This article addresses how characteristics of human reasoning (either specific to an individual or in general) and characteristics of situations (either specific to a case or in general in a lab) can contribute to errors before, during, or after forensic analyses.
The success of forensic science depends heavily on human reasoning abilities. Although we typically navigate our lives well using those abilities, decades of psychological science research shows that human reasoning is not always rational. In addition, forensic science often demands that its practitioners reason in non-natural ways. In feature comparison judgments, such as fingerprints or firearms, a main challenge is to avoid biases from extraneous knowledge or arising from the comparison method itself. In causal and process judgments, for example fire scenes or pathology, a main challenge is to keep multiple potential hypotheses open as the investigation continues. Considering the contributions to forensic science judgments by persons, situations, and their interaction, reveals ways to develop procedures to decrease errors and improve accuracy. (Publisher Abstract)
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Extraction of Ignitable Liquid Residues by Dynamic Capillary Headspace Sampling and Comparison to the Carbon Strip Method
- Criticality of Spray Solvent Choice on the Performance of Next Generation, Spray-Based Ambient Mass Spectrometric Ionization Sources: A Case Study Based on Synthetic Cannabinoid Forensic Evidence
- Recovery and Detection of Ignitable Liquid Residues from the Substrates by Solid Phase Microextraction – Direct Analysis in Real Time Mass Spectrometry