Does suggestive information cause a confirmation bias in bullet comparisons?

Kerstholt, Johanna Helena; Eikelboom, A.R.; Dijkman, Tjisse; Stoel, Reinoud D.; Hermsen, Rob; Leuven, Bert van

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.02.007

Cited by 48 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When considering the reliability of any forensic method, it is important to assess whether factors outside of the evidence can influence the reliability of interpretations. In particular, a growing body of research has demonstrated that expert interpretations may be influenced by the presentation of contextual information (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Reliability of Pattern Classification in Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, Part 1: Bloodstain Patterns on Rigid Non‐absorbent Surfaces

Taylor

Laber²,

Kish

et al. 2016

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to produce the first baseline measure of reliability in bloodstain pattern classification. A panel of experienced bloodstain pattern analysts examined over 400 spatter patterns on three rigid non-absorbent surfaces. The patterns varied in spatter type and extent. A case summary accompanied each pattern that either contained neutral information, information to suggest the correct pattern (i.e., was positively biasing), or information to suggest an incorrect pattern (i.e., was negatively biasing). Across the variables under examination, 13% of classifications were erroneous. Generally speaking, where the pattern was more difficult to recognize (e.g., limited staining extent or a patterned substrate), analysts became more conservative in their judgment, opting to be inconclusive. Incorrect classifications increased as a function of the negatively biasing contextual information. The implications of the findings for practice are discussed.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Reliability of Pattern Classification in Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, Part 1: Bloodstain Patterns on Rigid Non‐absorbent Surfaces

Taylor

Laber²,

Kish

et al. 2016

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, given the multitude and diversity of forensic science disciplines, researchers should exercise some caution in generalizing results across disciplines that may vary in their vulnerability to bias. For example, at least two studies failed to find confirmation bias effects among professional shoeprint (Kerstholt, Paashuis, & Sjerps, 2007) and firearms (Kerstholt et al, 2010) examiners in the Netherlands. The authors of these studies speculated that these domains experience less risk of bias because they utilize a highly standardized methodology (though there are other possible explanations for these null effects; see Kukucka, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of evidence lineups on fingerprint expert decisions

Kukucka

Dror

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Forensic examiners routinely compare a crime‐relevant mark of unknown origin against a single suspect's sample, which may create an expectation that the two will match. We tested how embedding the suspect's sample among known‐innocent fillers (i.e., an evidence lineup) affects expert decision‐making. Experienced fingerprint examiners (N = 43) compared crime‐relevant marks against either individual suspect fingerprints (i.e., the standard procedure) or arrays of fingerprints (i.e., evidence lineups), with a matching fingerprint either present or absent. Evidence lineups promoted conservative decision‐making, as evidenced by fewer correct IDs and a higher rate of inconclusive judgments. Though errors were rare, evidence lineups also occasionally revealed errors that would have otherwise gone undetected. Our findings thus support arguments that evidence lineups can expose fraud, identify flawed methodologies, and curb overconfidence. The potential benefits and challenges of implementing evidence lineups in forensic laboratories are discussed.

show abstract

“…This is not a new claim, neither in decision science (10) nor forensic science (8,9). Further, in a number of experimental investigations (11)(12)(13), it was found that task-irrelevant contextual information (with no probative value as defined in the Letter) may have no significant impact on the accuracy of judgments in forensic analysis. Further, Stevenage and Bennett (14) found that knowledge of task-irrelevant contextual information could even be beneficial, as the effects of said information were dependent on the ground truth of the forensic evidence being analyzed (i.e., did the contextual information confirm or disconfirm the accurate decision).…”

Section: Methodological Issues In Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%