Reconstructing Meaning, Objectivity, and Ethical Practice in Contemporary Forensic Psychology: An Integrative Theoretical and Empirical Reappraisal

Dr. Elias Verhoeven — 2026-02-01

Forensic psychology occupies a distinctive position at the intersection of law, science, and human experience, requiring practitioners and scholars to navigate complex tensions between objectivity, ethical responsibility, and the lived realities of both victims and accused persons. Over the past several decades, this field has expanded from a primarily assessment-driven specialty into a broad, theoretically informed discipline that engages deeply with questions of meaning, identity, and social context. Building on classical and contemporary contributions to forensic psychology, this article offers a comprehensive reappraisal of how meaning structures, professional socialization, ethical labeling, and psychological constructs interact to shape forensic practice and research. Drawing on foundational frameworks of personality and meaning, as well as modern criminological and victimological research, the article argues that forensic psychology cannot be reduced to technical assessment alone but must be understood as an interpretive science embedded within moral, cultural, and institutional systems.

The work is anchored theoretically in the tradition of personal construct psychology, which emphasizes that individuals actively interpret and organize their experiences through unique systems of meaning (Kelly, 1955), and in contemporary models of criminal conduct that integrate cognitive, social, and environmental factors (Bonta & Andrews, 2023). These theoretical perspectives are situated within the broader professional and ethical landscape of forensic psychology, including debates over objectivity, role conflict, and occupational socialization (Neal & Brodsky, 2014), as well as concerns regarding the ethical implications of labeling and categorization in correctional and forensic contexts (Willis, 2018). Central to this analysis is the recognition that forensic psychology is not merely a technical enterprise but a deeply normative one, in which judgments about risk, responsibility, and harm are inseparable from assumptions about human nature and social order.

A major contribution of this article is its integration of victimological research into the core of forensic psychological theory. Studies of victimization, particularly those focusing on gendered and institutionalized forms of harm, demonstrate that experiences of trauma and injustice are mediated by meaning structures that profoundly affect psychological outcomes (Baum et al., 1983; Fisher, 2025; Johnson & Wasielewski, 1982). These insights challenge forensic psychologists to move beyond purely symptom-focused models and to attend to the interpretive frameworks through which victims and offenders understand their experiences. At the same time, criminological scholarship emphasizes that crime and deviance must be understood within broader social and moral contexts, rather than as isolated individual pathologies (Liebling et al., 2023).

Methodologically, the article adopts a theoretically grounded, integrative research design that synthesizes qualitative and quantitative traditions within forensic psychology. Rather than privileging one form of evidence over another, the approach reflects the pluralistic epistemology that has long characterized the field, as exemplified by the diverse assessment practices documented in surveys of forensic psychologists (Archer et al., 2006). The results of this integrative analysis suggest that objectivity in forensic psychology is best understood not as the absence of values or perspectives, but as the disciplined and transparent engagement with them, an idea that is consistent with contemporary reflections on professional identity and ethical responsibility (Neal & Brodsky, 2014; Willis, 2018).

Throughout the article, the theoretical and practical contributions of major handbooks and foundational texts are woven into a unified argument about the future of forensic psychology. In particular, the comprehensive scope and conceptual depth of the Handbook of Forensic Psychology by Weiner and Hess (2004) provide an essential anchor for understanding how assessment, ethics, and theory converge in professional practice. By situating newer debates about meaning, labeling, and victimization within this broader tradition, the article demonstrates that many of the field’s current challenges are extensions of long-standing conceptual tensions rather than entirely novel problems.

Ultimately, this article contends that a more reflective, theoretically integrated, and ethically grounded forensic psychology is both possible and necessary. By acknowledging the interpretive nature of psychological judgment, the socially embedded character of crime and victimization, and the moral weight of professional decisions, forensic psychologists can better serve the legal system and the individuals whose lives are affected by it. The article concludes by outlining directions for future research that emphasize interdisciplinary collaboration, deeper engagement with meaning-centered theories, and a renewed commitment to ethical reflexivity within forensic practice.

International Journal of Law And Criminology

Reconstructing Meaning, Objectivity, and Ethical Practice in Contemporary Forensic Psychology: An Integrative Theoretical and Empirical Reappraisal