Careers in Psychology and Law:
Professional Biographies

These biographies are intended to provide examples of the different work environments and activities that encompass psychology and law.

DR. ROBERT MACCOUN Ph.D.

Dr. MacCoun drifted into graduate school without a grand design; when a post-BA job fell through, he was accepted into Michigan State's social psych program, and given a BA position with then-Assistant Professor Norbert Kerr, for 4 years. Dr. MacCoun received his Ph.D. in Psychology (Social) in 1984. The social psych job market was limited in 1984 (as always); however he was able to land a post-doc at Northwestern, where he collaborated with Dr. Reid Hastie on several jury studies and with Dr. Tom Tyler on a procedural justice study. Dr. Allan Lind then recruited Dr. MacCoun to RAND, a non-partisan,non-profit private research "think tank" in Santa Monica. He stayed for 7 years (he remains an active consultant), working on studies of jury behavior, alternative dispute resolution, drug dealing, drug legalization, and the gays in the military controversy. (Dr. MacCoun later served as expert witness for the ACLU on military cohesion and the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.) In 1993, he moved to Berkeley, where he accepted a job at UC Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy. He is one of the very few psychologists currently employed at a policy school, but finds that he is quite happy representing psychology in a world of economists, political scientists, and lawyers.

Dr. MacCoun does not have any special career advice, though he would entertain questions. He has enjoyed keeping a diverse portfolio of research interests rather than specializing in juries (or ADR, or drugs, etc.). He also tries to maintain a balance between publications in "applied" outlets and publications in basic psychology outlets. But these choices are mostly a matter of taste; strict specialization can work fine so long as students remain productive and the research process stays fun.

DR. DANIEL WOLFE JD. PH.D.

Dr. Wolfe's interests in jury consulting developed as a result of working on a large-scale NIMH-funded project that examined the impact of the Guilty But Mentally Ill (GBMI) verdict option on juror decision making. As a result of his involvement on this project, he was able to complete his dissertation utilizing data from this project. The primary thrust of his dissertation was to examine the relationship between juror note taking and comprehension. Dr. Wolfe is a jury consultant with a large litigation consulting firm in Chicago. His primary areas of interests as a jury consultant pertain to the understanding of juror decision making and the interface of psychological phenomena in the litigation arena. Although Dr. Wolfe pursues these interests through a practice with a large firm, most jury consultants pursue their practice independently or in a small firm setting. Other relevant areas of research interest for Dr. Wolfe include ethics of trial consulting and the interaction of attorney gender and courtroom bias.

The majority of Dr. Wolfe's work involves consulting with trial attorneys on high risk and complex civil and criminal cases with the primary goal of assisting the trial attorneys in case strategy preparation, juror attitude and belief identification, witness preparation, juror profile development and juror selection, and post-trial juror interviews. Although most of the litigation has involved civil matters, Dr. Wolfe also consults on high profile criminal cases, particularly antitrust and securities fraud and capital murder cases.

Given the nature of the litigation process, it has been quite easy for Dr. Wolfe to integrate the disciplines of psychology and law. For example, the basic principles of social cognition, attribution theory, heuristic processing, and sensory perceptions have been instrumental in understanding jurors decision making capabilities in the legal context, including attributions of responsibility, perceptions of culpability, and decision making in complex cases. As part of his consulting practice, Dr. Wolfe also delivers workshops and speeches nationally to legal organizations including the American Bar Association, American Board of Trial Advocates, Inns of Court, and several state and local bar associations as part of an effort to educate litigators about the profession. Dr. Wolfe graduated from the Colorado State University and earned his masters and doctoral degrees in Psychology from the University of Nebraska. Dr. Wolfe also earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Nebraska.

Advice for those entering the field of jury consulting should consider the following: You must be focused on providing the highest quality jury services that offer recognizable distinctions in quality and value in the marketplace. Additionally, because of the highly competitive nature of this business, you must make the clients interests paramount -- you must listen carefully, understand their needs, clarify their goals, give them your best, and invest in them. Extraordinary service to your clients is the key competitive advantage. Furthermore, the quality of your services must be superior, distinctive and uncompromising.

DR. STUART GREENBERG PH.D.

Dr. Greenberg is in the full-time private practice of forensic psychology, mostly evaluating plaintiffs in personal injury lawsuits. He works equally for defense and plaintiff and has completed a large number of forensic examinations. His primary areas of interest are in torts of emotional distress, generating a model for civil forensic examinations, and educating attorneys in how to make the most effective and appropriate use of experts.

His most cited work, which appeared in the February, 1997 issue of Professional Psychology, is about the role conflict that occurs when therapists attempt to provide pseudo-forensic testimony on behalf of their patients. Dr. Greenberg, along with Dr. Stan Brodsky, is in the final stages of preparation of "The Civil Practice of Forensic Psychology", a textbook to be published by APA in 1998 or 1999. Dr. Greenberg is also very interested in the development of forensic psychology as a field and profession, and was recently elected a member of the Board of the American Board of Forensic Psychology.

Like most of the early generations of forensic psychologists, Dr. Greenberg did not have formal training in forensic psychology in graduate school. Because of having been trained as a child clinical psychologist, he was asked in the early 1980's by family law attorneys to assist with parenting evaluations. Some of these attorneys also had personal injury practices and, over time, Dr. Greenberg found that he enjoyed doing personal injury examinations more that the parenting work. His personal interest, intrigue with all forensic cases , civil, and criminal, is the same. Early continuing education, mostly through AAFP, exposed him to stimulating role models. Dr. Greenberg's interests were, and continue to be, excited by people such as Herb Weissman, Dave Shapiro, Steve Banks, Alan Goldstein, Ira Packer, Tom Grisso, Steven Golding, Bob Meyer, Stan Brodsky, Randy Otto, and Dan Shuman.

Dr. Greenberg loves teaching about the various aspects of forensic practice and, thanks primarily to the University of Minnesota and to the American Academy of Forensic Psychology, has been able to teach workshops across the country in Forensic Applications of the MMPI, Personal Injury Examinations, Parenting Examinations, and Forensic Ethics. Cases have also drawn him far away from Seattle, to places as New Jersey, Alaska, and Puerto Rico. More locally, he lectures in the Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry at the University of Washington, at Western State Hospital in Washington, and for the ABPP Summer Institute in Oregon.

Dr. Greenberg attended Rutgers University for his undergraduate education, where he received a BA in psychology in 1969 with a minor in modern art. He earned a PhD in 1973 in clinical psychology from the University of Southern California where he specialized in child psychopathology, and was a post-doctoral fellow in 1973-74 at Neuropsychiatric Institute, UCLA. He received his Diplomate in Forensic Psychology, ABPP, in 1989. Dr. Greenberg is fascinated with the law, often wishing it were possible to go to law school in just those legal areas that are relevant to forensic psychology. As a substitute, he can be found at CLE's on various "expert witness" topics. He often finds that attorneys and psychologists fail to understand the rules and perspectives that govern each other's work. Psychologists, in particular, fail to appreciate the rules that govern their participation often thinking that as long as their testimony is truthful, it should be admissible. Attorneys, correspondingly, often believe that if the psychologist is supportive of the attorney's client, then the psychologist should be part of "the team" and not say anything that would be contrary to that person's case. Dr. Greenberg feels that the psychologist should know more about the law and the attorney should know more about how to best use psychological fact and expert witnesses. Two of his favorite CE topics to present are, for psychologists, "Understanding Torts of Emotional Distress" and, for attorneys, "Forensic Roles and Ethics".

While the field of forensic psychology is a specialty, it also encompasses a huge intellectual domain. The model of a funnel applies: start off broadly and focus as you develop particular interests. While there is no substitute for a strong general education in either science or humanities, it can be helpful to know well ahead of time what particular goal you have in mind and whether this field is for you. For example, preparation for forensic work in the area of child custody litigation can be very different than preparation for a specialization in eyewitness testimony or in advocating for the rights of those involuntarily committed to refuse psychotropic medications.

Students would do well to expose themselves as early as possible to the goals they seek in order to test whether they are on the path they desire. Volunteer in a state hospital legal offender unit, a domestic violence safe house, or a sexual assault center. Attend a variety of trials and watch what expert witnesses do and how they are treated. Read an introductory book in forensic psychology and another intended for beginning law students. Hang around with attorneys at a continuing legal education seminar or in the back of courtroom as they wait to be called on the motions calendar. Meet some forensic psychologists who do this work regularly and see if you feel an affinity with them and if their work suits your temperament. Find a part-time forensic job or volunteer, it's a good investment. This field, as stimulating, exciting, and rewarding as it is, can also be a very difficult and draining area of practice. Forensic practice involves high pressure, conflict, deadlines, and perfectionism. Don't let yourself be seduced by the occasional glamour. Find out if it really suits you before you pass up other opportunities that you might enjoy more.

DR. DEBRA POOLE PH.D.

Dr. Poole is interested in the social policy applications of basic research in cognitive development and, more generally, the interface between science and social policy. Her most cited work deals with children's eyewitness testimony. She has written on other topics, however, including clinician's attitudes and practices regarding memory recovery work in therapy, the heritability concept, gender differences in scientific knowledge, and developmental outcomes of Black children from three environments in South Africa.

Dr. Poole's early interests were in basic research, especially perception, memory, and language development. Her transition to social policy applications involved two influences. First, she had a life-long fascination with the history of ideas that was nurtured by reading Russell in high school, taking a course in the philosophy of science during graduate school, and co-directing a women's studies program at Beloit College during a time of renewed debate about relationships between science and society. Second, the birth of her children peeked her interest in using scientific methods to solve practical problems. She began studying children's eyewitness testimony when media coverage of sexual abuse investigations during the 1980's prompted her to write a grant with a social psychologist who taught psychology and law. Dr. Poole continues to maintain an interdisciplinary perspective at Central Michigan University by team-teaching a course on inequality with Len Lieberman (a sociologist and physical anthropologist) and working on a geography research team.

Dr. Poole works primarily in her two offices, one at Central Michigan University, where she is a professor of psychology, and one at home, where she does a great deal of her writing. Occasionally, however, she travels outside of Mt. Pleasant to teach workshops in forensic interviewing to child protective services personnel, state police, prosecuting attorneys and judges.

Dr. Poole attended the University of Connecticut for her undergraduate education, where she received a BA in psychology in 1975 with a minor in anthropology. She earned the MA (1977) and Ph.D. (1980) degrees in developmental and experimental child psychology at the University of Iowa, where she studied language development before shifting to a perception laboratory. While working toward her graduate degrees, Dr. Poole took classes in computer programming to fulfill the requirements of her research assistantship, and she taught numerous classes including development psychology, memory and cognition, and perception. These experiences provided technical skills that would later be the foundation for analyzing problems in the legal arena.

Dr. Poole's research has implications for such topics as the structure of forensic interviewing protocols and competency requirements for child witnesses. Dr. Poole drafted the investigative interviewing protocol for Michigan's Family Independence Agency and the Governor's Task Force on Children's Justice. Her book with Michael Lamb (Investigative Interviews of Children: A Guide for Helping Professionals) is forthcoming from the American Psychological Association.

Dr. Poole believes firmly in the value of a liberal arts education. Her advice for student: Resist pressures to specialize early in your careers, because you cannot predict what will be necessary to solve the problems of tomorrow. Work to develop basic skills in computer technology, mathematics, and writing. Moreover, spend at least as much time analyzing the social and historical contexts for novel ideas as you spend basking in the temporary euphoria of their immediate appeal. Finally, throughout your careers, look for the smartest people you can find and ask them to teach you something.