Psychologists on the “psychological-linguistic examination” in the Pussy Riot case

The psychological and linguistic examination of the case of the punk group Pussy Riot became one of the central points of the trial. It is by reference to the text of the examination that the state prosecutor substantiates the guilt of the defendants in committing acts provided for in the relevant articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; it is on the conclusions of the experts that he bases his polemics with the defendants and their defense attorneys.

Since the examination is of fundamental importance for conclusions about the guilt or innocence of defendants, we, professional psychologists, want to express our opinion on its quality.

The examination is called psychological-linguistic, among the experts is Doctor of Psychological Sciences V.V. Abramenkova, and, judging by the preamble (p. 3), she is the main author - she played a key role in preparing the answers to the first two questions and was the only expert who prepared the answer to the third (last) question. However, despite the stated goals of the examination and the professional affiliation of one of the experts, the text of the examination does not contain elements of psychological analysis.

1. It is impossible to draw any definite conclusions about the motivation and direction of actions without analyzing the social context and the previous activities of the punk group, but this was not done. Limiting psychological analysis to a three-minute recording provides equal opportunity for alternative assumptions about motives and direction.

2. “Combining the sacred and the profane-base” can pursue directly opposite goals - both mockery and a demand to stop the ongoing mockery. Again, context analysis is required, and again it is missing.

3. Assessment of movements as “depraved”, “aggressive”, etc. cannot be based only on the subjective opinion of an expert. There are ways to assess elements of nonverbal communication in psychology, but they have not been used.

4. The assertion that the phrase “Mother of God, drive Putin away” is not an organic part of the text and was inserted there in order to give the matter a political overtone requires an analysis of the content of the song. The examination stated that content analysis was used, but a description of its results is not provided, and content analysis of a single short text cannot give definite results.

5. The results of psychosemantic analysis, which is also stated as one of the methods of psychological examination, are not presented (or are completely absent).

In general, the text is of a purely everyday nature with a number of references to ancient church codes and dictionaries and cannot be considered either a psychological or psychological-linguistic examination. And this despite the fact that the apparatus of modern psychological science provides certain opportunities for a professional answer to the questions posed to experts. For example, it would be possible to conduct an empirical psychosemantic analysis and, not limiting ourselves to unfounded statements, to determine the place of the terms used by the punk group in the semantic field. It would be possible to analyze the text in the context of other texts similar in content and style, considering the reactions to them of people similar in socio-demographic characteristics and religious affiliation to the group of victims. It would be possible to conduct in-depth interviews, relevant social-psychological experiments, and much more. The authors of the examination did nothing!

We are forced to state that the mention of psychology in the title of the examination is completely unfounded and discredits our profession.

List of signatories (at 14-00 Moscow on August 13, 2012 taken from the blog of M.S. Egorova http://services1.ht-line.ru/infolane/index.php?act=board&topic=1344781362X7204&extresp=2)

Egorova M.S., Doctor of Psychology

Andreeva G.M., Doctor of Psychology

Stefanenko T.G., Doctor of Psychology

Podolsky A.I., Doctor of Psychology

Allahverdov V.M., Doctor of Psychological Sciences

Sergienko E.A., Doctor of Psychology

Yurkevich V.S., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Zhamkochyan M.S., psychologist

Magun V.S., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Znakov V.V., Doctor of Psychology

Zelichenko A.I., psychologist, candidate of physical and mathematical sciences

Ledovaya Y.A., psychologist

Chetverikov A.A., psychologist

Leontyeva A.A., psychologist

Vladimirov I.Yu., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Leontyev D.A., Doctor of Psychology

Popova O.S., psychologist

Edrenkin I.V., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Tukachev Yu.A., psychologist

Savin E.Yu., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Chuprov L.F., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Poddyakov A.N., Doctor of Psychological Sciences

Alyokhina E.V., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Kagan V.E., Doctor of Medical Sciences (medical psychology and psychiatry)

Khlomov K.D., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Korneev A.A., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Bazarov T.Yu., Doctor of Psychology

Ulanovsky A.M., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Osin E.N., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Shcherbatykh Yu.V., Doctor of Biological Sciences (physiology and psychophysiology)

Chaley L.L., psychologist

Kryukova T.L., Doctor of Psychology

Martsinkovskaya T.D., Doctor of Psychology

Ulybina E.V., Doctor of Psychology

Yudina E.G., Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Belorusets A.S., psychologist

Voronin I.A., psychologist

Yaroshevskaya S.V., psychologist

Tsukerman G.A., Doctor of Psychology

Kudryavitsky A.R., psychologist

Bamburov K.A., psychologist

Zelichenko E.A., psychologist

Original

To sign the letter, leave a comment: Last name I.O., profession, academic degree (if any)