Subjectivity and bias in forensic DNA mixture interpretation

Dror, Itiel E.; Hampikian, Greg

doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004

Cited by 272 publications

(201 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

193

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example; there has recently been detailed discussion of likely sources and consequences of biases and subjectivity in the interpretation of investigative evidence [3,4,5,16]. Krane et al [3] observe that practitioners will often have been exposed to information about a criminal case and/or potential suspect(s) before commencing any form of forensic analysis, creating the opportunity for confirmatory or expectancy biases to occur regardless of the best intentions of the analyst.…”

Section: The Pertinence Of Cognitive Bias To the Forensic And Investimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Krane et al [3] observe that practitioners will often have been exposed to information about a criminal case and/or potential suspect(s) before commencing any form of forensic analysis, creating the opportunity for confirmatory or expectancy biases to occur regardless of the best intentions of the analyst. Indeed, Dror and Hampikian [4] present direct evidence to show that the interpretation of complex DNA mixtures can be biased by a practitioner's knowledge of the extraneous circumstances of the criminal case.…”

Section: The Pertinence Of Cognitive Bias To the Forensic And Investimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, he demonstrates that the values of such methods are rarely taught in science-based disciplines [38]. However, it is clear that things need change if the objectivity at the very heart of the discipline is to be preserved [4].…”

Section: The Need For Universal Uptake Of Double-blind Procedures Acrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whilst the potential for biases and subjectivity effects in forensic science disciplines has been discussed for a number of years [1,2,3] only recently has the question of the true objectivity of forensic practices come to the fore [4], largely as a result of the National Academy of Science (NAS) report on Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States [4]. A number of empirical studies have begun to emerge which, between them, demonstrate the range of impacts that practitioners can have on the reliability and consequent validity of evidential evaluations [4,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of empirical studies have begun to emerge which, between them, demonstrate the range of impacts that practitioners can have on the reliability and consequent validity of evidential evaluations [4,6]. More specifically, these works have demonstrated that extraneous knowledge of the details of a case can influence the interpretation of evidence pertaining to that case by forensic practitioners [3,4,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Cognitive bias in line-up identifications: The impact of administrator knowledge

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior knowledge of the likely or expected outcome of a forensic investigation has been shown to produce biases in results obtained, reducing objectivity within the forensic sciences. The wide prevalence of such cognitive biases has long been recognised by social psychologists, but its significance is only now gaining appreciation within forensic science communities. It is therefore timely to draw attention to the power of cognitive biases found in a study of the influence of administrator expectations on photographic identifications. Data are presented to show that when a line-up administrator knows the identity and position of a target within a line-up that target is more than twice as likely to be selected compared with when the administrator is kept 'blind'. These findings, taken together with related studies, support the recommendation that all forensic analyses are made 'double-blind'-a method that has proven to be effective at reducing such effects within the social science literature.

show abstract

Section: The Pertinence Of Cognitive Bias To the Forensic And Investimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Pertinence Of Cognitive Bias To the Forensic And Investimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Need For Universal Uptake Of Double-blind Procedures Acrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cognitive bias in line-up identifications: The impact of administrator knowledge

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Minimizing Contextual Bias in Forensic Firearms Examinations

Mattijssen

Stoel

Kerkhoff

2015

Wiley Encyclopedia of Forensic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solutions to cognitive and human factor challenges in forensic science are emerging [Dror, I.E. (2014). Practical solutions to cognitive and human factor challenges in forensic science, Forensic Science Policy & Management 4(3–4), 1–9.], but have not yet been widely communicated let alone applied in practice. Within the discipline of forensic firearms examination, a procedure has been developed and implemented that minimizes the effects of domain‐irrelevant information and maximizes the utilization of domain‐relevant information. This procedure, termed context management , is described and for this we distinguish between different types of contextual information that an examiner may come across. Contextual information may come from the trace (Level 1), the reference material (Level 2), the case information (Level 3), and the “base rate” information (Level 4) [Stoel, R., Berger, C., Kerkhoff, W., Mattijssen, E.J.A.T. & Dror, I. (2014). Minimizing Contextual Bias in Forensic Casework, in Forensic Science and the Administration of Justice: Critical Issues and Directions , p. 67–86, SAGE.]. By going through the steps of the examination of a typical comparison case (i.e., checking and acceptance of the case, preassessment of the case, comparison of the markings, and peer review and reporting), it is illustrated how and when contextual information may influence the examiners' judgment and how this influence can be minimized by implementing context management.

show abstract

Forensic Anthropology and Cognitive Bias

Nakhaeizadeh

Morgan

2015

Wiley Encyclopedia of Forensic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of cognitive bias in forensic science is being empirically tested within a number of forensic domains. The presence and impact of cognitive interpretation issues within the domain of forensic anthropology have yet to be fully recognized in much of the published literature. However, the experimental studies that have been carried out to examine the effect of external manipulations on judgment and decision‐making in forensic anthropological methods have revealed a significant influence. Current empirical findings focus on the visual interpretation of skeletal remains and the degree to which biases may occur when conducting a biological profile. This article deals with the influence of cognitive bias in forensic anthropological methods, with special emphasis on non‐metric assessments. It highlights the degree to which cognitive biases can potentially influence the forensic anthropologists' judgments and interpretations. It also provides recommendations for the mitigation of this effect to ensure that the value of forensic anthropology continues to develop and aid forensic investigations.

show abstract

Subjectivity and bias in forensic DNA mixture interpretation

Cited by 272 publications

References 22 publications

Cognitive bias in line-up identifications: The impact of administrator knowledge

Cognitive bias in line-up identifications: The impact of administrator knowledge

Minimizing Contextual Bias in Forensic Firearms Examinations

Forensic Anthropology and Cognitive Bias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About