Psychology's influence on constitutional interpretation - A comment on how to succeed

Thomas Grisso, Michael Saks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

When organized psychology files amicus briefs with the Supreme Court and other courts, it does so for a variety of reasons and seeks to advance a number of policy objectives. The thesis of this article is that pursuit of some of those objectives is improper and that their pursuit threatens to defeat other objectives. Psychology's expertise is not in constitutional analysis; it is in the study of human behavior. As a practical matter, to pretend to do the former is to weaken our effectiveness in describing the latter. In public interest cases, when acting as a true friend of the court, APA's obligation is to share with the court what empirical research and theory tell us about human behavior, and not to argue for any particular outcome of the case before the court.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-211
Number of pages7
JournalLaw and Human Behavior
Volume15
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1991
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

psychology
Psychology
interpretation
Empirical Research
public interest
Supreme Court
empirical research
obligation
expertise
Constitutional Interpretation
Pursuit
Human Behavior

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law
  • Social Psychology
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Psychology's influence on constitutional interpretation - A comment on how to succeed. / Grisso, Thomas; Saks, Michael.

In: Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 15, No. 2, 04.1991, p. 205-211.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{827110d424f540d98acd02daff41899b,
title = "Psychology's influence on constitutional interpretation - A comment on how to succeed",
abstract = "When organized psychology files amicus briefs with the Supreme Court and other courts, it does so for a variety of reasons and seeks to advance a number of policy objectives. The thesis of this article is that pursuit of some of those objectives is improper and that their pursuit threatens to defeat other objectives. Psychology's expertise is not in constitutional analysis; it is in the study of human behavior. As a practical matter, to pretend to do the former is to weaken our effectiveness in describing the latter. In public interest cases, when acting as a true friend of the court, APA's obligation is to share with the court what empirical research and theory tell us about human behavior, and not to argue for any particular outcome of the case before the court.",
author = "Thomas Grisso and Michael Saks",
year = "1991",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1007/BF01044618",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "205--211",
journal = "Law and Human Behavior",
issn = "0147-7307",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Psychology's influence on constitutional interpretation - A comment on how to succeed

AU - Grisso, Thomas

AU - Saks, Michael

PY - 1991/4

Y1 - 1991/4

N2 - When organized psychology files amicus briefs with the Supreme Court and other courts, it does so for a variety of reasons and seeks to advance a number of policy objectives. The thesis of this article is that pursuit of some of those objectives is improper and that their pursuit threatens to defeat other objectives. Psychology's expertise is not in constitutional analysis; it is in the study of human behavior. As a practical matter, to pretend to do the former is to weaken our effectiveness in describing the latter. In public interest cases, when acting as a true friend of the court, APA's obligation is to share with the court what empirical research and theory tell us about human behavior, and not to argue for any particular outcome of the case before the court.

AB - When organized psychology files amicus briefs with the Supreme Court and other courts, it does so for a variety of reasons and seeks to advance a number of policy objectives. The thesis of this article is that pursuit of some of those objectives is improper and that their pursuit threatens to defeat other objectives. Psychology's expertise is not in constitutional analysis; it is in the study of human behavior. As a practical matter, to pretend to do the former is to weaken our effectiveness in describing the latter. In public interest cases, when acting as a true friend of the court, APA's obligation is to share with the court what empirical research and theory tell us about human behavior, and not to argue for any particular outcome of the case before the court.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025782873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025782873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/BF01044618

DO - 10.1007/BF01044618

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0025782873

VL - 15

SP - 205

EP - 211

JO - Law and Human Behavior

JF - Law and Human Behavior

SN - 0147-7307

IS - 2

ER -