal competence and responsibility,
civil competence and commitment, the right to refuse treatment, and
the significance of psychological impairment for the just administration
of criminal punishment. His books and articles have addressed questions
such as these and others within the broad categories of substantive
criminal law and mental health law. His work tends to emphasize conceptual
and normative analysis with available empirical evidence integrated
into that analysis. Recent work in the general category of mental health
law addresses outpatient commitment, sexually violent predator statutes,
and a book advancing an integrated theory of mental health law. Recent
work in the substantive criminal law addresses a variety of issues involving
capital punishment, including the most defensible understanding of the
Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment analysis, the integration of
empirical data with that analysis, and the relationship between the
justification in principle of capital punishment and evidence of various
types of distortions in practice.
CENTER ON CHILDREN, FAMILIES,AND THE LAW (CCFL)
(Director – Brian Wilcox)
The Center on Children, Families, and the Law at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
was established in 1987 as a home for interdisciplinary research, teaching
and public service on issues related to child and family policy and
services. The mission of the Center on Children, Families and the Law
is to educate, conduct research, analyze policy, and provide community
services related to children, families and legal policy issues. The
data on child and family issues generated by the Center are widely distributed
to educate policy makers, scholars, service providers and the public.
Work done by the Center has served as the primary basis for new local,
state and national legislation, and has been cited in court rulings,
including the U.S. Supreme Court. The Center on Children, Families and
the Law holds a strong commitment to the people of Nebraska. Center
faculty work closely with state and local agencies, the Governor's Office
on Child and Family Policy, the legislature, and nonprofit organizations
to promote child and family welfare through training and educational
programs, legal and policy analyses, consultation with service providers,
and research intended to address practical child and family welfare
issues.
Scientific Resources for the Law (SRL) (Director, Roger Lott)
A University-Based Research and Consulting Service for Attorneys
SRL, Inc. is our university-based research and legal consulting service,
which assists attorneys, state legislators, and government executives
with their law-related scientific and social science needs. SRL, Inc.,
a nonprofit organization supported by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
(UNL) facilitates the ability of attorneys to draw upon and utilize
the expertise and resources of the UNL Law/Psychology program. SRL,
Inc. offers attorneys three primary services:
• Identifying, contacting, and preparing consultants or potential
expert witnesses
• Conducting empirical research to assist members of the legal
community with their work (e.g. threat assessment, financial literacy
training for bankruptcy filers)
• Providing trial and jury consultation services (e.g., jury selection,
mock juries, focus groups, and trial strategies).
SRL, Inc. is operated by Law and Psychology Program faculty and students
and has provided consulting services in criminal cases (e.g. the Timothy
McVeigh trial) and in civil cases (including large class-action suits
and commercial disputes involving damage claims in the hundreds of millions
of dollars).
The Public Policy Center (PPC) (Director, Alan Tomkins)
The PPC seeks to inform public policy by facilitating, developing, and
making available objective research and analysis on issues important
to Nebraskans. The PPC is a link between the University of Nebraska's
public policy resources and elected and appointed officials; state and
local agency staff; the public at large; and others who represent the
diverse policy interests of Nebraskans. Drawing on faculty, staff, and
student expertise from throughout the University of Nebraska system,
the PPC facilitates, coordinates, and supports public policy research,
and undertakes collaborative projects to benefit Nebraska. The PPC brings
a proactive focus to identification and research on emerging policy
issues and establishing networks among researchers, educators, and policymakers.
The PPC's primary focus centers around longer-term analytic studies
that address new or ongoing public policy issues of importance to Nebraskans.
Topics are suggested by policymakers and administrators from the Executive,
Judicial, and Legislative branches of government, as well as by faculty,
students, and staff from the University. The entities with which the
PPC works closely include the Nebraska Legislative Research Office,
the Executive Board of the Legislature, the Governor's Policy Research
and Energy Office, and the State Court Administrator's Office. The PPC
also works with other recognized groups in Nebraska that have an interest
in public policy.
