A Theory Matrix for Mediators

The author uses a behavioral perspective to survey theory that may be useful in mediation. He notes the lack of diffusion of knowledge of theory among practitioners and argues that mediators should pay more explicit attention to theory. He presents a matrix comprising the behavioral factors of perception, emotion, cognition, communication, and intervention at the micro, meso, and macro levels of conflict and uses this matrix to organize and review some mediation theories. Several types of intervention theory are identified: integrated, generic, dialectical, developmental, and dialogical. The article closes by posing some outstanding theoretical issues and questioning whether current mediator training programs are adequate to bridge the gap between theory and practice.     

Legacies of Saleem Shah

Saleem A. Shah made seminal and substantive contributions to psychological knowledge, theory, and practice in corrections and the law. He assumed a role as instigator of research and generous colleague in a vast range of psychological-legal activities. Current clinical practices and conceptual frames of reference in legal and correctional psychology reflect the conscience, involvements, and ideas of Saleem Shah.     

"Magical thinking," suicide, and malpractice litigation

Prospective clinical assessment of suicidality differs significantly from that used retrospectively in malpractice litigation. In the latter context, the judge or jury may be susceptible to hindsight reasoning and a disproportionate emphasis on the specific method of suicide, exaggerating its foreseeability and "magically" linking the means of death to the treating clinician, especially in the case of suicide by an overdose of prescribed medication. Such magical thinking, moreover, is rooted in the clinical context of suicide: The errors of reasoning observed in the courtroom exhibit striking parallels with the mind-set of the suicidal patient. An understanding of these dynamics suggests appropriate precautions for the clinician and thus contributes to the prevention both of suicide and of malpractice litigation.     

Worst Expert Testimony Ever

Much of the literature on expert testimony addresses ways to improve witness credibility. A smaller body of knowledge examines instances of testimony in which the expert makes stylistic or substantive errors. In the present paper, a case of expert testimony is presented in which an expert witness under the duress of strong cross-examinations lost emotional control and spoke inappropriately. The circumstances of the testimony are discussed and alternative paths towards managing such situations are presented.