The article examines the role of protective factors in explaining temporal changes in violence risk among forensic psychiatric patients and prison inmates in Poland. A longitudinal study was conducted with 403 men (201 forensic patients and 202 inmates). Participants were assessed twice at a six-month-long interval using the HCR-20v3 and SAPROF. Forensic psychiatric patients showed a significant reduction in integrated risk for vioence, while prison inmates exhibited a slight increase in this field during the same period. In the patient group, the level of motivational protective factors from SAPROF was the sole notable predictor (albeit with low predictive power) explaining the variance in risk reduction. No protective factors significantly predicted risk changes in the inmate group. The findings indicate that risk dynamics may be context-dependent. The conducted analyses require further deepening and expansion. To facilitate this within the Polish psychiatric and penitentiary systems, systemic improvements are necessary, including the further implementation of Structured Professional Judgement (SPJ) risk assessment tools.
Numerous scholarly works have examined the course and execution of criminal procedural and forensic activities related to interrogation. The way this activity is carried out is discussed in textbooks on forensic science and is also addressed during workshop classes and lecture courses in criminal procedure. The importance of proper and reliable documentation of proced-ural activities cannot be overstated. This activity is examined both at the stage of court proceedings and during the preparatory phase, often accom-panied by subsequent allegations that the record was prepared in an unreli-able manner, does not reflect the actual factual situation, is defective, or is false. Allegations are also raised directly against the officer conducting the activity, accusing them of bias or of having an interest in a particular out-come, as well as concerning the atmosphere in which the interrogation was conducted. The findings presented in this article constitute a continuation (in the form of a separate text) of the Author’s reflections developed over the years and represent their considerations, conclusions, and observations. In the theoretical and research assumptions, emphasis has been placed on guidelines and appropriate elements relating to the drafting of records, which should form the framework for deliberations by those conducting this activity. The postulates, assumptions, and recommendations are accompanied by commentary and by indications of possible procedural errors and their impact on the course of proceedings. The article includes examples that are useful in the practical documentation of interrogations concerning eviden-tiary issues, as well as the practice of their application. Nevertheless, atten-tion should be paid to elements of the text as constituting guidelines rather than certainties, since every interrogation is different, both in terms of the person being questioned and the scope of the act to which it relates. For this reason, the application of automatic or schematic approaches during an in-terrogation is not possible.
Many scientific fields of study use formally established reportingstandards to foster research and experimental design, transparency,replicability, peer review, and student training. Examples includeCONSORT in medicine, the What Works Clearinghouse in educa-tion, JARS in psychology. Such standards yield agreement on studyreporting and evaluation, even if using different methodologies.CHI has not adopted reporting standards. Like other fields, CHI hasseen an increased number of low-quality submissions and reviewsfueled by AI. This panel’s objective is to discuss advantages and bar-riers of adopting reporting standards for SIGCHI. Panelists includerepresentatives with significant experience creating, adopting andoperationalizing reporting standards in adjacent fields: softwareengineering, CS education, and Programming Languages. The panelwill include an overview of the history of reporting standards, a livedemo of a standards-based peer review system, discussions of op-portunities, challenges, limitations for SIGCHI reporting standards,and an interactive discussion between attendees and panelists
This study investigates legal professionals’ knowledge of eyewitness testimony factors, including system and estimator factors, compared to laypeople. Previous research has questioned the adequacy of methods assessing legal actors’ understanding. To address this, 313 legal professionals and 400 laypeople completed a 21-item questionnaire embedded in case-specific scenarios using vignette methodology. Legal professionals achieved an accuracy rate of 66%, compared to 60.3% for laypeople. They more accurately identified estimator factors than system factors, with judges and prosecutors performing better than laypeople in both categories. These results reveal significant variations in knowledge of eyewitness testimony and underscore the need for targeted training programs. Enhancing legal professionals’ understanding of eyewitness factors could contribute to fairer and more accurate judicial outcomes.
Born-digital cultural heritage is an extremely broad category. However, there is no doubt that much of it includes activities that were created on the margins of the art world. Both the content itself, such as amateur games or demoscene productions, but also the efforts to archive them, are in effect often the work of amateur enthusiasts - dispersed groups that do invaluable work but at the same time do not meet institutional and academic standards, and often remain in tension with copyright law. In an era of increasing institutionalisation of digital heritage, how do we reconcile the expectations of all parties involved? Can the arrangement of this cooperation enable the rationalisation of resource management and facilitate similar activities in the future?
The article focuses on experiences from the COST Grassroots of Digital Europe project, in which we are trying to build a ‘network of networks’, connecting academics, GLAM institutions and enthusiasts, and providing all stakeholders with materials to support their work. Examples of good practices will be presented, but there will also be remarks on the difficulties and challenges of such an approach.
Otwarty dostępArtykułyJournal Article in Conference proceedings
