OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier
Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026
136
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE USE OF FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL
EXAMINATIONS IN STUDYING THE MOTIVATIONAL STRUCTURE OF
CRIMINALS: IMPORTANCE FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES
LARYSA ARKUSHA
larisa7arkusha@gmail.com
Doctor of Law, Professor. Head of the Department of Criminalistics, Forensic Science, and
Polygraphology National University “Odesa Law Academy” Odesa (Ukraine)
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0422-6416
VALERII TISHCHENKO
valeriy.tishenko1@gmail.com
Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor of the Department of Criminalistics, Forensic Science, and
Polygraphology National University “Odesa Law Academy” Odesa (Ukraine)
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2441-7535
YULIІA HRES
julia.bayderina@gmail.com
PhD (Law Sci.), Associate Professor of the Department of Criminalistics, Forensic Science, and
Polygraphology National University “Odesa Law Academy” Odesa (Ukraine)
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8670-9779
OLEKSANDR CHERNOV
sanjehan.14@gmail.com
PhD, Associate Professor of the Department of Criminalistics, Forensic Science and
Polygraphology Faculty of Prosecution and Investigation (Criminal Justice) National University
“Odesa Law Academy” Odesa (Ukraine) https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6038-9479
VLADLENA VOLOSHYNA
vkvoloshyna@gmail.com
PhD (Law Sci.), Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure
Faculty of Prosecution and Investigation National University “Odesa Law Academy” Odesa
(Ukraine) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8772-4172
IRYNA KISLITSYNA
kislitsyna.ira@gmail.com
PhD (Law Sci.), Associate Professor of the Department of Judicial, Law Enforcement Authorities
and Advocacy Faculty of Advocacy and Anti-Corruption Activity National University “Odessa Law
Academy” Odesa (Ukraine) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7215-0791
Abstract
Currently, no unified array of globally applicable standards for forensic psychological tests
exist, in particular aimed at evaluation of criminal motivations, which determines the necessity
for harmonization. International and national-scale professional organizations are making
evident efforts in this domain, but still major obstacles exist due to disparities in legal systems,
cultural contexts, and evaluation techniques. The research examines international standards
directing forensic psychological assessment to reveal criminals’ motivation and investigates
expert systems that are applied inside law enforcement organizations and court institutions.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
137
Comparative method and integrative review were employed to understand how international
approaches merge with nation-states' expert practices. The authors presented evidence on
the detrimental effect of ‘scattered’ standards in forensic psychological assessment
demonstrated that forensic psychological examination procedures which follow international
standards produce more reliable evidence and contribute to the improvement of international
legal system cooperation. Ultimately, it has been demonstrated that a balance between
mental health knowledge and legal integrity is necessary for the successful application of
psychological testing in international justice. This balance can only be reached by openness,
moral consistency, and interdisciplinary collaboration, guaranteeing that mental health
knowledge positively advances justice, accountability, and human dignity. The research
results contribute to further development of international protocols for expert collaboration in
forensic psychological assessment, as well as improving appropriate experts’ professional
training and establishing evidence-based standards for criminal justice functioning.
Keywords
Psychological diagnosis; forensic psychological examination; motivation; psychology;
international cooperation.
Resumo
Atualmente, não existe um conjunto unificado de normas aplicáveis globalmente para testes
psicológicos forenses, em particular destinados à avaliação das motivações criminais, o que
determina a necessidade de harmonização. Organizações profissionais internacionais e
nacionais estão a envidar esforços evidentes neste domínio, mas ainda existem grandes
obstáculos devido às disparidades nos sistemas jurídicos, contextos culturais e técnicas de
avaliação. A investigação examina as normas internacionais que orientam a avaliação
psicológica forense para revelar a motivação dos criminosos e investiga os sistemas
especializados que são aplicados dentro das organizações policiais e instituições judiciais.
Foram utilizados métodos comparativos e revisões integrativas para compreender como as
abordagens internacionais se fundem com as práticas especializadas dos Estados-nação. Os
autores apresentaram evidências sobre o efeito prejudicial de padrões «dispersos» na
avaliação psicológica forense, demonstrando que os procedimentos de exame psicológico
forense que seguem padrões internacionais produzem evidências mais confiáveis e
contribuem para a melhoria da cooperação do sistema jurídico internacional. Em última
análise, ficou demonstrado que é necessário um equilíbrio entre o conhecimento sobre saúde
mental e a integridade jurídica para a aplicação bem-sucedida de testes psicológicos na justiça
internacional. Este equilíbrio só pode ser alcançado através da abertura, da consistência moral
e da colaboração interdisciplinar, garantindo que o conhecimento sobre saúde mental
promova positivamente a justiça, a responsabilização e a dignidade humana. Os resultados
da investigação contribuem para o desenvolvimento de protocolos internacionais para a
colaboração de especialistas na avaliação psicológica forense, bem como para a melhoria da
formação profissional de especialistas adequados e para o estabelecimento de normas
baseadas em evidências para o funcionamento da justiça criminal.
Palavras-chave
Diagnóstico psicológico; exame psicológico forense; motivação; psicologia; cooperação
internacional.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
138
How to cite this article
Arkusha, Larysa, Tishchenko, Valerii, Hres, Yuliіa, Chernov, Oleksandr, Voloshyna, Vladlena
Voloshyna & Kislitsyna, Iryna (2026). International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological
Examinations in Studying the Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. Thematic
Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional Transformation in Times of Global and
National Challenges, VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3, March 2026, pp. 136-164.
https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.DT0226.8
Article submitted on 24 November 2025 and accepted for publication on 23 December
2025.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
139
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE USE OF FORENSIC
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATIONS IN STUDYING THE
MOTIVATIONAL STRUCTURE OF CRIMINALS: IMPORTANCE FOR
COOPERATION BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
LARYSA ARKUSHA
VALERII TISHCHENKO
YULIІA HRES
OLEKSANDR CHERNOV
VLADLENA VOLOSHYNA
IRYNA KISLITSYNA
Introduction
Today, trends observed in criminal justice landscape show increasing interest in
interdisciplinary research on criminal’ personality traits through motivational factor
analysis. The results from forensic psychological examination serve as vital evidence that
enables experts to understand criminal psychological processes and evaluate offenders'
mental states, emotional control, and social development. The absence of a logical and
scientifically justified process might result in misconceptions, rights violations, or even
unfair sentencing the need to address psychological assessment standards becomes even
more evident. Meanwhile, the practice of using forensic psychological examinations faces
challenges because different countries lack standardized methods and their procedures
do not coordinate well, which hinders international law enforcement cooperation.
According to the widely adopted definition, “a psychological evaluation implies an
assessment conducted by a qualified mental health professional to understand
individual’s mental health, cognitive function, and behavioral patterns, which can
influence legal proceedings and sentencing outcomes” (Trenoweth & Moone, 2017).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
140
These assessments have broad implications. They may influence choices about the
appropriateness of rehabilitation programs, the severity of the sentence, or the necessity
of specific interventions. For instance, a psychological assessment may identify
underlying mental health conditions like anxiety, depression, or trauma that may have
influenced the person’s behavior. When crafting a sentence that not only punishes the
offender but also aids in their rehabilitation, this information might be crucial. Moreover,
in cases involving adolescents, the knowledge gathered from psychological assessments
might assist in striking a balance between protection and punishment (Malvaso et al.,
2024).
Organizations like the United Nations (UNODC), the American Psychological Association
(APA), and the International Association of Forensic Psychology (IAFP) conceptually
established some procedures for carrying out psychological testing during the criminal
sentencing process on a global scale. These evaluations consistently stress how crucial it
is to observe the values of justice and human rights. The application and function of
forensic psychologists and psychiatrists vary, despite the underlying principles being
similar, according to a comparative analysis of the legal systems of various nation-states.
For instance, forensic psychologists in the U.S. evaluate criminal risk and culpability using
standard tests like MMPI2, PCL-R, and HCR-20, whereas psychiatrists play a bigger role
in France. This field is still in its early stages in Iran, calling for the creation of local
psychometric tests, specialized training, and standards (Chaimowitz et al., 2025).
In the meantime, it has become evident in recent years that expert opinion can be
prejudiced, as Rassin (2021) correctly points out, and it has been suggested that forensic
psychologists might also be biased. In his research, the susceptibility of forensic
psychological assessment of the suspect’s mental state to the context effect – that is,
the impact of unrelated material on expert opinion – was examined. Forensic psychology
master’s students were instructed to analyze a suspect’s test results in a made-up double
murder case. A version of the case with a neutral account of the murders was given to
some attendees. A more explicit version was given to others. Participants in the latter
condition appeared to be more concerned about the suspect’s mental health than those
in the former, even though the explicitness should not have had an impact on the forensic
psychological examination. The author came to the conclusion that bias should be a focus
of forensic psychological evaluation training programs. However, these studies also
demonstrate the need for forensic psychological assessment frameworks to be unified,
creating a canvas that would reduce the possibility of biases and enable accurate and
efficient psychological testing as well as the assessment of criminals’ motivations in
international trials.
Fundamentally, the goal of forensic psychiatric evaluation is to offer impartial,
scientifically sound information to support judicial decisions. Law enforcement officials
and forensic psychologists are collaborating to use psychological science in criminal
profiling. The goal of profiling is to determine the primary personality traits and
behavioral traits of criminals based on their interactions during the crime. Based on
analyzing trends and evidence, criminal profiling aims to develop broad profiles of
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
141
offenders, while forensic psychology, in turn, focuses its attention on diagnosing
psychological problems, assessing risks, and determining competency through
customized evaluations of individuals involved in judicial cases. Although forensic
psychology and profiling have different goals and approaches, both are crucial for
investigations and legal proceedings.
Three primary methods of reasoning are used for developing profiles: induction,
abduction, and deduction. Rather than thinking of these as distinct forms of logic, it is
preferable to think of them as distinct places along the logical continuum. To arrive at
the best explanation (abduction) or only one that is based on universal laws or principles
and cannot be refuted (deduction), we begin with various hypotheses about what might
have happened or that might be true (induction) and use the scientific method to falsify
each conclusion. Abduction is sometimes the best explanation for the evidence seen due
to human behavior, evidential dynamics, or deliberate attempts to obstruct the
investigation (known as staging, among other things). An inductive argument determines
whether the conclusion is likely or an issue of probability by using supporting premises,
such as empirical data or research. Although a strong inductive argument offers strong
evidence for the conclusion, it is not perfect. In their study on behavioral consistency,
Bateman and Salfati (2007) discovered that burying the body occurred 67.8% of the
time, while transferring the body after the homicide occurred 61.1% of the time. While
listed as high-frequency behaviors, these findings indicate that each will only be
encountered about two-thirds of the time. As a result, investigators utilizing a profile that
reports such statistical judgments may mistake probability for certainty. These
tendencies do, however, occur in certain situations but not in others, which raises
questions about the usefulness of this data as well as where criminal activity is consistent
and inconsistent with studies. This might be particularly true when the degree of certainty
is expressed ambiguously or generically, such as “the body will be hidden most of the
time” (Petherick & Brooks, 2020). Although this argument is actually correct technically,
it does not convey the precise degree of assurance. Thus, analyzing the motivations of
criminals is of crucial nature for profiling process, and standardizing the framework and
procedures for the examination represents the first step towards optimization of profiling
accuracy. Expert evaluation of offender motivations enables successful identification of
crime pattern and provides a foundation for developing prevention strategy in the field
of violent and organized criminal offenses.
With this in mind, the research relevance grounds on the need to align domestic expert
methods, applied in nation-states’ practice, with international standards in the field. The
scientific problem stems from the fact that there is no established system connecting
forensic psychological examination theory with international criminal procedure
standards, which impedes enhancing law enforcement capabilities and prevents
strengthening international criminal justice partnerships.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
142
Literature Review
Jadidi (2025) correctly points out that criminal justice in the contemporary societies is
not merely dependent on crime and punishment, but the type and severity of punishment
are also significantly influenced by the defendant’s psychological, social, and personality
traits. The court, police, attorneys, and other organizations focused on justice have direct
contact with forensic psychology. To better understand the accused’s mental condition
and impose a more equitable punishment, the forensic psychologist provides the judge
with specialized assessments.
At the same time, a range of scholars point out the phenomena of cognitive biases in
forensic psychological assessment. According to Buongiorno et al. (2025), cognitive
biases are a result of forensic psychiatry’s intrinsic limitations. In particular, psychiatric
evaluations, including forensic assessments, are particularly vulnerable to cognitive
biases since they primarily rely on patients’ subjective interpretations of their symptoms
and self-reports. Additionally, a “cascade” effect that gradually modifies the judgment
process can be produced by cognitive biases at many levels (Scarpazza & Ghidini, 2023).
A thorough evaluation of the literature on forensic mental health expert (FMHE)
testimony and court decision-making was carried out by van Es et al. (2020). This review
contains a total of 27 studies. Most of the research was done on fictitious jurors in the
United States. The majority of research concentrated on sentencing guidelines or criminal
liability. Research on criminal responsibility consistently revealed that psychotic
defendants of violent, major crimes were more frequently found not guilty by reason of
insanity than defendants with psychopathic disorders. The length and kind of
punishments had less consistent results, and they were frequently influenced by
perceived behavioral control, recidivism risk, and treatability. There are hardly any
studies on the potential negative consequences of FMHE.
The opinions of mental health professionals can have a significant impact on legal
processes. In the meantime, Grossi and Green (2017) stress that because legal criteria,
operationalization, and classification of mental illness vary throughout countries, it is
challenging to compare the usage and impact of forensic mental health expert testimony
on judicial decisions across jurisdictions. Regarding these distinctions, it seemed feasible
to identify the components that are pertinent in the majority of legal systems and, where
needed, to explain key distinctions. Table 1 shows this structure.
Table 1. Effects of forensic mental health expertise on judicial decisions
A court ruling
Forensic mental health expertise
+
0
-
1. Guilt
a. Mens rea
b. Actus reus
x
x
√
√
√
x
2. Sentencing
√
√
√
Source: van Es et al. (2020)
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
143
Neal et al. (2019) presented the findings of a two-part study on psychological
assessments performed by psychologists in legal circumstances. The first section
included a thorough examination of the 364 psychological assessment tools that
psychologists reported using in court cases in 22 surveys of experienced forensic mental
health practitioners, with an emphasis on legal norms as well as scientific and
psychometric theories. The second section included a legal analysis of admissibility issues
in psychological assessments. The first part’s findings show that, consistent with their
roots in psychology science, almost all of the evaluation methods employed by
psychologists and given as expert testimony in legal situations have been empirically
tested (90%). However, the authors were able to clearly identify approximately 67% as
generally acknowledged in the field, with only around 40% receiving generally positive
appraisals of their psychometric and technical qualities from authorities such as the
Mental Measurements Yearbook. Furthermore, there is little correlation between
widespread acceptance and the favorability of tools’ psychometric qualities. The second
section’s findings demonstrate the rarity of legal challenges to this evidence’s admission:
Just 5.1% of the sample’s instances contained legal objections to the evaluation evidence
for any reason; slightly more than half of these featured validity concerns. Only roughly
one-third of the time did they succeed when challenges were posed. There are hardly
any challenges to the most dubious scientific instruments. Psychological expert
evaluation testimony is rarely contested by attorneys, and when it is, judges frequently
neglect to apply the legal scrutiny.
According to de Roo et al. (2022), behavioral science and forensics are frequently viewed
as distinct fields. The need for more integration between the two fields is becoming
increasingly apparent, though. Forensic science may be able to solve investigation issues,
particularly at the crime scene, by using psychological theories about human behavior.
The authors of the study investigate the following: (1) investigative psychologists are
better at identifying deviant behavioral cues than forensic examiners when examining a
crime scene; (2) forensic examiners can identify pertinent traces that may be linked to
this behavior; and (3) the availability of a psychological report that highlights these
behavioral cues aids forensic examiners in identifying more pertinent traces. In order to
do this, a virtual 3D fake crime scene was examined by 40 forensic examiners and 14
investigative psychologists. The study’s findings demonstrate that forensic examiners
who receive a psychological report on these cues identify and gather significantly more
traces that can be connected to deviant behavior and have a high evidential value than
examiners who do not receive this information, and that investigative psychologists
observe significantly more deviant behavioral cues than forensic examiners. But the
study also shows that when behavioral information challenges preexisting views, it is
likely to be disregarded.
Criminals’ motivation, on the other hand, plays a critical part in forensic investigations
by offering context for a crime, supporting suspect profiling, and connecting instances
through behavioral patterns. Although motive is not a legal prerequisite for conviction,
knowing it aids in case linking, helps investigators formulate hypotheses, and helps them
grasp purpose, particularly in recurrent crimes. Armeanu (2018) highlights the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
144
importance of motivation in forensic analysis from a variety of perspectives. Table 2
provides summary of these insights.
Table 2. The role of motivation in forensic examination
Role
Gives context and
purpose
Provides information for
criminal profiling
Helps with case linking
Aids in the examination of
crime scenes
Guides investigative
strategy
Supports courtroom
presentations
Enhances forensic work’
quality
Source: Armeanu (2018)
Baidya (2022) studies criminal reasons by looking at conventional theories of motivation.
Using actual criminal cases from India, McClelland's needs, Murray's psychogenic
requirements, Maslow’s need hierarchy, Alderfer's ERG model, and Optimal Level Theory
are all examined. These theories bridge the gap between motivational psychology and
the forensic-criminal environment by incorporating ideas from Sutherland's postulates,
Kohlberg’s moral growth, and the Frustration-Aggression hypothesis. Lastly, the author
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
145
shows how the drive for non-criminal behavior and the motivation for unlawful activity
have similar foundations.
In order to assess the significance of individual motives for juvenile and adult crimes, as
well as across a variety of offending categories, Koegl and Farringtron (2021) compiled
a list of offender motivations for criminal offending. The applicability of each of the 17
reasons to official conviction records and other clinical-risk variables was evaluated by
adult male convicts (N = 136). According to the findings, the majority of prisoners
committed crimes in order to escape reality, feel pleasure, or pursue sensations. While
non-sex offenders supported substance abuse, social influence, and utilitarian incentives,
adult sex offenders cited sexual motives. The results are examined in relation to
evidence-based correctional practice and research.
Reddy (2025) uses psychological theories and techniques to comprehend the
complexities of criminal behavior by drawing on a wide range of instances from the US,
UK, Belgium, Columbia, Germany, and India, such as financial deceit, maternal
psychosis, and serial murder. These ideas cover everything from behavioral analysis and
criminal profiling to the dynamics of influence and the psychology of dishonesty.
According to Combalbert et al. (2014), there has been an increasing worry about the
quality of forensic mental health assessment in a number of nations on both sides of the
Atlantic. However, legal systems are not necessarily comparable, and many parts of
forensic assessment are unique to a particular nation. The authors examine forensic
mental health evaluation in France and provide suggestions for raising standards. The
study outlines the benefits and drawbacks of forensic psychological evaluation in France
(i.e., the pre-trial investigative phase assigned to a judge, with mental health evaluation
carried out by preselected professionals referred to as “experts” in French). According to
the authors, a lack of agreement on a number of fundamental concepts, including mental
health diagnosis or assessment techniques, unfavorable working conditions, a lack of
specialized training, and a lack of familiarity with the Code of Ethics, appear to be the
primary causes of the heterogeneity of expert practices in France. The quality and
dependability of forensic mental health reports have come under increasing scrutiny from
the public and the judiciary due to the alleged involvement of psychiatric and
psychological reports in a number of high-profile mismanaged criminal cases (such as
the Outreau trial in 2005). According to Combalbert et al. (2014), there has been an
increasing worry about the quality of forensic mental health assessment in a number of
nations on both sides of the Atlantic. However, legal systems are not necessarily
comparable, and many parts of forensic assessment are unique to a particular nation.
The authors examine forensic mental health evaluation in France and provide suggestions
for raising standards. The study outlines the benefits and drawbacks of forensic
psychological evaluation in France (i.e., the pre-trial investigative phase assigned to a
judge, with mental health evaluation carried out by preselected professionals referred to
as “experts” in French). According to the authors, a lack of agreement on several
fundamental concepts, including mental health diagnosis or assessment techniques,
unfavorable working conditions, a lack of specialized training, and a lack of familiarity
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
146
with the Code of Ethics, appears to be the primary cause of the heterogeneity of expert
practices in France. The quality and dependability of forensic mental health reports have
come under increasing scrutiny from the public and the judiciary due to the alleged
involvement of psychiatric and psychological reports in several high-profile mismanaged
criminal cases (such as the Outreau trial in 2005). According to Combalbert et al. (2014),
a psychological or psychiatric report that is mainly meant to inform the court on the
personalities of accused criminals and victims should be written in a way that is
understandable to both the prosecution and the defense. Technical terminology should
be used sparingly. Additionally, experts should provide thorough answers to every query.
Their findings should be supported by strong reasons, and they should be clear and
succinct. Additionally, the authors emphasize the abundance of structured instruments
for both actuarial evaluation (which yields the best rates of predictive validity) and clinical
assessment of antisocial, violent, and sexual risk, as well as the practicality of taking
their use into consideration.
Research by Neal et al. (2022) discusses the potential future of forensic psychology and
gives a summary of its past. The authors claim that best practices of a psychological
evaluation using the standards, principles, and respect of science to guide legal
proceedings, should be followed. Accordingly, eight important factors are formulated: (i)
assessment’ foundational validity; (ii) assessment’s validity as used; (iii) control and
mitigation of bias; (iv) paying attention to quality control; (v) communicating data,
findings, and opinions suitably; (vi) taking assumptions and limits into account in a clear
manner; (vii) evaluating opposing viewpoints or arguments; and (viii) strict adhering to
professional standards, codes of conduct, rules of evidence, and ethical duties.
Ukrainian scientist Martynenko (2024) focus her research attention on creating uniform
protocols for professional forensic psychology work in the Ukrainian setting. In order to
establish standardized procedures, improve forensic psychological outcomes, and
expedite international cooperation, the study looks into finding the ways how
international standards might be applied in Ukrainian practice. The author highlights that
the universality of international standards, that is, their ability to be applied in any
forensic institution, independent of the nation, departmental affiliation, or organizational
structure is what makes them valuable in the field of forensic examination. The article’s
conclusion states that in order to support adherence to the principles of interdependence,
consistency, and continuity in standardization, national standards in the field of forensic
examination should take into consideration the provisions of the ISO/TC 272 standards.
The author claims that, for enhancing the quality of forensic examination activities,
cooperation between Ukrainian forensic institutions and international organizations on
standardization issues should be developed and strengthened. This can be achieved by
working together on ISO/TC 272 and by participating in the various communication
formats provided by regional networks of operational forensic examination laboratories.
A group of Ukrainian scholars – Tkachenko et al. (2024) – made an effort to evaluate
global experience in the area of expert assistance of justice and to examine strategies
for incorporating contemporary international standards into domestic forensic expert
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
147
practice. It was highlighted that forensic expert activity in Ukraine is organized using a
hybrid approach. Harmonization of forensic examinations, standardization of expert
methodologies, certification of forensic facilities, and publishing of the register of forensic
experts are some benefits of such an approach. The author emphasized the importance
of integrating the Ukrainian system of expert support for justice into the worldwide
framework, as well as the participation of Ukrainian forensic institutions in international
organizations that bring together foreign experts. The author recommended establishing
a single body, the National Service for the Provision of Forensic Expertise, which would
be subordinated to Ukraine’s Ministry of Justice.
Makarova (2024) underlined the importance of studying a personality’s psychological
features and their impact on forensic psychiatric examination strategies in order to
improve examination quality. According to the author, recognizing these characteristics
enables the expert to analyze the defendant’s mental state in a more objective and
reliable manner. Nestor et al. (2024) investigate ethical norms in Ukraine and English-
speaking countries, demonstrating the importance of established guidelines that
minimize expert prejudice and ensure public trust in their conclusions.
Nevertheless, at the international level, there are very few studies in the field of
harmonization of international standards in forensic psychological expertise, in particular,
in analyzing criminals’ motivation. Many publications describe the theoretical concepts of
motive and goal, but do not develop a unified methodology that would allow for a
standardized assessment of the motivational structure of criminals in different countries.
Practical research often focuses on general personality characteristics or
psychopathology rather than on a detailed analysis of motivational processes
(awareness, conflict of motives, role of context). This evidently necessitates further
research in this field, implying departure from vague conceptualization and moving
towards design of practical solutions.
Methods
The research was carried out within a qualitative paradigm, with the use of an integrative
review methodology. Preliminary search for sources to be included in the sample was
carried out within the scientometric libraries databases ScienceDirect, ResearchGate,
Wiley, MDPI, PubMed, as well as through direct search on the Google platform. The
inquiry for search included two domains: 1) international standards of forensic
psychological assessment”; and 2) criminals’ motivation evaluation. Only peer-reviewed
or monographic English-language publications were considered. Screening was based on
the topic and abstract. This preliminary search allowed identifying 97 sources. Among
them, 30 publications appeared not openly available in full text. In the next stage of
research, the found publications were evaluated based on their methodology and
findings, which enabled deeper analysis of their scope and, thus, relevance for current
research. This procedure allowed selecting 41 entries for inclusion in the sample for
integrative review.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
148
Results and Discussion
Typically, the validity, dependability, and consistency of the fundamental scientific
techniques for examining tangible evidence, such as DNA, fingerprints, and digital
evidence, are the main goals of harmonization initiatives within forensic science. General
standards are created and promoted by organizations like the International Organization
for Standardization (ISO), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
and ASTM International (e.g., ISO/IEC 17025 for testing and calibration laboratories, and
the ISO 21043 series for forensic sciences). By reducing the influence of cognitive and
motivational biases in examiners’ decisions, these guidelines seek to enhance the quality
of data collection, analysis, and reporting. Meanwhile, within the domain of psychological
forensic examination, harmonization process is much more ‘modest’. At the same time,
to speed up the efforts in this field, there is the need of uniting expertise of psychology,
social psychology, forensic science, and ethics.
It should be noted that understanding the basic ideas of psychology is crucial to
comprehending the nature of criminal behavior and the influence of mental state on it.
According to Bartol and Bartol (2016), the most significant of these theories are:
1 According to Bandura’s Social Learning Theory, criminal behavior is picked up by
watching and copying others, particularly strong role models like family members or peer
groups. This viewpoint emphasizes the importance of both positive and negative
reinforcement, the social context, and the incapacity to understand the detrimental
effects of conduct.
2. Hirschi’s Social Control Theory: This theory highlights how social connections with
family, school, the law, and society can help to prevent deviation. Crimes are more likely
to be committed by those individuals who were actually cut off from these connections.
Mental illnesses potentially can erode social bonds and serve as a criminal activity’
catalyst.
3. Psychodynamic theory (Freud and his followers): The theory implies that unresolved
childhood concerns (traumas) and a weak Superego may represent the cause of criminal
behavior. Within this approach, psychological evaluation examines personality structure
of individual, his/her unresolved complexes, and unconscious motivations.
4. According to Eysenck’s trait theory, criminal behavior is strongly associated with traits
such as neuroticism, severe extraversion, and psychopathy. Individuals with high
impulsivity, low empathy, and antisocial characteristics are more likely to violate the law.
Motivation is a key component of the criminal psychology analysis system because it
helps researchers comprehend how criminal intentions develop, how criminals make
decisions, and what motivates their criminal behavior. In-depth research on criminal
behavior helps scientists create evidence-based theories about criminal offenders, which
improves crime prevention, tailored punishment, and rehabilitation initiatives. Studying
criminal motivating patterns is crucial in the contemporary globalized legal context
because correct forensic psychology evaluations for international criminal justice rely on
appropriate interpretation.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
149
In recent decades, an important point of cooperation in international criminal justice was
set in the phenomenon of profiling.
Criminal profiling, according to European police forces, was an effort to create a
description of the offender based on the findings of an examination of the crime scene
data and traits associated with the offender’s past (Eze et al., 2025). The UK’s Association
of Chief Police Officers Behavioral Science Investigative Support Subcommittee later
approved and endorsed this description. Criminal profiling was viewed by the definition
as a preferred approach to crime solving rather than a specific technique, and it was
generally unable to identify the actual criminals. In actuality, it can only imply some of
the personality traits and demographics that a criminal would probably have. Because a
criminal profile is simply one method of detecting real criminals, it was improper for the
police to totally exclude anyone who did not match the aforementioned traits.
In his book, Kocsis (2006) defined criminal profiling as the practice of examining and
interpreting the behavior or activity that was obviously evident in a crime. The traits that
the offender most likely had were predicted by this research. In contrast to psychological
profiling, criminal profiling did not involve the examination of new patients. Instead, it
involved analyzing the crime to understand key behaviors at the time of the crime so
that the investigator could create an image of the perpetrator (Kocsis, 2006).
Compared to the earlier definitions, this one appeared to be more expansive and general.
When creating a criminal profile, Kocsis (2006) considered every facet of criminality. This
meant that his definition was more flexible in terms of the strategies and techniques that
profilers may employ throughout investigations in order to accomplish the primary
objective of creating a criminal profile of the offender in question.
From the standpoint of criminology, criminal profiling identified the precise circumstances
that could have led to a crime. It concentrated more on creating the chronology of the
incident than on developing the character of the offender. In the meantime, criminal
profiles were created by the psychiatric section in order to determine the perpetrator’s
demographics, mental health, and motivations for committing such acts. Instead of
emphasizing how a crime was actually committed, it focused more on the background
and history of the offender. From a forensics perspective, a criminal profile was
constructed using the evidence found at a crime scene and focused more on the
techniques and consequences of the crime.
In the end, criminal profiling was one of the techniques that law enforcement could
employ to determine the predominant traits of an offender in a specific case by
considering the traits, demographics, method of operation, and evidence in comparable
cases that have been documented, looked into, or tried in court. Only prior case studies
and scientific knowledge from fields like criminal psychology, forensics, geography, and
statistics may be used to construct this strategy. These components were crucial in
raising the accuracy percentage for any profiles that were generated. However, because
the three branches of knowledge that served as the foundation for creating crime profiles
did not have the same goals, it was still very difficult to implement an integrated
definition of criminal profiling (Mustaffa et al., 2022).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
150
In fact, just two studies have looked at adult prison samples’ reasons for committing
crimes thus far. In a sample of 196 male inmates, Gudjonsson et al. (2011) investigated
the connection between four OMQ-derived motivations, Axis I and II illnesses, and
childhood ADHD symptoms. Generally speaking, many connections were not significant
when other personality characteristics were taken into account, even though different
DSM illnesses had strong univariate links with each of the four motivation categories. The
most compelling result was that drug dependence was closely linked to financial
incentive. The second study (Ohlsson & Ireland, 2011) examined the connection between
aggression and incentives in a sample of 206 adult male inmates in the United Kingdom.
The OMQ, an aggression motivation questionnaire, and other tests were completed by
study participants. Four primary motivations for aggressiveness were identified:
enjoyment, social recognition, protection, and perceived benefits. The findings showed
that the reasons behind hostility varied across violent and nonviolent criminals. Positive
outcomes and pleasure-related motives were more frequently endorsed by those with a
violent conviction, and both of these motives were strongly correlated with a standardized
measure of rage (Ohlsson & Ireland, 2011).
Unquestionably, variations in the process employed to create a criminal profile may alter
the profile’s veracity and admissibility as the foundation for a suspect’s arrest and
conviction. Finding the ideal methods to do so was a challenging task. In addition to
drawing on prior case studies and pertinent scientific knowledge, the community’s
demographics should also be considered. The majority of research on criminal profiling
methodology was predicated on the demographic appropriateness of western civilization.
Although international criminal tribunals deal with a variety of people, Western cultures
are frequently the source of psychological tools and diagnostic frameworks. This raises
moral questions regarding (Mihaela, 2025):
- Cultural misreading of symptoms or behaviors (e.g., culturally normal manifestations
of grief or trauma misunderstood as psychopathology);
- Language obstacles, reliance on interpreters, and translation mistakes that distort
meaning;
- Ethnocentrism in diagnosis can undermine local narratives or resilience methods.
According to Mustaffa et al. (2022), the absence of a defined framework for forensic
psychiatric examination has a negative impact on the legal system and law enforcement.
The author thought that one of the primary sources for creating a crime profile in Malaysia
may be the customs and culture of a particular national or ethnic group. This was because
the demographics and customs of the local community where the crime was perpetrated
were intimately linked to the prominent traits of the offenders.
Numerous initiatives have already been put into place that could aid in the advancement
of criminal profiling techniques in Malaysia. The creation of the Penang State Crime
Mapping Application (Polgis-Pen) 2012 (Police Online Geographical Information System
for Penang) was one of them. The app was created to track the locations and specifics of
crimes for when a police complaint was filed, as well as to analyze crime and eSector
data. Additionally, it made it easier to create Penang’s crime statistics. The app alerted
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
151
users to two types of crimes: property crimes and violent crimes. The app’s
geographically based data has helped to facilitate and expedite the crime profiling process
(Simposium Maklumat Geospatial Kebangsaan (NGIS) ke 5, 2012). In addition to nations
like Sweden and Canada, Malaysia also employed criminal profiling as a crucial
investigative technique, according to a 2008 Skeptic Magazine article titled “Criminal
Profiling”. The application of this method can be found in Part V, Chapter 13 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, which covers information to the police and investigative
authority from section 107 to section 120. Moreover, Part VIII, Chapter 33, Section 329
of the same Code, which addressed the police’s obligation to investigate deaths, also
included reference to criminal profiling.
The inquiry process outlined in Chapter 13 of the Code, meanwhile, has be an object of
criticism for being overly broad and harsh. It also focuses more on physical evidence,
even though psychological evidence must also be considered. The investigation analysis
and evidence from the incident – whether from witnesses, the crime scene, or criminal
remnants – were used in Malaysia’s crime profiling process. However, the author also
believed that the Code’s rules regarding the authority and methods of inquiry failed to
provide a clear and comprehensive explanation of the criminal profiling technique
employed by local police officers. Mustaffa et al. (2022) came to the conclusion that
variations in backgrounds and methods employed by investigating officers during a
criminal profile can lead to an incorrect crime profile, which could result in erroneous
arrests.
Part IV, Chapter 13 and Part VIII, Chapter 33 of the Criminal Procedure Code in Malaysia
both mention the use of criminal profiling; the latter relates to information provided to
police and their investigative authority. Sections 109 and 329 were the precise provisions
in question. Only police or officers in charge of stations with a level of Sergeant or higher
were qualified to conduct an investigation for a significant case, according to Section 109.
These officers were also prohibited from being questioned at any point during the
process. In the meantime, Section 329 (1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code established
a police officer’s obligation to look into deaths caused by unknown causes. Section 329(2)
made it clear that the criminal profiling method could be applied utilizing evidence from
the crime scene and traces of the crime approach. In addition to conducting
investigations based on the crime sites and issues pertaining to the death, District Police
Officers and police officers ranking Sergeant and higher were required to submit an initial
determination on the crime’s method of operation. However, the “investigation” offered
in this instance was overly broad and condensed, focusing more on physical evidence
whereas psychological evidence should also be prioritized (Mustaffa et al., 2022).
There was no minimal benchmark or yardstick to gauge their effectiveness because being
a profiler did not require any particular training or accreditation. It was impossible to
discipline or punish careless or inept profilers due to the lack of realistic criteria.
Aggravating effects like unlawful detention and, worse, the possibility of misconvictions
were exacerbated by the lack of a “peer-reviewed system” practice and uniformity over
the necessary profile-making process and methodology.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
152
Rather than being a “forensic examination” in the conventional sense of physical evidence
analysis, the assessment of motivation is typically a component of a mental health
evaluation or competency assessment. There is a lack of agreement on particular
evaluation techniques and reporting across various contexts and judicial systems because
these evaluations heavily rely on clinical data, mental history, interviews, and the
defendant’s account of the accused offense. Although experts in these fields frequently
offer their opinions to the court, there is a continuous discussion in the legal and scientific
communities over the necessity of stricter, scientifically grounded standards to guarantee
the validity and admissibility of such expert testimony. Current international standards
emphasize tangible, empirical data. Due to inherent differences in legal frameworks and
the subjective nature of psychological assessment, motivation assessment is still a
difficult, qualitative area of forensic psychology that is not governed by a single,
harmonized forensic standard.
The International Association of Forensic Psychology (IAFP), the American Psychological
Association (APA), as well as United Nations documents, unanimously claim that
psychological evaluation standards should have a number of key ideas in their
foundation:
1. Professional competence of assessor. The forensic psychologist should possess
expertise in forensic psychology, proficiency in application of psychometric instruments,
adequate experience in judicial assessment, and be familiar with current legal
frameworks.
2. Employing scientifically justified and standardized instruments: It is crucial to use
assessments protocols with established validity and reliability, such as MMPI-2, PCL-R,
and SCL-90-R. Any informal or local tools should be considered with caution and be
assessed based on strong scientific argumentation.
3. Respecting the principles of independence and impartiality: During the evaluation
process, an expert is obliged to express an opinion based solely on objective observations
and scientific evidence, regardless of the demands of the parties involved or political and
personal factors.
4. Respecting confidentiality and informed consent: The expert should be made aware of
the evaluation’s goal, methodology, and implications. Personal information should not be
shared unless there are specific circumstances, including a court order or a threat to
other persons.
5. Transparent and intelligible reporting for the court: In order for the judge or jury to
understand psychological reports, they must be given in straightforward, logical language
that makes reference to the instruments employed and is devoid of technical or
judgmental terminology.
Table 3 provides structure of international standards for psychological evaluation.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
153
Table 3. International guidelines for forensic psychological assessment structure
APA standards
IAFP guidelines
Recommendations of
the United Nations
and the Office on
Drugs and Crime
(UNODC)
The assessor should be
completely knowledgeable of
the legal conditions and the
type of case
Selecting scientifically valid
psychometric instruments
Conducting systematic and
documented clinical
interviews
Preserving professional
objectivity and independence
Respecting confidentiality
and clients’ rights
Reports for the court that
are credentialed, accurate,
and transparent
Recognizing the
assessment’s limits and
refraining from incorrectly
extrapolating the findings
Necessity of specialized
training for psychologists in
the legal and ethical field
Focus on multi-source
evaluation (interview,
psychometric testing, case
review, witness accounts)
Considering linguistic, social,
and cultural factors when
analyzing data
The necessity of preserving
independence from political or
judicial pressure
The necessity of constantly
updating one’s knowledge and
abilities
Safeguarding the
accused’s rights during
evaluations
Preventing prejudice
and discrimination
based on race, sexual
orientation, and culture
Educating criminal
justice staff on how to
communicate with
psychologists
Stress the use of
evaluation to lessen the
negative effects of
punishment
Source: Liell et al. (2022)
Despite the importance of all these concepts, they do not offer a workable framework
that can be modified for the global forensic environment. The discipline of forensic mental
health evaluation is delicate, challenging, and have implicit dangers. It necessitates a
deep understanding of symptomatology, substantial assessment experience, cautious
interpretation, and rigorous observance of ethical code. Forensic work is complicated and
can have major repercussions for both defendants and plaintiffs, thus ethics is a crucial
component. Many nations, most notably the Netherlands (Duits et al., 2012), have
demanded improvements in mental health forensic reports during the past 20 years and
have offered models that incorporate structural changes. Certain European nations may
not be able to use these models since judicial processes vary depending on whether their
legal systems are founded on Roman law or Common law. At the international level, the
‘disperse’ in standards for forensic psychological assessment is still very significant, which
impedes international criminal justice cooperation.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
154
Psychologists may have to choose between their ethical duty to the person being
evaluated and their duty to the court. The prosecution, defense, or judges frequently
request psychiatric examinations under international criminal law; nonetheless, the
person being assessed may not have given completely informed or willing consent,
particularly in detention situations. Confidentiality violations, the possibility of coercion
or lack of agency in participation, and the compromise of therapeutic neutrality due to
the use of evaluations for legal rather than clinical goals are some of the issues that arise
from this dual role.
There is no a global code of ethics created especially for psychologists working in
international criminal courts. As a result:
- The expert’s training and country of origin determine different ethical norms;
- Ethical wrongdoing is not well monitored or enforced;
- Fairness is undermined by cross-jurisdictional inconsistencies that result in unequal use
of psychological expertise.
Let us remind that the study of motivation as a psychological phenomenon started during
the early 20th century when scientists began to examine human behavior through
systematic analysis. The initial understanding of behavior focused on biological and
stimulus-based explanations but Heckhausen (1977) and other scientists later
established motivation as a complex system which combines needs with goals and
emotions and social factors. The criminal-psychological framework shows that criminal
conduct emerges from a complete system of personal and environmental elements which
affect how people make choices.
A person commits a crime through deliberate action which fulfills their needs by using
dangerous social behaviors. The structure of criminal motivation contains three elements
which include cognitive processes and emotional responses and volitional actions that
function together based on personal mental state and life experiences and social
surroundings (Ha et al., 2024). The forensic psychological examination requires complete
understanding of this structure because it enables experts to determine the extent of
criminal awareness and control and pathological motivation elements for creating expert
opinions.
The distinction between internal and external motives receives special focus because it
enables researchers to understand crime psychology better. People develop internal
motivation through their personal needs to achieve self-affirmation and compensate for
frustration but external motivation stems from social rewards and pressures and benefits
(Franco & Svensgaard, 2011). The classification system serves an essential purpose for
international expert work because multiple countries need experts to determine the
extent of personal control over motives and their impact on decision-making processes.
The scientific validity, dependability, and quality control of test results and evidence
handling are the main goals of harmonization efforts in forensic science (e.g., through
the ISO 21043 series and ISO/IEC 17025 standards). In particular, for evidence that can
be objectively verified, such as DNA or digital evidence, these criteria guarantee that
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
155
forensic procedures are scientifically sound and that the outcomes are dependable,
reproducible, and globally acceptable.
However, behavioral analysis, psychological profiling, and investigative procedures – all
of which are intrinsically more subjective and reliant on national legal frameworks,
cultural contexts, and investigative traditions – are primarily responsible for the forensic
investigation of a criminal’s motivation.
Among the main obstacles to harmonizing forensic investigation of motivation are
(Bouzin et al., 2023):
- Subjectivity: The interpretation and behavioral theories involved in motivation
analysis are less subject to the empirical testing and validation criteria used for tangible
evidence
- Legal Differences: The weight and admissibility of such evidence varied greatly amongst
legal systems (e.g., common law vs. civil law states)
- Lack of Consensus: Harmonization of intricate, non-physical studies is challenging since
there is still a lack of a wide, shared international understanding of the foundational ideas
and boundaries of forensic science itself.
A number of professional associations, including the International Association for
Correctional and Forensic Psychology (IACFP), the American Psychological Association,
and the American Academy of Forensic Psychology (AAFP), create and disseminate their
own best practices and specialist recommendations. By improving service quality and
providing guidance for accreditation and certification procedures, these
recommendations help members and associated areas achieve de facto harmonization.
Global information exchange and the promotion of best practices are facilitated by
organizations such as the International Association of Forensic Sciences (IAFS), which
offer forums for international discussion and cooperation.
The necessity of using culturally sensitive methods in forensic mental health evaluations
to guarantee validity and reliability across a range of demographics is becoming more
widely acknowledged and the subject of increased research. When used in different
cultural contexts, assessment tools and techniques created in one may not have cross-
cultural validity and reliability. As was already established, evaluators who are not
familiar with local norms may misunderstand the impact of culture.
The use of classic psychological tests in various forensic contexts has been the subject
of numerous survey studies, all of which have consistently shown that psychological tests
are crucial to the majority of forensic assessments. However, its use has both benefits
and drawbacks. When choosing, administering, and interpreting psychological tests for
forensic evaluation, the forensic evaluator should consider a set of standards.
El-Shenawy (2017) correctly points out that there are differences between the standards
employed in therapeutic and forensic assessment. While forensic assessment
incorporates both clinical and legal standards, therapeutic assessment standards aid in
diagnosis and treatment and serve organizing, condensing, and orienting purposes. For
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
156
instance, when the evaluator is expected to take into account the relationship between
the underlying mental, emotional, and cognitive deficiencies and various legal difficulties,
such criminal responsibility, skills, or sentencing considerations.
The sources of information used in each of the two types of assessments differ
significantly from one another. They both use behavioral assessment, psychological
testing, and self-report measures to gather clinical and psychosocial data. These sources
are insufficient for forensic evaluation, in contrast to therapeutic evaluation. To evaluate
the accuracy and consistency of data obtained from self-reports, additional information
is required through the use of collateral material (such as document examination and
interviews). There are numerous reasons why someone undergoing forensic evaluation
might provide false information. For instance, some persons may exaggerate mental
health issues to avoid criminal culpability or to seek financial advantage in personal injury
claims, while others may overestimate their parenting abilities to get custody of their
children. The likelihood that the person being assessed will purposefully (by exaggerating
or minimizing) falsify the nature of symptoms or experiences is typically low in the
majority of therapeutic evaluation cases.
Additionally, in light of verbal communication regarding the evaluation outcomes, there
is a significant difference between the two types of assessments. It is uncommon for the
therapist evaluator to testify as an expert witness in court. The theory that provides the
context and framework for the tests used in the evaluation must be clearly explained to
the trier of fact (typically a jury, sometimes the judge), even though the forensic
evaluator should always testify as an expert witness and that testimony would be
connected to the assessment. In order to prevent the lawyer from proving that the expert
is not an expert in this field and has misinterpreted, misused, or misstated the workings
and results of the tests, it should be explained how the tests were developed, how they
are used, how the results are interpreted, and how the test results at hand can be used
validly and reliably.
Lees-Haley et al. (1996) carried out an early survey study to determine the prevalence
of several psychological tests used in forensic assessments. Information gathered from
reports of 100 neuropsychologists’ assessments of adult personal injuries. The findings
showed that between one and thirty-two tests were used in one hundred forensic
neuropsychological assessments. The most popular scale was the Wechsler Adult
Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R), followed by the MMPI/MMPI-2 and the Wechsler
Memory Scale (WMS)/Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised (WMS-R).
Quinnell and Bow surveyed 198 psychologists about the use of psychological tests in child
custody assessments (Liell et al., 2022). According to the results, half of the participants
said that IQ tests were used to assess custody of both adults and children. The Millon
Clinical Multiaxial Inventory II or III (MCMI) was the second most popular objective test
for adults, followed by the MMPI/MMPI-2. Other assessments, such as the California
Personality Inventory and the 16-Personality Factors, were also utilized, but sparingly.
The Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI) and the Minnesota Multiphasic
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
157
Personality Inventory–Adolescent Version (MMPI-A) were frequently used for testing
adolescents.
Another survey was carried out in Australia by Martin et al. (2001) to evaluate the usage
of psychological tests and their application among 79 Australian psychologists employed
in government agencies, private practices, or organizations that offer court evaluations.
The MMPI and Wechsler Intelligence Scales are recognized as highly used tests, according
to the results. The MCMI was placed third, while the PAI was the second most popular
personality test.
Members of the American Psychology-Law Society Division of APA and American Board
of Forensic Psychology evaluated the psychological tests used in forensic examinations
(Archer et al., 2006). Participants were asked to describe how they used the exams in
specific areas, such as ability to stand trial, custody evaluations, and sex offender risk
assessments. Additionally, survey data was gathered for specific testing categories, such
as cognitive/intellectual tests, neuropsychological tests, multiscale inventories, and
single-scale evaluations. The results demonstrated that the most widely used clinical
assessment instruments in forensic examinations were the MMPI-2 and the Wechsler IQ
scores. The results also demonstrated the use of other assessment instruments in the
field of minors evaluation, such as the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and parent
self-report measures like the Parenting Stress Index (PSI), in addition to more well-
known instruments like the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and the Personality Inventory
for Children (PIC).
McLaughlin and Kan (2014) provided an update on the usage of assessment tools by 102
forensic examiners to assess nonsexual violence risk, reaction style/malingering,
competency to stand trial (CST), and mental state at the time of alleged offense (MSO).
The findings demonstrated that the type of assessment tool and forensic mental health
assessment had an impact on test usage. While multiscale inventory like MMPI-2, MMPI-
2, MCMI, and PAI were more frequently used in MSO assessments, FAIs/FRIs were most
frequently utilized in evaluations of reaction style/malingering, CST, and risk for
nonsexual violence. Evaluators used projective techniques the least across all four
forensic concerns (such as the Thematic Apperception Test and the Rorschach inkblot
Test).
The other key consideration for using psychological tests in forensic settings is how the
test results are interpreted. In general, all psychological test findings should be
interpreted in light of the standards group, which may limit their applicability in forensic
evaluation. Groth-Marnat (2003) asserts that a well-designed test incorporates both
fundamental standardized group norms and particular subgroup norms. A more
appropriate and significant interpretation of scores is made possible by an understanding
of each of these subgroup norms. Sadly, not all psychological tests are covered by this,
especially those used in forensic assessments. The MMPI-2-RF is an unusual since it is a
thorough assessment of psychopathology with fundamental criteria for healthy people
and a variety of comparison groups to support its application in populations of inmates,
personal injury claims, and custody evaluation litigants.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
158
Berger (2025) provides a well-structured and internationally agreed-upon framework,
the importance of which extends beyond traditional quality management. The ISO
21043-4 Interpretation standard, guided by principles such as rationality, transparency,
and relevance, includes standards and suggestions, as well as a common vocabulary and
support for both evaluative and investigative interpretations. According to the author,
the standard was developed with the goal of establishing uniformity and accountability
while allowing for the necessary flexibility across varied areas of expertise. Above all, he
believes that ISO 21043 represents a rare chance to integrate and enhance the discipline
of forensic science, as well as to strengthen the reliability of expert judgments and faith
in the justice system.
Indeed, ISO 21043-4 Interpretation focuses on the case’s issues and possible solutions
in the form of opinions. The standard recognizes that there are multiple ways to do
something correctly and provides the flexibility to accommodate it. At the same time,
this flexibility does not include doing things incorrectly in order to ensure the quality of
the forensic process.
The Interpretation ISO standard is based on the understanding that forensic science is
about asking questions and using science to assist answer those questions. Interpretation
explains what our observations signify in relation to the case’s central question. As a
result, some of the most important requirements are logical: what answers are possible,
and what information is needed? The standard’s fundamental structure is based on the
different types of inquiries and replies or opinions. All essential task information must be
considered, and all data, observations, and interpretation methods must be documented.
Any known limits or potential sources of mistake in the analysis and interpretation
processes must be documented and factored into the interpretation.
In our opinion, namely this ISO standard can become a foundation for approaching
national standards for forensic psychological examination in studying the motivational
structure of criminals, since it provides clear directions, necessary flexibility, and at the
same time implies obligatory nature of potential limitations, which could eliminate, for
example, cultural specifics to the maximum extent.
In recent years, several documents containing evaluative comments have been
published. The European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) issued the
“ENFSI Guideline for Evaluative Reporting in Forensic Science” in 2015. The Australia
New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (ANZPAA) released “An introductory guide to
evaluative reporting” in 2017. In 2021, the UK Forensic Science Regulator will publish
“Development of evaluative opinions: codes of practice and conduct for forensic service
providers”.
While these documents were important to varied degrees, none of them met international
standards or incorporated investigative opinion. The ISO 21043-4 Interpretation
standard is a truly global standard that covers both evaluative and investigative questions
and judgments. This is the initial two-way division in types of opinions: evaluative or
inquisitive.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
159
According to Mihaela (2025), the psychiatric evaluation of people charged with
international crimes such war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide has grown
to be an important yet challenging part of international criminal justice. In procedures
before international tribunals and courts, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC)
and ad hoc tribunals, this study investigates the function, extent, and constraints of
psychological evaluations. Psychological evaluations are frequently used to ascertain the
accused’s mental competence, their eligibility for trial, or the existence of personality
problems that would have affected their behavior. However, there are important ethical
and legal issues when psychological competence is incorporated into international legal
contexts. According to the author, obstacles include the potential of “pathologizing”
political or ideological motives, cultural and linguistic biases, as well as the absence of
standardized templates for assessment across different jurisdictions. Moreover,
assessments by forensic expert can also affect punishment, criminal responsibility, or
views of regret and rehabilitation, and this fact actually creates ethical dilemmas.
The above-mentioned ISO 21043-4 Interpretation can serve as a point of intersection of
approaching nation-states’ legal system peculiarities within forensic psychological
expertise, eliminating the effect of biases, adjusting cultural concerns, providing broader
perspective for criminals’ motivation analysis, impact of political landscape, etc.
Moreover, there is an evident need for a multidisciplinary strategy, in order to close the
gap between legal frameworks and psychological forensic science. It is needed to create
integrated systems that guarantee the uniform application of forensic techniques and
their conformity with legal requirements; policymakers, legal experts, and forensic
scientists must collaborate. This endeavor necessitates investments in infrastructure,
technology, and training in addition to the development of open procedures for gathering,
analyzing, and presenting evidence. In order for the legal and forensic communities to
comprehend one another and recognize the subtleties of each other’s fields, appropriate
education is essential. Collaborative research, interdisciplinary workshops, and
cooperative training programs are examples of initiatives that could improve criminal
justice systems’ efficacy.
Integrated approach has numerous potential advantages. Justice systems can increase
their accuracy, effectiveness, and trustworthiness by promoting a more harmonious
interaction between forensic science and legal frameworks. A system that maintains both
responsibility and fairness serves society as a whole, and both defendants and victims
can have more faith in the impartiality of court decisions. Furthermore, integration fosters
innovation since the cooperation of the legal and scientific sectors promotes the creation
of innovative approaches and instruments for addressing complicated crimes.
A coordinated, context-sensitive, and rights-based strategy is necessary to develop
interdisciplinary standards and ethical principles for psychological evaluations in
international criminal justice. Such criteria must draw from law, psychology, human
rights, ethics, and cross-cultural studies due to the complexity of international crimes
and the variety of cultural, legal, and psychological concerns involved. The development
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
160
of strong, equitable, and human rights-compliant frameworks can be guided by the
following essential components:
1. Creation of a multidisciplinary working group comprised of legal experts from
international criminal law institutions (ICC, ICTY, and ICTR), cross-culturally competent
clinical and forensic psychologists; human rights specialists; representatives of
vulnerable groups and civil society; and experts in medical law and ethics. In addition to
verifying compliance with international legal documents like the Rome Statute, the UN
Principles of Medical Ethics, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this
committee would be in charge of creating fundamental principles and harmonizing
current national standards.
2. Defining minimum ethical and procedural requirements (neutrality and independence
from political and prosecutorial influence; clear limitations of interpretation:
psychological findings must not be pushed to serve punitive or ideological aims).
3. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) for conducting interviews, gathering data, and
writing reports; triangulation of data (clinical observation, collateral information, and
self-report) to minimize bias and error; and the development of standardized
methodologies and tools (culturally adapted instruments that are validated for use across
diverse populations). Before being recognized as evidence, psychological instruments
should, if feasible, go through peer review and international validation procedures.
4. Forensic experts training and accreditation.
5. Establishing procedures for oversight and review (an impartial review board ought to
have the authority to keep an eye on the application of psychological evidence,
particularly in international cases).
Conclusion
International experience and evidence, revealed in the process of integrative review,
demonstrates that integrating psychological knowledge into law enforcement activities
significantly increases the effectiveness of investigations, contributes to the
humanization of criminal proceedings and the development of preventive strategies; at
the same time, the use of forensic psychological examinations in combination with
criminalistic, medical, and sociological methods allows for a deeper understanding of the
nature of criminal behavior, the formation of an objective picture of motives and the
creation of conditions for crime prevention at the institutional level.
Meanwhile, large gaps still exist in this integration within the criminal justice system,
despite the evident success in forensic psychology science evolution and the strong
structures of legal frameworks. These deficiencies manifest themselves as institutional,
procedural, instructional, and technical difficulties that compromise the effectiveness and
equity of court decisions. In order to have a coherent system where forensic evidence
and legal procedures coexist together and guarantee justice is done, it is imperative that
these gaps be filled.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
161
The study showed that although forensic psychological evaluations are crucial in
international trials, their use is inherent with serious methodological issues that can
compromise their validity, usefulness, and even applicability in court.
The absence of uniformity among international legal systems is a major challenge.
Psychological evaluations are neither consistently carried out nor consistently interpreted
because different courts may function under different procedural rules, definitions, and
evidentiary standards. Efforts to guarantee consistency and comparability of
assessments across instances and jurisdictions are complicated by this diversity.
Furthermore, psychological evaluations are extremely vulnerable to linguistic and cultural
biases, which can substantially undermine their validity, particularly in such a
complicated field as the motivations of criminals. Many evaluation instruments may not
fairly represent psychological functioning in people from diverse cultural backgrounds
since they were created and standardized in particular cultural contexts, frequently
Western ones.
Designing culturally sensitive techniques, enhancing interdisciplinary communication
between legal and mental health professionals, as well as establishing more precise
standards for psychological evaluations in international justice contexts are necessary
condition to address current problems.
References
Archer, R., Buffington-Vollum, J., Stredny, R., & Handel, R. (2006). A survey of
psychological test use patterns among forensic psychologists. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 87, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_07
Armeanu, A. (2018). The research of motivational factors and the psycho-behavioral
footprint of sexually motivated homicide. In Proceedings of the 10th International RAIS
Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities (Vol. 211, pp. 248–253). Atlantis Press.
211. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3266923
Baidya, A. (2022). Motivation in a forensic psychological perspective. International
Journal of Novel Research and Development, 7(9), 1697–1705.
http://doi.one/10.1729/Journal.31754
Bartol, C., & Bartol, N. (2016). Criminal behavior: A psychological approach.
London:Pearson.
Bateman, A. L., & Salfati, C. G. (2007). An examination of behavioral consistency using
individual behaviors or groups of behaviors in serial homicide. Behavioral Sciences & the
Law, 25(4), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.742
Berger, Ch. (2025). Finally a really forensic worldwide standard: ISO 21043 Forensic
sciences, Part 4, Interpretation. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 10, 100589.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2025.100589
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
162
Bouzin, J., Lopes, Th., Heavey, A., Parrish, J., Sauzier, G., & Lewis, S. (2023). Mind the
gap: The challenges of sustainable forensic science service provision. Forensic Science
International: Synergy, 6, 100318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2023.100318
Buongiorno, L., Mele, F., Petroni, G., Margari, A., Carabellese, F., Catanesi, R., &
Mandarelli, G. (2025). Cognitive biases in forensic psychiatry: A scoping review.
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 101, 102083.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102083
Chaimowitz, G., Mamak, M., Moulden, H., & Kingston, D. (Eds.). (2025). Global
perspectives in forensic psychiatry: International approaches to practice, policies, and
the law. London:Routledge.
Combalbert, N., Andronikof, A., Armand, M., Robin, C., & Bazex, H. (2014). Forensic
mental health assessment in France: Recommendations for quality improvement.
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 37(6), 628–634.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2014.02.037
De Roo, R., Gruijter, M., de Poot, Ch., Limborgh, J., & van den Hoven, P. (2022). The
added value of behavioural information in crime scene investigations. Forensic Science
International: Synergy, 5, 100290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100290
Duits, N., Van Der Hoorn, S., Wiznitzer, M., Wettstein, R. M., & de Beurs, E. (2012).
Quality improvement of forensic mental health evaluations and reports of youth in the
Netherlands. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 35(5–6), 440–444.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.09.018
El-Shenawy, O. (2017). Traditional psychological tests usage in forensic assessment.
HSOA Journal of Forensic, Legal & Investigative Sciences.
http://dx.doi.org/10.24966/FLIS-733X/100020
Eze, S. Alabi, K., Ibrahim, S., Yusuf, A., Hamzat, F., Abdulrauf, A., Atoyebi, A., Lawal, I.,
Ibrahim, O., Imam-Fulani, A., & Dare, B. (2025). Forensic psychology and criminal
profiling. Journal of Forensic Science and Research, 9(1), 092–096.
https://dx.doi.org/10.29328/journal.jfsr.1001085
Franco, J. & Svensgaard, A. (2011). Handbook on psychology of motivation: New
research. New York: Nova Science Pub.
Grossi, L. M., & Green, D. (2017). An international perspective on criminal responsibility
and mental illness. Practice Innovations, 2(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1037/pri0000037
Groth-Marnat, G. (2003). Handbook of psychological assessment. New York: John Wiley
& Sons.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Wells, J., & Young, S. (2011). Motivation for offending among
prisoners and the relationship with Axis I and Axis II disorders and ADHD symptoms.
Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 64–68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.08.023
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
163
Ha, S., Ma, F., & Zaldokas, A. (2024). Motivating collusion. Journal of Financial
Economics, 154, 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2024.103798
Heckhausen, H. (1977). Achievement motivation and its constructs: A cognitive model.
Motivation and Emotion, 1, 283–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992538
Jadidi, V. (2025). Psychological assessment standards in criminal sentencing. Advanced
Journal of Management, Humanity and Social Science, 1(4).
file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/Temp.pdf
Kocsis, R. (2006). Criminal profiling: Principles and practice. Totowa, NJ: Humana.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-109-3
Koegl, C. J., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). Advancing knowledge about motivations for
criminal offending. Victims & Offenders, 17(3), 313–334.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2021.1895940
Lees-Haley, P., Smith, H., Williams, C., & Dunn, J. (1996). Forensic neuropsychological
test usage: An empirical survey. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 11(1), 45–51.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0887-6177(95)00011-9
Liell, G., Fisher, M., & Jones, L. (Eds.). (2022). Challenging bias in forensic psychological
assessment and testing: Theoretical and practical approaches to working with diverse
populations. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003230977
Makarova, O. (2024). The influence of psychological characteristics of a personality on
the tactics of forensic psychiatric examination, Bulletin of Kharkiv National University of
Internal Affairs, 105(2 (Part 1)), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.32631/v.2024.2.16
Malvaso, C., Day, A., & Boyd, C. (2024). The outcomes of trauma-informed practice in
youth justice: An umbrella review. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 17(3), 939–
955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40653-024-00634-5
Martin, M.-A., Allan, A., & Allan, M. (2001). The use of psychological tests by Australian
psychologists who do assessments for the courts. Australian Journal of Psychology,
53(2), 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530108255127
Martynenko, N. (2024). Prospects of standardization of methodological support of
forensic expert activities in Ukraine. Theory and Practice of Public Administration, 2(79),
328–341. https://doi.org/10.26565/1727-6667-2024-2-16
McLaughlin, J., & Kan, L. (2014). Test usage in four common types of forensic mental
health assessment. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 45, 128–135.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036318
Mihaela, R. (2025). The psychological assessment of perpetrators of international crimes:
Judicial implications and ethical challenges in the context of international criminal justice.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Future of Social Sciences and
Humanities (Vol 3., Issue. 1, 2025, pp. 10–20). Diamond Scientific Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.33422/fshconf.v2i1.1251
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD3
Thematic Dossier - Rule of Law, Human Rights, and Institutional
Transformation in Times of Global and National Challenges
March 2026, pp. 136-164
International Standards for the Use of Forensic Psychological Examinations in Studying the
Motivational Structure of Criminals: Importance for Cooperation
Between Law Enforcement Agencies
Larysa Arkusha, Valerii Tishchenko, Yuliіa Hres, Oleksandr Chernov,
Vladlena Voloshyna, Iryna Kislitsyna
164
Mustaffa, M., Said, M., Nasrul, M., Hassan, M., Rajamanickam, R., & Dahlan, N. (2022).
Criminal profiling then and now: Prospect and challenges in Malaysia. Academic Journal
of Interdisciplinary Studies, 11(1), 80, https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2022-0007
Neal, T., Martire, K., Johan, J., Mathers, E., & Otto, R. (2022). The law meets
psychological expertise: Eight best practices to improve forensic psychological
assessment. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 18(1).
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-050420-010148
Neal, T., Slobogin, Ch., Saks, M., Faigman, D., & Geisinger, K. (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.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100619888860
Nestor, O., Polianskyi, V., & Lushchyk, M. A (2024). Systematic approach to the analysis
of ethical standards of forensic experts. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National
University Series Law, (38), 188–200. https://doi.org/10.26565/2075-1834-2024-38-21
Ohlsson, I. M., & Ireland, J. L. (2011). Aggression and offence motivation in prisoners:
Exploring the components of motivation in an adult male sample. Aggressive Behavior,
37(3), 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20386
Petherick, W., & Brooks, N. (2020). Reframing criminal profiling: A guide for integrated
practice. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 28(5), 694–710.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1837030
Rassin, E. (2021). ‘Anyone who commits such a cruel crime, must be criminally
irresponsible’: Context effects in forensic psychological assessment. Psychiatry,
Psychology and Law, 29(4), 506–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2021.1938272
Reddy, K. J. (2025). International Cases in Forensic Psychology: Inside the criminal mind.
London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003602927
Scarpazza, C., & Ghidini, E. (2023). Cognitive biases and their impact on judicial decision-
making Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 4, 757–780. https://doi.org/10.1421/109153
Tkachenko, N., Alieksieichuk, V., Yusupov, V., Myrovska, A., & Cherniavska, O. (2024).
Comparative analysis of models of organization of forensic activities: International
experience. Social and Legal Studios, 7(3), 55–65.
https://doi.org/10.32518/sals3.2024.55
Trenoweth, S., & Moone, N. (Eds.). (2017). Psychosocial assessment in mental health.
New York: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714784
Van Es, R., Kunst, M., & Keijser, J. (2020). Forensic mental health expert testimony and
judicial decision-making: A systematic literature review. Aggression and Violent
Behavior, 51, 101387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2020.101387