Prof. Richard Kemp1, Associate Professor Carly Schreiver2, Associate Professor Kevin O'Sullivan2, Professor Jill Hunter1, Professor Kylie Burns3, Adjunct Professor Terese Henning4, Dist. Professor Sharyn Roach Anleu5, Professor Natalie Skead2,6, Professor Prue Vines1, Professor Kate Warner4, Chelsi Williams1, Monique Piggott1, Holly Braico1, Bojana Popovic1
1UNSW, Sydney, Australia, 2University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia, 3Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia, 4University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia, 5Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia, 6Singapore Judicial College, , Singapore
Biography:
Professor Richard Kemp is an applied cognitive and forensic psychologist working at UNSW, Sydney. Richard seeks to apply psychological research to aspects of the legal system.
Abstract:
The psychological health and wellbeing of judicial officers are of growing interest, nationally and internationally. A national survey was conducted which received responses from over 600 judicial officers from every Australian state and territory. Respondents completed several scales, including standardised measures of life satisfaction, psychological distress, and secondary trauma, together with a newly developed measure, the Judicial Attitudes to Work Scale (JAWS) which is designed to investigated the psychological impact of specific aspects of the judicial role and work environment.
Results indicate that while many judicial officers experience considerable job satisfaction, there is evidence of high levels of psychological distress and trauma. More than 30% of judicial officers experience symptoms associated with indirect exposure to trauma to a degree that warrants formal clinical assessment for PTSD. Critically, there are significant differences in the experience of judicial officers working in the lower courts (magistrates or local courts) compared to those working in higher courts. Judicial officers from the lower courts reported lower levels of life satisfaction, and higher levels of psychological distress and secondary trauma compared to judges in higher courts. These different experiences of judicial work were explored through the pattern of responses to the JAWS scale which provided further insight into the aspects of the job which were most stressful and those which provided most satisfaction.
These survey results are discussed in light of the uniquely isolated nature of judicial work, and its potential impact on both the health of the individuals concerned and the wider administration of justice.