Stressors in forensic organizations: Risks and solutions

Interpol review of forensic management, 2019–2022

“…Quality assurance can be supported in several other ways, many but not all of which are tied to accreditation standards. The following is a non-exhaustive list of quality assurance methods, the details of which can be found either in other sections of this review or in the supporting texts cited: lean six sigma or total quality management approach to improve turnaround time and efficiency [ 11 , 116 , 117 ]; Daku,2019 [ 118 ]; the use of a LIMS or case management system [ 10 , 111 , 119 ]; blind proficiency testing [ 20 , 27 , 30 , 53 , 54 , 108 , 120 ]; improved education or certification of forensic scientists and technicians [ 15 , 20 , [29] , [30] , [31] , 36 , 40 , 52 , 115 , 121 ]; other stakeholders [ 10 , 40 , 58 ]; improvements in organizational culture and stress reduction [ 19 , 23 , 116 , 122 ]; laboratory independence [ 17 , 18 , 52 , 120 ]; effective use of regulation [ 15 , 16 , 31 , 109 ]; improvements in evidence chain of custody and storage [ 10 , 119 , 123 , 124 ]; improvements in crime scene management and testing standards [ 10 , 15 , 125 , 126 ]; and reduction of biases and conflicts of interest [ [15] , [16] , [17] , 20 , 21 , 52 , 53 , …”

“…Television and the media often make forensic science appear infallible to the lay audience, known as the CSI effect, yet experts know that forensic science is far from perfect [ 16 , 17 ]. When humans make subjective decisions, there is an opportunity for bias and error [ 122 ]. Although machines, artificial intelligence (AI), and computers will eventually replace some human decisions and reduce cognitive errors, humans will likely always be involved in some way in forensic laboratory management [ 129 ].…”

“…Technology risk management, data integrity, coding bias, etc. will continue to be issues humans will be involved in managing or addressing [ 119 , 122 , 129 , 130 ]. Besides, an AI driven laboratory is not quite yet the reality we live in, and human bias is still an important issue facing forensic science today that leads to error and miscarriage of justice.…”

“…Another source of human decision error is the psychological effects of stress working in a forensic laboratory environment. Whether through high managerial expectations that work is error free, high workloads causing fatigue, or the vicarious trauma many laboratory employees experience due to working on disturbing cases, a proper response to stress by management is needed [ 3 , 19 , 122 ]. Stress can lead to either unbiased errors, or biased errors if there is pressure to get the “right” answer or avoid inconclusive decisions [ 19 ].…”

Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019–2022

“…The FTCOE also published a human factors forensic science sourcebook 18 in March 2022 through open access articles in the journal Forensic Science International: Synergy . This sourcebook, which has general applicability rather than being specific to forensic DNA analysts, includes an overview article [ 31 ] along with articles on personnel selection and assessment [ 32 ], the benefits of committing errors during training [ 33 ], how characteristics of human reasoning and certain situations can contribute to errors [ 34 ], stressors that impact performance [ 35 ], and the impact of communication between forensic analysts and detectives using a new metaphor [ 36 ].…”