PSDE3714 Forensic Psychology Exam Notes and Study Guide for UFS Students

Forensic psychology sits at the intersection of psychological science and the legal system, demanding both conceptual understanding and practical application. These notes organise the major themes commonly assessed in PSDE3714 Forensic Psychology within the University of the Free State (UFS): Forensic & Criminological Psychology cluster, with an emphasis on the South African context, exam-ready definitions, and applied examples. The guide is designed to support revision, essay writing, and problem-solving in assessments that require clear links between theory, law, ethics, and practice.

1. Foundations of Forensic Psychology in the South African Legal Context

What forensic psychology is

Forensic psychology is the application of psychological knowledge, methods, and principles to issues related to the law, crime, courts, corrections, and criminal investigation. It is not limited to offender profiling or criminal “mind-reading,” which is a popular misconception. In an academic setting such as PSDE3714, the subject is usually presented as a rigorous discipline that asks how human behaviour, mental processes, trauma, personality, memory, decision-making, and social influence intersect with legal questions.

At its core, forensic psychology deals with questions such as:

Why do people offend?
How should courts evaluate mental illness in relation to criminal responsibility?
How reliable is eyewitness evidence?
How should children be interviewed in legal investigations?
What is the psychologist’s role in risk assessment, rehabilitation, and victim support?
How do prisons, policing practices, and court procedures affect behaviour?

This field is distinct from general clinical psychology because its purpose is not simply treatment. It also serves the legal system, which means the psychologist must understand evidentiary standards, legal thresholds, report writing, and courtroom testimony. In South Africa, this makes forensic psychology especially important because legal practice occurs within a constitutional framework that emphasises dignity, equality, freedom, and procedural fairness.

Core assumptions and scope

A useful way to think about forensic psychology is that it operates in three overlapping spaces:

The individual: personality, cognition, development, trauma, mental illness, impulse control, and aggression.
The offence or legal event: crime scenes, victimisation, interrogation, confession, testimony, and sentencing.
The system: police, courts, correctional services, child protection, and forensic mental health services.

These three spaces are constantly in interaction. For example, an accused person with a history of head injury and substance use may be involved in an assault case. A forensic psychologist might be asked to assess whether the person understood the nature and wrongfulness of the act, whether memory is reliable, whether intoxication impaired judgment, and what rehabilitation or risk-management recommendations are appropriate.

The South African legal environment

South African forensic psychology cannot be studied effectively without reference to the constitutional and statutory environment. Several legal principles are repeatedly relevant:

Presumption of innocence
Right to remain silent
Right to legal representation
Protection against self-incrimination
Protection of children’s rights
Right to dignity
Fair trial rights

These principles shape how psychologists interview, assess, and report. A forensic psychologist must avoid becoming an advocate for either side and must remain objective, evidence-based, and transparent about limitations.

South African practice also reflects a deep concern with the past abuses of power, making ethical sensitivity essential. In forensic work, the psychologist may encounter vulnerable groups such as children, survivors of sexual violence, accused persons with intellectual disability, and offenders with severe trauma histories. This means that competent practice is not only about technical knowledge but also about cultural awareness, trauma-informed interaction, and legal literacy.

Common myths and misconceptions

A strong exam answer should often distinguish forensic psychology from media stereotypes. Common myths include:

Myth 1: Forensic psychology equals criminal profiling.
Profiling is only one small and contested area. Most forensic psychologists spend far more time on assessment, report writing, treatment, consultation, and testimony.
Myth 2: Psychologists can determine guilt.
Guilt is a legal determination made by the court, not the psychologist.
Myth 3: Mental illness explains most violent crime.
While severe mental illness can be relevant in some cases, most people with mental disorders are not violent. Violence is more strongly associated with multiple interacting factors such as antisocial traits, substance abuse, social deprivation, prior violence, and environmental stressors.
Myth 4: Children always tell the truth.
Children can be reliable witnesses in some circumstances, but their accounts are highly sensitive to interviewing style, suggestibility, stress, and developmental stage.
Myth 5: An expert’s opinion is objective fact.
Expert opinions are based on training, methods, available evidence, and judgment. They must be justified and qualified.

Why the subject matters

Forensic psychology matters because legal decisions can profoundly alter lives. A mistaken assessment may contribute to wrongful conviction, an unsafe release decision, or inappropriate sentencing. A poorly conducted interview may contaminate evidence. A weak risk assessment may fail to protect victims. Conversely, a skilled forensic psychologist can support fair process, improve access to justice, assist rehabilitation, and reduce reoffending.

In a South African context, this discipline also matters because the justice system must balance accountability with constitutional rights and social realities such as inequality, trauma, overcrowded prisons, gender-based violence, and limited access to mental health services. The forensic psychologist often becomes a bridge between human complexity and legal procedure.

2. Key Theories of Crime, Aggression, and Offending Behaviour

Biological, psychological, and social explanations

A frequent exam theme is that no single theory fully explains crime. Instead, offending behaviour is best understood through an integrative model. The major categories are biological, psychological, and social explanations.

Biological perspectives

Biological explanations focus on heredity, neurochemistry, brain structure, hormones, and physiological arousal. They do not claim that biology “causes” crime in a simple way, but rather that certain biological features may increase vulnerability to impulsivity, aggression, sensation-seeking, or poor emotional regulation.

Relevant ideas include:

Genetic predispositions: Some traits linked to antisocial behaviour, such as impulsivity and low self-control, show moderate heritability.
Brain functioning: Damage or dysfunction in the prefrontal cortex may reduce inhibition and planning.
Neurotransmitters: Serotonin is often associated with impulse regulation; lower functioning can be linked with aggression in some contexts.
Hormonal influences: Testosterone has been studied in relation to dominance and aggression, although the relationship is not direct or deterministic.
Psychophysiology: Low resting arousal has been associated in some studies with sensation-seeking and fearlessness.

These ideas are useful, but they must be handled carefully. Biology may increase risk, but environmental context determines whether that risk is expressed.

Psychological perspectives

Psychological explanations focus on cognition, personality, learning, emotional regulation, attachment, and mental health. Important concepts include:

Social learning theory: Behaviour is learned through observation, imitation, reinforcement, and modelling.
Cognitive distortions: Offenders may minimise harm, blame victims, or justify violence.
Personality traits: Traits such as callousness, impulsivity, low empathy, and hostility are linked to offending.
Attachment theory: Insecure early attachments may affect emotional regulation and relationships.
Moral development: Some offenders display weak internalisation of social rules.
Trauma and coping: Early abuse, neglect, and chronic stress can shape later antisocial adaptation.

Social perspectives

Social explanations emphasise context, opportunity, inequality, peer influence, family structure, community disorganisation, and social norms. Examples include:

Exposure to violent neighbourhoods
Poverty and unemployment
Gang affiliation
Peer pressure
Family conflict and weak supervision
Substance availability
Ineffective policing or weak social cohesion

In South Africa, social context is especially important because crime often arises in environments shaped by poverty, inequality, historical disadvantage, alcohol misuse, and gendered violence. A strong study answer should avoid reductionism and instead describe how social conditions interact with individual vulnerabilities.

Major criminological theories

Classical and rational choice perspectives

Classical theory assumes that individuals are rational actors who weigh costs and benefits. Rational choice theory develops this idea by suggesting that offenders consider opportunity, risk, and reward before acting. These theories are often used in relation to situational crime prevention and security design.

Limitations:

Not all offending is fully rational.
Emotional, impulsive, intoxicated, or compulsive behaviour may not involve careful weighing of consequences.
Structural disadvantage can limit genuine choice.

Trait and personality approaches

Trait theories focus on stable characteristics that predispose individuals to offend. Commonly discussed traits include impulsivity, low empathy, sensation-seeking, hostility, and poor self-control. The concept of psychopathy is often central here, though it must be used carefully and not confused with all forms of violence.

Social learning theory

According to social learning theory, behaviour is learned by observing models and experiencing reinforcement. If a child witnesses aggression being rewarded, they may learn that violence is effective. This theory is particularly helpful in understanding family violence, gang involvement, and juvenile offending.

Strain and frustration theories

Strain theories propose that crime may arise when people experience blocked goals, relative deprivation, or pressure that creates frustration. This is relevant where people experience social exclusion, humiliation, or limited legitimate opportunities. Strain may contribute to theft, violence, retaliation, or substance abuse as coping.

Developmental and life-course theories

Developmental theories examine how offending begins, escalates, persists, or declines across time. Important ideas include:

Early onset of antisocial behaviour predicts more persistent offending.
Adolescence-limited offending often declines as people mature.
Life-course persistent offending may reflect early neuropsychological risk combined with adverse environments.

These theories are helpful in rehabilitation because they show that not all offenders follow the same pattern. Risk and intervention must be developmentally tailored.

Psychopathy and antisocial behaviour

Psychopathy is often misunderstood in popular culture. In forensic psychology, it refers to a constellation of interpersonal, affective, and behavioural traits such as superficial charm, manipulativeness, lack of empathy, shallow affect, irresponsibility, impulsivity, and persistent antisocial behaviour. It is not synonymous with being “evil,” although the traits can be highly harmful.

In assessments, psychopathy is relevant because it may correlate with:

Higher risk of violent recidivism
Poor treatment engagement
Manipulative presentation
Shallow remorse
Repeated rule violations

However, exam answers should recognise limits:

Not every violent offender is psychopathic.
Risk cannot be inferred from one trait alone.
The label can be misused if applied carelessly.
Structured assessment is preferable to impressionistic judgment.

A useful comparative summary

Perspective	Main focus	Strengths	Limitations
Biological	Genes, brain, neurochemistry	Explains vulnerability factors	Can be deterministic if overused
Psychological	Learning, cognition, personality	Directly informs treatment	May ignore structural conditions
Social	Family, peers, poverty, culture	Explains context and opportunity	May understate individual differences
Developmental	Change over the life course	Helps with prevention and intervention	Requires long-term data
Rational choice	Decision-making and opportunity	Useful for crime prevention	Overestimates rationality

A high-quality exam response often combines these perspectives rather than presenting one as superior to all others.

3. Assessment, Diagnosis, and the Forensic Interview

The purpose of forensic assessment

Forensic assessment is different from therapeutic assessment. A therapist asks, “How can I help this person?” A forensic psychologist asks, “What is the legally relevant psychological question, and what evidence supports the answer?” This distinction is central to PSDE3714 because it affects ethics, interviewing style, test selection, and report writing.

Common referral questions include:

Does the accused understand the proceedings?
Was the accused criminally responsible at the time of the offence?
Is the person fit to stand trial?
What is the risk of future violence or sexual reoffending?
Has the child been influenced by suggestion?
What trauma symptoms are present in a victim?
What rehabilitation needs does the offender have?

The assessor must determine the relevant legal issue first. Without that clarity, psychological data may be interesting but not useful.

Key principles of forensic assessment

A competent forensic assessment is:

Objective
Structured
Multi-method
Evidence-based
Legally relevant
Transparent about limitations

This usually involves:

Reviewing collateral information
Conducting a clinical and forensic interview
Administering appropriate psychometric tools
Considering behavioural observations
Integrating information from multiple sources
Writing a reasoned report
Possibly testifying in court

Interviewing in forensic settings

The forensic interview is a specialised process because the interviewee may be an accused person, victim, witness, or child. The psychologist must be alert to deception, coercion, memory contamination, trauma reactions, and secondary gain.

Interview goals

A forensic interview often aims to:

Establish background information
Clarify the legal referral question
Explore relevant symptoms or behaviours
Assess consistency of narrative
Evaluate functioning and mental state
Gather information for risk or competency decisions

Best-practice features

Neutral, non-leading questions
Clear explanation of purpose and limits of confidentiality
Attention to comprehension
Documentation of exact statements where possible
Use of open-ended prompts before specific questions
Avoidance of suggestive wording

Child interviewing

Child witnesses and victims require special care. Children may have poorer narrative organisation, limited vocabulary, and greater sensitivity to suggestion. They are also more vulnerable to authority pressure and repeated questioning.

Important principles include:

Use age-appropriate language
Begin with neutral rapport-building
Encourage free recall
Avoid compound or complex questions
Do not reward particular answers
Minimise repeated interviews
Record interviews when possible
Consider developmental stage and emotional state

A common exam issue is the difference between competence and credibility. Competence refers to whether a child can give evidence in a legally meaningful way. Credibility concerns the believability of the account. A child may be competent but still provide inaccurate testimony, or may be partially limited in one area yet able to give reliable information in another.

Mental state examination in forensic contexts

The mental state examination helps determine current psychological functioning. It typically assesses:

Appearance and behaviour
Speech
Mood and affect
Thought process
Thought content
Perception
Cognition
Insight and judgment

In forensic settings, these observations are not merely descriptive. They can help answer legal questions about reality testing, competency, or capacity. For example, a person who is disorganised, paranoid, and unable to follow simple conversation may be unfit to stand trial. However, the assessor must avoid assuming that unusual behaviour alone proves incapacity; context and corroboration matter.

Psychological testing and its limits

Psychometric tools can support forensic conclusions, but they should never replace judgment. Tests may assess:

Intelligence
Personality
Trauma symptoms
Depression and anxiety
Risk factors
Response style or malingering

The major caution is that many tests were not designed specifically for forensic use, and even good instruments can be misused. A test score should always be interpreted in context, with attention to culture, language, education, motivation, and possible exaggeration or minimisation of symptoms.

Malingering, defensiveness, and response bias

One of the most important forensic issues is the possibility that an examinee may overreport, underreport, or distort symptoms. This is often called response bias. The person may have incentives to appear more impaired, less impaired, more remorseful, less responsible, or more dangerous depending on the legal situation.

Examples:

An accused person may exaggerate psychosis to avoid responsibility.
A victim may underreport symptoms due to shame or fear.
A prisoner may minimise aggression to improve parole prospects.
A custody disputant may overstate psychological damage.

A strong forensic assessment therefore considers:

Consistency across reports
Objective records
Behavioral indicators
Test validity measures
Incentive structure
Collateral interviews

Writing the forensic report

A forensic report should be clear, structured, and tied to the referral question. It usually includes:

Identifying information
Referral source and question
Sources of information
Background history
Behavioural observations
Test results, if used
Psychological formulation
Conclusion
Recommendations, if appropriate

The language must be precise. For example, instead of stating “the accused is lying,” a report should say “the account provided was inconsistent with collateral records and showed indicators of possible minimisation.” Precision protects both scientific integrity and legal fairness.

Common assessment errors

Failing to clarify the referral question
Using leading questions
Ignoring collateral information
Overinterpreting one test score
Confusing diagnosis with legal conclusion
Using jargon without explanation
Failing to consider cultural and language factors
Treating symptoms as proof of legal incapacity

A concise exam formulation is: good forensic assessment integrates psychological science with legal relevance while remaining methodologically cautious.

4. Crime, Victimisation, Trauma, and the Psychology of Violence

Understanding violence

Violence is one of the most heavily examined forensic topics because it appears in cases involving assault, homicide, domestic abuse, sexual offences, gang conflict, and child maltreatment. Violence is not a single phenomenon. It includes expressive violence, instrumental violence, reactive aggression, predatory aggression, intimate partner violence, and collective violence.

Reactive versus instrumental violence

Reactive violence is impulsive, emotionally driven, and often linked to provocation, fear, humiliation, or frustration.
Instrumental violence is goal-directed and used as a means to an end, such as intimidation, control, robbery, or status enhancement.

This distinction matters because it influences risk assessment, treatment planning, and sentencing considerations. Reactive violence may be more associated with poor impulse control and emotional dysregulation, while instrumental violence may be more associated with callousness, planning, and antisocial values.

Domestic violence and intimate partner abuse

Domestic violence is a critical issue in South Africa and a major concern for forensic psychologists. It includes physical violence, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, coercive control, stalking, economic control, and intimidation within intimate or family relationships.

A forensic perspective asks:

What patterns of coercion and control are present?
What are the trauma consequences for the victim and children?
Is there a cycle of violence?
What are the risk factors for escalation?
How should protection, therapy, and legal interventions interact?

Common risk factors include:

Prior violence
Jealousy and possessiveness
Substance misuse
Threats to kill or harm
Strangulation incidents
Separation or attempted separation
Access to weapons
Witnessing intergenerational violence
Unemployment and stress, though these do not excuse abuse

Importantly, domestic violence is not merely “relationship conflict.” It is often a pattern of power and control. A good exam answer should emphasise this distinction.

Sexual offending

Sexual offending is another major area in forensic psychology. It involves a broad spectrum of behaviours, including harassment, coercion, exploitation, rape, indecent assault, child sexual abuse, and online sexual offending. This area requires nuanced thinking because public assumptions are often distorted by stereotypes.

Common misconceptions include:

All sexual offenders are strangers
Sexual offending is always caused by uncontrollable desire
Sexual offenders fit one profile
Treatment cannot help
Victims always physically resist

In reality, sexual offences are heterogeneous. Motivations may include power, entitlement, hostility, opportunism, deviant sexual interests, antisociality, anger, or grooming dynamics. Assessment must therefore consider both offence-specific features and broader personality and situational factors.

Trauma and victimisation

Forensic psychology also studies the psychological consequences of victimisation. Trauma responses may include:

Intrusive memories
Hypervigilance
Avoidance
Emotional numbing
Sleep disturbance
Dissociation
Guilt and shame
Depression and anxiety
Interpersonal mistrust

Not all trauma symptoms develop immediately. Some appear later, especially when the person encounters reminders, lack of support, or ongoing legal stress. In legal settings, victims may feel re-traumatised by repeated questioning, disbelief, delays, or public exposure. A trauma-informed forensic approach recognises that the legal process itself can influence psychological functioning.

Children as victims and witnesses

Children who experience abuse or witness violence may show:

Regression
Fear of certain adults
Behavioural problems
Academic decline
Sexualised behaviour
Anxiety or somatic complaints
Withdrawal or aggression

These signs are not proof by themselves, but they may support broader evidence of trauma. Forensic psychologists must avoid both false positives and false negatives. Overpathologising a child can be harmful, but dismissing symptoms can leave abuse unaddressed.

The cycle of violence and intergenerational transmission

A common concept in forensic psychology is the intergenerational transmission of violence. This does not mean violence is destiny; rather, it means that children who grow up in violent, chaotic, or neglectful homes may be at higher risk of later offending or victimisation. Mechanisms may include:

Modelling of aggressive behaviour
Insecure attachment
Normalisation of violence
Poor emotional regulation
Academic disruption
Weak supervision
Trauma-related coping through aggression or substance use

This idea is important because it links victimisation and offending without collapsing them into the same phenomenon. Some victims become offenders, some do not, and many offenders were also victims. The relationship is probabilistic, not deterministic.

A concise model of violence for exam use

A strong answer can organise violence using a multi-factor lens:

Individual factors: impulsivity, trauma, substance misuse, personality traits, mental illness, anger.
Relationship factors: coercive control, jealousy, dependency, family conflict.
Community factors: gang presence, weapon availability, neighbourhood disadvantage.
Societal factors: inequality, gender norms, violence tolerance, weak social support.

This model is especially useful because it avoids simplistic explanations and aligns well with contemporary forensic thinking.

5. Legal Issues, Ethics, Risk Assessment, and Practice Applications

Criminal responsibility and fitness to stand trial

Two of the most important legal questions in forensic psychology are criminal responsibility and fitness to stand trial.

Criminal responsibility

Criminal responsibility concerns whether, at the time of the offence, the accused understood the nature and wrongfulness of the act and had the capacity to act in accordance with that understanding. Psychological issues relevant here may include:

Psychosis
Severe intoxication
Intellectual disability
Neurological impairment
Dissociation
Extreme emotional disturbance, depending on legal framing

The key point is that a psychological condition alone does not automatically remove responsibility. The legal question is whether the condition actually affected the relevant capacities at the relevant time.

Fitness to stand trial

Fitness to stand trial concerns whether the accused can participate meaningfully in the legal process at the time of trial. This may involve the ability to:

Understand the charges
Understand the roles of court personnel
Communicate with legal representatives
Follow proceedings
Make basic decisions

A person may have committed an offence responsibly but later be unfit for trial due to deteriorating mental state. This distinction often appears in exams because it shows the difference between past offence capacity and present procedural capacity.

Ethics in forensic psychology

Ethics are especially important because forensic work can have high stakes and conflicting interests. The psychologist must balance honesty, competence, confidentiality, and fairness while working in adversarial conditions.

Key ethical principles include:

Competence: only practise within areas of training and experience
Integrity: provide accurate and unbiased opinions
Respect for dignity: treat all parties respectfully, even in adversarial cases
Informed consent: explain role, limits, and use of information
Confidentiality with limits: clarify that forensic assessments are usually not private therapy
Objectivity: avoid being co-opted by the retaining party
Documentation: maintain clear records
Cultural sensitivity: adapt methods to language and context

A forensic psychologist must not become an advocate dressed as an expert. This is one of the most important ethical distinctions in the subject.

Risk assessment

Risk assessment predicts the likelihood of future harmful behaviour. It is used for violence, sexual offending, suicide, self-harm, and general recidivism. In practice, risk assessment is not about certainty; it is about structured estimation.

Types of risk factors

Static factors: unchangeable historical variables such as past violence, age at first offence, prior convictions.
Dynamic factors: changeable variables such as substance use, current stress, impulsivity, treatment engagement, peer associations.

Static factors are useful for baseline prediction, while dynamic factors are important for intervention and case management.

Common risk domains

Criminal history
Substance use
Antisocial attitudes
Relationship instability
Employment problems
Poor supervision
Mental illness in some contexts
Victim access
Sexual deviance in sexual offence cases

Structured approaches

Structured risk assessment is preferred over casual intuition because it reduces bias. A structured method requires the assessor to consider specific domains systematically and to justify the final judgment. This does not eliminate judgment, but it improves reliability and transparency.

Why risk assessment matters

Decisions about bail, sentencing, and parole
Security classification in correctional settings
Treatment planning
Child protection and custody decisions
Community supervision

Rehabilitation and correctional psychology

A forensic psychologist does not only assess risk; they may also contribute to rehabilitation. Effective interventions often target:

Substance misuse
Anger management
Cognitive distortions
Empathy deficits
Problem-solving skills
Emotional regulation
Trauma symptoms
Relapse prevention
Social skills and employment readiness

The modern evidence-based view is that rehabilitation is most effective when interventions match the offender’s risk level, criminogenic needs, and learning style. Punishment alone is usually insufficient to reduce reoffending if the underlying drivers remain unchanged.

Court testimony and expert evidence

When a forensic psychologist testifies, the role is to educate the court rather than persuade it with rhetoric. Good testimony is:

Clear
Honest
Balanced
Limited to the expert’s competence
Supported by data and reasoning

The expert should be prepared to explain:

What was assessed
What methods were used
What the results mean
What the limits are
How alternative interpretations were considered

Cross-examination may challenge methodology, bias, qualifications, or factual foundations. This is why written reports and oral testimony must be internally consistent and well documented.

Practical exam tips and high-yield distinctions

A strong exam performance often depends on distinguishing related concepts precisely. The following contrasts are frequently useful:

Concept pair	Key difference
Therapy vs forensic assessment	Therapy aims to help; forensic assessment answers a legal question
Criminal responsibility vs fitness to stand trial	One concerns the time of the offence; the other concerns the present ability to participate in trial
Static vs dynamic risk factors	Static factors do not change; dynamic factors can change with intervention
Competence vs credibility	Competence is the ability to testify meaningfully; credibility is the believability of the testimony
Diagnosis vs legal conclusion	Diagnosis describes mental disorder; legal conclusion answers the court’s question
Reactive vs instrumental violence	Reactive is impulsive and emotional; instrumental is goal-directed

How to answer typical PSDE3714 exam questions

If asked to discuss a theory

Define the theory clearly
Explain its main assumptions
Identify strengths
Identify limitations
Apply it to a forensic example
Conclude with an integrated view

If asked to analyse a case

Identify the legal issue
Identify relevant psychological factors
Consider alternative explanations
Distinguish fact from inference
Link findings to legal and ethical implications

If asked to compare approaches

State the basis of comparison
Use a table or structured paragraph
Show similarities and differences
Indicate which approach is more suitable in which context

Final revision synthesis

Forensic psychology is a disciplined application of psychological science to legal problems. In PSDE3714, the most important ideas are not isolated facts but relationships: between crime and context, assessment and evidence, mental disorder and legal responsibility, trauma and behaviour, risk and rehabilitation, and ethics and objectivity. The subject requires both analytic precision and practical sensitivity.

The central revision message is this: forensic psychology is about answering legal questions with psychological methods while respecting the limits of both disciplines. If that principle is kept in view, the major topics become easier to organise in exams, case analyses, and essay responses.

A concise high-yield checklist for last-minute revision:

Define forensic psychology accurately.
Distinguish it from clinical psychology.
Know major crime theories and their limitations.
Understand child interviewing principles.
Distinguish criminal responsibility from fitness to stand trial.
Explain risk assessment using static and dynamic factors.
Recognise the ethical demands of objectivity and confidentiality limits.
Apply trauma-informed and culturally sensitive reasoning.
Use precise terminology and avoid sensationalism.

These notes are intended to support deep understanding rather than memorisation alone. In forensic psychology, the best answers are not the most dramatic; they are the most careful, coherent, and evidence-based.