SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.19 issue2Social Perception through Gender Stereotypes of Partner Violence author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Psychosocial Intervention

On-line version ISSN 2173-4712Print version ISSN 1132-0559

Abstract

ARCE, Ramón; FARINA, Francisca  and  VILARINO, Manuel. Contrasting the Efficiency of the CBCA in the Assessment of Credibility in Violence Against Women Cases. Psychosocial Intervention [online]. 2010, vol.19, n.2, pp.109-119. ISSN 2173-4712.

Archival data reveal that in Spain the conviction rate for cases of gender violence is approximately 70%, whereas the conviction rate for other crimes is in the region of 90%. This dysfunction arises from a multiplicity of factors, chiefly the lack of evidence. As most gender violence occurs within the privacy of the home, the burden of proof rests exclusively or primarily on the victim’s testimony. Testimonies admitted in a court of law are often corroborated by circumstantial evidence (e.g., legal criteria of plausibility), and in particular the psychological report on testimonial credibility that plays a critical role in verdict outcome. An archive study of cases of gender violence revealed that psychological reports were admitted in 20% of the cases reviewed. Although Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA; Steller and Köhnken, 1994) is not valid for legal contexts, it has been observed to be the standard procedure for the evaluation of testimonial credibility in the archive cases of gender violence under review. Thus, a study involving 50 women (25 real victims and 25 feigners of gender violence) was undertaken to assess the efficacy of this procedure for the discrimination of real victims from feigners. The results reveal that real testimonies contained more reality criteria than faked testimonies. Nevertheless, the procedure, in line with the demands of forensic evidence in terms of the unacceptability of false positives (i.e., feigned case classed as real), erroneously detected 44% of real testimonies as false negatives (i.e., detected real case as feigned). The results are discussed in terms of the practical implications for forensic psychology.

Keywords : violence against women; battered woman; credibility; CBCA; testimony; expert testimony.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License