Unable to recover title from abbreviations and course metadata

¶ … forensic psychology professionals working in the military subspecialty role in various settings of interrogation, it is necessary to describe some of the more salient differences between military psychology and civilian psychology. These differences become lessened when one considers the role that a forensic psychologist plays in civilian psychology vs. In the military. Essentially, in the former setting a forensic psychologist is dedicated to discovering the truth and interpreting pieces of evidence to help uncover fact. In military settings, however, a forensic psychologist plays much more of a partisan role.

Granted, there are certain international laws and mandates that bind the military in this and other countries (pertaining to international law). However, there is much less an emphasis on discovery and obtaining justice as there is in achieving a specific objective -- often one which was conceived of and implemented by a military authority figure with much more authority than the forensic psychologist, who is oftentimes carrying out orders or finding her own responsibilities shaped by some overriding objective (Zur and Gonzales, 2002).

Therefore, from a purely pragmatic standpoint, there is a justification for a forensic psychologist in the military subspecialty role working in interrogations. Since the primary function of this position (regardless of location or setting) is to interpret evidence to assist in the carrying out of legal matters, it is not entirely inappropriate to have a forensic psychologist present during interrogations. However, the nature of the interpretation of evidence is a lot less complicated in military settings that it can be in civilian settings in, say, a court of law. Whereas a psychologist may be required to verify scientific or empirical proof about a piece of evidence in the latter, he or she is essentially performing a job that any military person can perform in a military setting -- denoting a confession. There may be some more advanced reasoning involved in piecing together different information from an interrogation, but from the perspective of its quintessential job function, a forensic psychologist is as unneeded in these settings as she is in police interrogation settings.

However, a forensic psychologist in a military setting may be able to assist in other ways in interrogations in prisoner-of-war camps and in warfare in general. Because these professionals have a strong civilian foundation -- usually having achieved some if ont a significant part of their coursework in civilian settings -- and due to the fact that they are familiar with regulations governing their profession both within and outside of the military, they may be able to display humane tendencies during these settings that can mitigate unneeded pain and suffering. However, even this role is not a given, since the function of these professionals within military settings is substantially framed within achieving the overall objectives of the military. There certainly can be a conflict of interest between overarching psychology norms and the goals of the military in interrogations. Psychologists may not be able to prevent the latter from overshadowing the former, but they may certainly try.