Bringing legal psychology into your classroom

Why would an innocent person confess to a crime they didn’t commit? Can we trust eyewitness evidence? What shapes a judge’s or jury’s legal decisions? What are the psychological effects of being held in a carceral setting, including in solitary confinement? These real-world questions often fascinate students and teachers, especially those invested in the newest true crime documentary, and can provoke robust classroom discussions. They are also at the heart of the legal psychology field.

Legal psychology covers many applied areas at the intersection of psychology and law (Cantone et al., 2024). Forensic psychology, which typically focuses on clinical evaluations (e.g., competency to stand trial and risk assessment), is a subset of that field, as are other applied areas of study including correctional, social-cognitive, developmental, and community psychology.

This article first identifies a variety of legal psychology topics that might spark discussion among students and then describes an array of legal psychology careers.

Psychological knowledge can inform the law and legal decision making in countless ways (see Miller et al., 2024). The American Psychology-Law Society addressed two especially engaging topics in scientific review papers: false confessions and eyewitness identification. 

Why would innocent people confess to crimes they did not commit? Kassin et al. (2025) addressed this question, summarizing research on risk factors that can lead innocent people to confess and the consequences of those false confessions (e.g., increased likelihood of pleading guilty or conviction at trial). They also provided a series of recommendations to reduce the likelihood of false confessions (e.g., video recording all suspect interviews and interrogations, requiring that defense attorneys be present during interrogations of youthful suspects and vulnerable adults). 

Did you know mistaken eyewitness identifications are a primary reason why innocent individuals are convicted? Addressing this and other serious concerns with eyewitness identification evidence, Wells et al. (2020) found that the reliability and integrity of eyewitness identification evidence often depends on law enforcement procedures. The authors then offered nine recommendations to improve how law enforcement collect and document eyewitness identification evidence. 

Discussing these two topics, and each paper’s recommendations, could lead to lively in-class discussions and they are only two of many legal psychology areas. Your students may also be interested in such topics as the insanity defense, risk assessment and likelihood of recidivism/re-offending, judge and jury decision-making, competency to stand trial, civil commitment and sexual offender treatment programs, interrogations and deception detection, juvenile justice concerns, child witnesses, victim advocacy, police use of force, sentencing and parole decisions, psychologist expert testimony in legal proceedings, mental health evaluations in immigration proceedings, and the rights and treatment of individuals with mental health needs within the legal system. 

Research articles addressing these many areas are featured in APA peer-reviewed journals including Law and Human Behavior and Psychology, Public Policy, and Law .

The Judiciary. Legal psychology graduates can work with judges and court staff to develop training programs or conduct program evaluations, work as jury or trial consultants, or help parties as victim advocates, providing emotional support and guidance to individuals affected by crime as they navigate the complex legal system. Legal psychology graduates, usually with a doctoral degree, can also serve as expert witnesses on such topics as competency, risk assessment, or the science surrounding eyewitness identification and false confessions.

Law enforcement . Legal psychology graduates can work to ensure that law enforcement agencies apply current science to improve interrogation strategies, refine suspect lineup procedures, predict and respond to crime trends, manage crises, and build stronger community

Corrections and probation. Legal psychology graduates seeking to provide therapy in correctional settings will need an advanced psychology degree, but others can help design rehabilitation programs or serve as correctional officers or probation officers who assist justice-involved individuals in their re-entry into society. Of note, correctional psychology and forensic psychology are distinct fields, but also share some similarities (Neal, 2018).

Non-judicial government roles. There are also several local, state, and federal agencies that seek out and rely on legal psychology expertise. At these agencies, legal psychology graduates can help with efforts to understand criminal behavior (criminal profiling and behavioral analysis), preventing crime (deterrence), and keeping communities healthy and safe (threat assessment and population health). Legal psychology graduates can also use legal psychology science and practice to inform and improve public policy and society.

Overall, there are many ways that psychology connects with the legal system. Integrating real-world issues and relevant legal psychology research can help students think critically about how the legal system works and further their existing interest in these exciting areas. Further, offering students information about legal psychology career paths can inspire the next generation of legal psychologists. 

Jason A. Cantone, JD, PhD, is an adjunct professor at George Mason University where he won the 2020 Adjunct Teaching Excellence Award. Across multiple universities, he has taught courses on research methods and statistics, social psychology, legal psychology, and the psychology of terror groups. In his teaching, he draws on his applied work experience in the U.S. judiciary and the U.S. Air Force to showcase the many career options open to people interested in legal psychology. He is currently a senior research associate at the Federal Judicial Center, but this article was completed outside of this position and the views expressed herein are those of the author and are not the views of the Federal Judicial Center or its board.