Bakhteev D. V.
Citation: Bakhteev D. V. Forensic Thinking and Multidisciplinary Approach to Studying it. Psychopedagogy in Law Enforcement. Vol. 24, No 4(79). 2019. Pp. 449–455 (In Russ.). DOI: 10. 24411/1999-6241-2019-14014
Для цитирования: Бахтеев Д. В. Криминалистическое мышление и мультидисциплинарный подход к его изучению // Психопедагогика в правоохранительных органах. 2019. Т. 24, № 4(79). С. 449–455. DOI: 10. 24411/1999-6241-2019-14014
Full text: Bakhteev D. V. Forensic Thinking and Multidisciplinary Approach to Studying it
Abstract
Introduction. It has become necessary for criminalistics to study thinking processes leading to the results which are important for criminalistics and criminal procedure. The paper attempts to systematize and analyze the approaches to studying certain aspects of forensic thinking. Materials and Methods. The following psychological and sociological methods were used: questionnaires for and interviewing of practical investigators of the Investigative Committee and police and forensic examiners (66 respondents). 214 criminal cases were analyzed in order to reveal different approaches to the solution of stereotypical tasks and identify features of mistakes. Results and Discussion. The analysis of criminal cases demonstrates the difference of criminal procedural results of investigation conducted by different investigators, and, thus, it is possible to observe the different level of development of forensic thinking among the mentioned subjects. Forensic thinking must be examined from different aspects as a complex phenomenon, and some of its methods and approaches originating in other fields of knowledge must be explored as well. No effective study of forensic thinking is available without enhanced knowledge of logical rules of criminalistics search and assessment of evidence. Psychological methods can help in studying such a phenomenon as investigator’s intuition. Learning the principles of functioning of artificial intelligence based on artificial neural networks will increase understanding of forensic thinking. Conclusions. Forensic thinking is a complex of personal characteristics of a subject who learns and means of cognitive activity enabling the subject to perceive and process fragmented, incomplete information in order to reveal and explain failures in cause and effect relationship. Acknowledgement. The author expresses his deep gratitude to Leonid Yakovlevich Drapkin, his research supervisor, Doctor of Juridical Sciences, and the personnel of the Department of Criminalistics of Ural State Law University for their assistance in the organization of the research and constructive recommendations.
Keywords: forensic thinking, investigator’s thinking, forensic cognition, logics, decision by intuition, artificial intelligence.
Main Provisions:
- Effective solution and investigation of crimes requires from the subject of this activity certain type of thinking, that is, forensic thinking. This type of thinking implies efficient processing (including intuitive processing) of received fragmented information, versioned reconstruction of the happening in a comprehensible and realistic way, planning of the investigation and urgent changes of the plans etc. Therefore, in future studying of this phenomenon will be helpful for effective fight with crime and maintenance of the state and public security.
- It is not sufficient to study forensic thinking only by means of criminalistics. To conduct similar researches it is important to apply a multidisciplinary approach which includes appropriate usage of terminology and methods employed by such sciences as logics, physiology, mathematics and computer sciences.
References
1. Vladimirov L. E. Study of Criminal Evidence. Tula, 2000. 464 p. (In Russ.)
2. Ratinov A. R. Forensic Psychology for Investigators. Мoscow, 2001. 352 p. (In Russ.)
3. Dunker K. Psychology of Productive (Creative) Thinking. Psychology of Thinking. Мoscow, 1965. Pp. 86–234.
4. Walder H., Hansjakob T. Kriminalistisches Denken. Heidelberg, 2016. 350 S.
5. Belkin R. S. Criminalistics. in 3 vol. Мoscow, 2001. Vol. 1. 323 p. (In Russ.)
6. Borulenkov Yu. P. Legal Thinking as an Intellectual Element of Legal Cognition. University Bulletin. Jurisprudence. No 2(331). 2017. Pp. 6–41. (In Russ.)
7. Aminev F. G. The Role of Forensic Thinking in Forensic Examination. Modern Forensics: problems, trends, prospects. International science-to-practice conference devoted to the 90th Jubilee of N.P.Yablokov, Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation, Honored Lawyer of the RSFSR, Doctor of Juridical Sciences, professor. Moscow, December 22, 2015. Мoscow, 2015. Pp. 200–204. (In Russ.)
8. Shamshiev P. A. Vision of the Content of Forensic Thinking. Law and Order in the 3rd Millennium. International science-topractice conference. Kaliningrad, 2015. Pp. 215–217. (In Russ.)
9. Yablokov N. P. To the Issue of Forensic Thinking. Legal Problems of Strengthening the Russian State. Collected articles. Tomsk, 2012. Pp. 156–159. (In Russ.)
10. Usmanov R. А. Notion, Content, Purpose of Theory of Forensic Data. Russian Juridical Journal. No 2. 2006. Pp. 25–33. (In Russ.)
11. Polevoy N. S. Forensic Cybernetics. Мoscow, 1989. 328 p. (In Russ.)
12. Bakhteev D. V. Intuition and Intuitive Decisions in Investigator’s Cognitive Activity: terms, features, prospects of study. Forensic Library. No 2. 2017. Pp. 193–197. (In Russ.)
13. Reason J., Mycielska K. Absent-Minded: The Psychology of Mental Lapses and Everyday Errors. New Jersey, 1982. 263 p.
14. Elizarova Е. I. Mathematical Education of Lawyers as the Basis for Fundamentalization of Professional Training. Psychopedagogy in Law Enforcement. No 2(73). 2018. Pp. 62–66. (In Russ.)
15. Gabidulin E. М., Pilipchuk N. I. Lectures on Theory of Information. Мoscow, 2007. 214 p. (In Russ.)
16. Cilibrasi R. Paul Vitányi. Clustering by Compression. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. 2005. 51(4). Pp. 1523–1545.
17. Borulenkov Yu. P. Contingency and Legal AWawraenes. Forensic Library. No 2(31). 2017. Pp. 319–330. (In Russ.)
18. Labinsky A. Yu., Podruzhkina Т. А. Specifics of Using Genetic Algorithms and Neural Networks. Natural and Technological Risks (Physics-Mathematical and Applied Aspects). No 4. 2015. Pp. 56–61. (In Russ.)
Submitted 02.09.2018