CLINICAL AND LEGAL JUDGMENT LAB
  • Home
  • People
    • Previous Lab Members
  • Research
  • Editing
  • Teaching
    • Forensic Psychology
    • Correctional Psychology
    • Research Methods
    • Abnormal Psychology
  • Contact

What We Study

The central theme motivating our research is the desire to understand the way people think and reach decisions, as well as how to improve these processes to result in better outcomes for society.  We are especially interested in human judgment processes as they intersect with the law. We approach these questions with different methods, such as descriptive studies that yield foundational information about phenomena that precedes explanatory experimental work, experimental methods that can yield causal inferences, and integrative syntheses across methods and sources. We study rich, real-world behaviors, embrace open science practices, and weave together theories and methods from the clinical, social, and cognitive traditions of psychological science.​

Our work on these topics is organized by three overlapping categories: 
  • expert judgment, especially as it intersects with the law
  • lay judgment, especially as it intersects with the law
  • public policy implications of this work. 
Picture
All of our articles are available for free through PsyArXiv or ​ISU and ASU Digital Repositories
​

A lot of our data, code, and preregistrations are available on the Open Science Framework
​
(a work in progress!) 

Selected Grants

PI Tess Neal, Co-PI Pamela "Nicky" Sandberg. Law and Society Association. Amount: $14,000. "How to Consult with the Law: Courts
​           Need your Expertise" Active dates 03/2023 - 06/2023

PI Tess Neal, Co-PI Emily Pronin (Princeton). National Science Foundation (#SES-LSS-1655011). Amount: $279,280.
          "Expert Bias: Perceptions, Misperceptions, and Their Implications."  Active dates: 05/2017 - 04/2023
           Research Experiences for Undergraduates Supplement (#1917576), $15,000, active 02/2019-04/2023 

PI Tess Neal, PI Sarah Gervais (University of NE-Lincoln). National Science Foundation (#SES-LSS-1733957). Amount:                    
           $272,287. "Calibration in Court: Jurors' Use of Scientific Information." Active dates 09/2017-08/2020
           Research Experiences for Undergraduates Supplement (#1841975), $14,772, active 09/2018-09/2020.

PI Tess Neal. American Psychology-Law Society, Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, and ASU. 
          Amount: $8,850.  "An Experimental Study of Bias in Psychologists' Diagnostic Reasoning." Active dates 11/2016 - 11/2017

Co-PI Tess Neal, PI Brian Bornstein (Univ. of NE-Lincoln). National Science Foundation (#SES-LSS-1353980). 
          "Institutional Trust and Confidence Workshop."  Amount: $47,343.  Active dates 01/2014 - 01/2015

Co-PI Tess Neal, PI Stanley Brodsky. National Science Foundation (Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant).
          (#SES-LSS-1022849).  "The Objectivity Demand: Experiences and Behaviors of Psychologists in Capital Case Evaluations."  
          Amount: $14,997.  Active dates 08/2010 - 08/2011. 

Selected Publications


​Expert Judgment
In much of our work, we are interested in expert judgment especially as it intersects with the law, such as identifying systematic bias in how forensic psychologists and forensic scientists reach conclusions about cases, problems in how judges make decisions about evidence admissibility, unjust influences on prosecutor's judgments about whether to file charges, and understanding how policymakers rely on evidence to create policy.​  Examples include:
Line, E.N. Neal, T.M.S., & Mathers, E. (under review). Experts screening experts: An experimental approach to understanding courts' abilities to effectively gatekeep psychological assessment evidence. Preprint available here.

Martire, K.A., Neal, T.M.S., Gobet, F., Chin, J., Berengut, J.F., & Edmond, G. (2025). Psychological insights for judging expertise and implications for adversarial legal contexts. Nature Reviews Psychology, 4, 264-276. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-025-00430-4 Bluesky thread with GIF here.

Neal, T.M.S., MacLean, N., Morgan, R.D., & Murrie, D.C. (2024). Confirmatory information seeking is robust in psychologists' diagnostic reasoning. Law and Human Behavior, 48(5-6), 503-518. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000574          Bluesky thread here.

MacNeil, E. R., Cox, J., Daquin, J. C., & Neal, T. M. S. (2024). Gender Role Attitudes and Prosecutorial Decision-Making in a Case of Intimate Partner Violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 39(7-8), 1496-1518. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231207901

Neal, T.M.S., Lienert, P., Denne, E., & Singh, J.P. (2022). A general model of cognitive bias in human judgment and systematic review specific to forensic mental health. Law and Human Behavior, 46(2), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000482. Twitter thread here.

Cox, J., Daquin, J.C., & Neal, T.M.S. (2022). Discretionary prosecutorial decision making: Gender, sexual orientation, and bias in intimate partner violence. Criminal Justice and Behavior,49(11), 1699-1719. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548221106498

Neal, T.M.S., Saks, M.J., Geisinger, K., Slobogin, C. & Faigman, D. (2019). Psychological assessments in legal contexts: Are courts keeping “junk science” out of the courtroom? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 20(3), 135-164. doi: 10.1177/1529100619888860. 
  • See also news coverage by the Associated Press, NPR Phoenix Affiliate (KJZZ), andWired.

MacLean, N., Neal, T.M.S., Morgan, R.D., & Murrie, D.C. (2019). Forensic clinicians’ understanding of bias. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 25(4), 323-330. doi: 10.1037/law0000212.

Neal, T.M.S., Hight, M., Howatt, B.C., & Hamza, C. (2018). The cognitive and social psychological bases of bias in forensic mental health judgments. In M.K. Miller & B.H. Bornstein (Eds), Advances in Psychology and Law: Volume 3 (151-176). New York: Springer.
​

Neal, T.M.S. (2018). Discerning bias in forensic psychological reports in insanity cases. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 36, 325-338. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2346​​

Neal, T.M.S. & Cramer, R.J. (2017).  Moral disengagement in legal judgments. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 14, 745-761. doi: 10.1111/jels.12163​

Neal, T.M.S. (2016). Are forensic experts already biased before adversarial legal parties hire them?  PLOS ONE., 11, e0154434. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0154434

Neal, T.M.S. & Brodsky, S.L. (2016). Forensic psychologists’ perceptions of bias and potential correction strategies in forensic mental health evaluations.  Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22, 58-76. doi: 10.1037/law0000077.

Neal, T.M.S. & Grisso, T. (2014). Assessment practices and expert judgment methods in forensic psychology and psychiatry: An International Snapshot.  Criminal Justice & Behavior, 41, 1406-1421. doi:10.1177/0093854814548449.

Neal, T.M.S. & Grisso, T. (2014).  The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 20, 200-211. doi:10.1037/a0035824

Neal, T.M.S. & Brodsky, S.L. (2014). Occupational socialization’s role in forensic psychologists’ objectivity. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 14, 24-44. doi: 10.1080/15228932.2013.863054

​Kelly, J.O., Brodsky, S.L., Neal, T.M.S., & Cramer, R.J. (2011). Prosecutor pre-trial attitudes and plea-bargain behavior toward veterans with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Psychological Services, 8, 319-331. doi: 10.1037/a0025330

​Lay Judgment
In much of our work, we are interested in lay judgment especially as it intersects with the law, such as jurors' calibration to the strength of scientific evidence, how jurors perceive experts, and how people perceive and respond to policies and laws. Examples include:
Neal, T.M.S., Velez, R.E., & Pronin, E. (in preparation). Laypeople’s perceptions of expert bias in 26 domains

Neal, T.M.S., Krauss, D.A., & Lawson, K.M. (in preparation). Bolstering, skepticism, and sensitivity effects: When are jurors calibrated to the scientific validity of expert testimony?  

Hamza, C., Brenholdt, M., Neal, T.M.S., Sandberg, P.N., & Richardson, C. (in preparation). An experimental approach to understanding and addressing juror biases in criminal responsibility cases.

​Sandberg, P.N., Neal, T.M.S., & O’Hara, K.L. (2024). Can jurors disregard inadmissible evidence? Using the Multiphase Optimization Strategy to test interventions derived from cognitive and social psychological theories. Behavioral Sciences, 15(1), 7. Published as part of Social Cognitive Processes in Legal Decision Making special issue. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15010007

Plantz, J.W., Neal, T.M.S., Clements, C.B., Miller, S.L., & Perelman, A. (2023). Assessing motivations for punishment: The Sentencing Goals Inventory. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 50(1), 139-162. doi: 10.1177/00938548221131954

Denne, E., Stolzenberg, S.N., & Neal, T.M.S. (2021). The effect of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse cases involving recantation. PLoS One, 16(8): e0254961. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254961 

Parrott, C.T., Neal, T.M.S., Wilson J.K., & Brodsky, S.L. (2015). Differences in expert witness knowledge: Do mock jurors notice and does it matter? Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 43, 69-81.

Neal, T.M.S. (2014). Women as expert witnesses: A review of the literature. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 32, 164-179. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2113
​
Neal, T.M.S., Guadagno, R.E., Eno, C.A., & Brodsky, S.L. (2012). Warmth and competence on the witness stand: Implications for credibility of male and female expert witnesses. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law, 40, 488-497. 

Neal, T.M.S., Christiansen, A., Bornstein, B.H., & Robicheaux, T. (2012). The effects of mock jurors’ beliefs about eyewitness performance on trial judgments.  Psychology, Crime, & Law, 18, 49-64. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2011.587815

Brodsky, S.L., Neal, T.M.S., Cramer, R.J., & Ziemke, M.H. (2009).  Credibility in the courtroom: How likeable should an expert witness be?  Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 37, 525-532.  
​
​Neal, T.M.S. & Brodsky, S.L. (2008).  Expert witness credibility as a function of eye contact behavior and gender.  Criminal Justice & Behavior, 35, 1515-1526. doi: 10.1177/0093854808325405
​Public Policy Implications 
We are explicitly interested in the public policy implications of much of our work, such as how expert judgment processes can be structured to reduce systematic bias and error, how to improve judicial and jury decision making, and how policymakers can harness psychological science about how people behave to craft effective policy. Examples include: 
Neal, T.M.S., Gordon, G., Falsetti, A., Schweitzer, N.J., Salerno, J., Kanthaswamy, S., Walker, K., & Saks, M.J. (in preparation). Major research universities can solve forensic science’s grand challenge.

​Neal, T.M.S. & Saks, M.J. (in preparation).  Context effects in forensic mental health science: A review and application of the science of science to the practice of forensic mental health evaluations.

Kanthaswamy, S., Oldt, R., & Neal, T.M.S. (in preparation). A proposal to mitigate racial bias in modern DNA evidence analysis.  
​
Neal, T.M.S. & Wylie, L.E. (in preparation). How ‘nudge’ policies affect public trust.

Martire, K.A., Chin, J.M., David, C., Edmond, G., Growns, B., Gorski, S., Kemp, R.I., Lee, Z., MarVerdon, C.M., Jansen, G., Lang, T., Neal, T.M.S., Searston, R., Slocum, J., Summersby, S., Tangen, J.M., Thompson, M.B., Towler, A., Watson, W., Werrett, M.V., Younan, M., & Ballantyne, K.N. (2024). Understanding “error” in the forensic sciences: A primer. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 8(100470). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100470 

Neal, T.M.S., Martire, K.A., Johan, J.L., Mathers, E.M., & Otto, R.K. (2022). The law meets psychological expertise: Eight best practices to improve forensic psychological assessment. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 18, 169-192. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-050420-010148

Neal, T.M.S., Sellbom, M., & de Ruiter, C. (2022). Personality assessments in legal contexts: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Personality Assessment, 102(2), 127-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2022.2033248
  • See entire 11-article special issue on assessment tools like the Rorschach, PCL-R, PAI, and more - all available for free - here. Twitter thread about the issue is here.
​
Smith, A.M. & Neal, T.M.S. (2021). The distinction between discriminability and reliability in forensic science. Science & Justice, 61(4), 319-331. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2021.04.002

Neal, ​T.M.S. (2018). Forensic psychology and correctional psychology: Distinct but related subfields of psychological science and practice.  American Psychologist, 73, 651-662. doi: 10.1037/amp0000227

​​Salekin, K.L., Neal, T.M.S., & Hedge, K.A. (2018). Validity, inter-rater reliability, and measures of adaptive behavior: Concerns regarding the probative versus prejudicial value.  Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24, 24-35. doi: 10.1037/law0000150.

PytlikZillig, L.M., Kimbrough, C.D., Shockley, E., Neal, T.M.S., Herian, M.N., Hamm, J.A., Bornstein, B.H., & Tomkins, A. (2017). A longitudinal and experimental study of the impact of knowledge on the bases of institutional trust. PLOS ONE, 12, e0175387. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175387
​

Neal, T.M.S., Miller, S.L., & Shealy, R.C. (2015). A field study of a comprehensive violence risk assessment battery.  Criminal Justice & Behavior, 42, 952-968.  doi: 10.1177/0093854815572252

Neal, T.M.S., Shockley, E., & Schilke, O. (2015).
 The “dark side” of institutional trust.  In E. Shockley, T.M.S. Neal, B.H. Bornstein, & L.M. PytlikZillig (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on trust: Towards theoretical and methodological integration (177-192). NY: Springer.

Candilis, P. & Neal, T.M.S. (2014). 
Not just welfare over justice: Ethics in forensic consultation. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 19, 19-29. doi: 10.1111/lcrp.12038​
Picture
CLJ Lab codeathon - working with several undergrads and grad students on a coding project, Fall 2024.
Picture
Gingerbread ornament made by Elizabeth Mathers.
Picture
CLJ Lab at AP-LS conference, 2023. From Left: Nicky Sandberg, JD, MS; Emma Saiter, MS; Gaurika Shah, BS; Ciera Arnett, PhD; Elizabeth Mathers, MS; Tess Neal.
Picture
Videotaping a mock trial, Spring 2016
Picture
Morgan Hight and Cassandra Hamza earn their M.S. psychology degrees - the first CLJ lab graduates! Spring 2018
Picture
Working white board in lab, Spring 2017
Picture
Codeathon Invitation, Fall 2018 for PSPI project
Picture
Writing retreat, Fall 2018 @ Desert Botanical Gardens
Picture
Prepping for NSF jury deliberation study (with kiddo help!), Spring 2019
Picture
The lab pivoted to Zoom meetings halfway through the Spring 2020 term due to the Covid19 pandemic. We still met weekly, including this coffee-writing group in April 2020, which was productive.
Picture
CLJ Lab writing meeting, masked / outdoors, Fall 2020.
© COPYRIGHT 2025  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
  • Home
  • People
    • Previous Lab Members
  • Research
  • Editing
  • Teaching
    • Forensic Psychology
    • Correctional Psychology
    • Research Methods
    • Abnormal Psychology
  • Contact