A Quantitative Method for Estimation of Volume Changes in Arachnoid Foveae with Age

Cranial remains retained from fallen enemies are commonly referred to as "trophy skulls," and many such crania were acquired as souvenirs by U.S. servicemembers during WWII and the Vietnam conflict. These remains increasingly have become the subject of forensic anthropological analysis as their possessors, typically veterans or their relatives, try to discard or repatriate them. The present research uses a qualitative analytical approach to review 24 cases of reported trophy skulls (14 previously unpublished cases and 10 from the literature) to determine which perimortem and postmortem characteristics are most useful for generating a taphonomic profile. Overall, the taphonomic signature of trophy remains includes traits relating to acquisition and preparation, ornamental display, and subsequent curation. Contextual evidence and the biological profile also are considered when determining the possible origin of human cranial remains as a trophy skull. Thorough taphonomic analysis will aid in identifying these types of remains as trophy skulls.

Section: Taphonomic Characteristics Of Trophy Skullsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Taphonomic Analysis of 24 Trophy Skulls from Modern Forensic Cases^,

Yucha¹,

Pokines

Bartelink

2017

“…The problem of accurately measuring the size and shape of the human cranium is a subject of long‐standing interest among both forensic and physical anthropologists. Volume and surface area measurements of different craniofacial components have been used to elucidate ontogenetic and phylogenetic relationships in human evolution (1–4), as well as to determine the age, sex, or ethnicity of modern skeletal remains for forensic and medical purposes (5–9).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Variation in the Measurement of Cranial Volume and Surface Area Using 3D Laser Scanning Technology

Sholts

Wärmländer

Flores

et al. 2010

124

Three-dimensional (3D) laser scanner models of human crania can be used for forensic facial reconstruction, and for obtaining craniometric data useful for estimating age, sex, and population affinity of unidentified human remains. However, the use of computer-generated measurements in a casework setting requires the measurement precision to be known. Here, we assess the repeatability and precision of cranial volume and surface area measurements using 3D laser scanner models created by different operators using different protocols for collecting and processing data. We report intraobserver measurement errors of 0.2% and interobserver errors of 2% of the total area and volume values, suggesting that observer-related errors do not pose major obstacles for sharing, combining, or comparing such measurements. Nevertheless, as no standardized procedure exists for area or volume measurements from 3D models, it is imperative to report the scanning and postscanning protocols employed when such measurements are conducted in a forensic setting.

“…This positivist theoretical positionthat scientists can be purely objective-allows for concepts like reliability to be considered a methodological characteristic rather than an observer characteristic, with error studies focusing on the reliability of a particular method, rather than investigating how reliable forensic anthropologists are at using a particular method. As a result, publications in this sample often stated that a method was reliable or unreliable rather than stating that the observers were reliable or unreliable using a particular method (e.g., [49][50][51][52]). Further, while forensic scientists may not view their research and casework through a purely positivist lens, there is an undeniable trend in scientific writing to present methods and results as if they are a "matter of fact" instead of being chosen, analyzed, and interpreted by individual agents, the scientists [53].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hierarchy of expert performance as applied to forensic anthropology

Hartley

Winburn

2021

Due to their medicolegal repercussions, forensic anthropology conclusions must be reliable, consistent, and minimally compromised by bias. Yet, a synthetic analysis of the reliability and biasability of the discipline's methods has not yet been conducted. To do so, this study utilized Dror's (2016) hierarchy of expert performance (HEP), an eightlevel model aimed at examining intra-and inter-expert reliability and biasability (the potential for cognitive bias) within the literature of forensic science disciplines. A systematic review of the forensic anthropology literature was conducted (1972-present), including papers published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Forensic Anthropology, Forensic Science International, and the Journal of Forensic Sciences and Anthropology Section abstracts published in the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the AAFS which matched keywords such as "forensic anthropology," "bias," "reliability," "cognition," "cognitive," or "error." The resulting forensic anthropology HEP showcases areas that have ample research and areas where more research can be conducted. Specifically, statistically significant increases in reliability (p < 0.001) and biasability (p < 0.001) publications were found since 2009 (publication of the NAS report).Extensive research examined the reliability of forensic anthropological observations and conclusions (n = 744 publications). However, minimal research investigated the biasability of forensic anthropological observations and conclusions (n = 20 publications).Notably, while several studies demonstrated the biasing effect of extraneous information on anthropological morphological assessments, there was no research into these effects on anthropological metric assessments. The findings revealed by the forensic anthropology HEP can help to guide future research, ultimately informing the development and refinement of best-practice standards for the discipline.