Forensic judgment and decision making
Forensic judgment and decision making
This chapter describes the decision making process by forensic experts. Forensic testimony is generally considered more reliable than most other forms of evidence and plays a key role in establishing guilt or innocence. Despite exaggerations in the media, automated, computerized methods are of limited capability and require experts to make judgment calls at various steps. Abductive reasoning is often required, perhaps inviting confirmation bias, particularly with decision making often based on reaching weight-of-evidence thresholds. Forensic scientists are expected to help find a conclusive outcome rather than the probabilistic one more compatible with scientific reasoning, and the need for rapid closure can lead to decisions based on incomplete data. Yet the interpretation of bottom-up information based on top-down information may lead to distortions, as in any type of data-driven decision making. Many of the same biases and difficulties that undermine human reasoning in other contexts reappear here too.
forensic testimony, decision making, judgment calls, abductive reasoning, confirmation bias, distortion
9780199856800
385-415
Fraser-Mackenzie, Peter A.F.
0582f787-6e98-45ec-aeb5-4e563f3f39c5
Bucht, Rebecca E.
55b31e1b-70e6-430a-9861-1bec6601a9cb
Dror, Itiel E.
4d907da2-0a2e-41ed-b927-770a70a35c71
2013
Fraser-Mackenzie, Peter A.F.
0582f787-6e98-45ec-aeb5-4e563f3f39c5
Bucht, Rebecca E.
55b31e1b-70e6-430a-9861-1bec6601a9cb
Dror, Itiel E.
4d907da2-0a2e-41ed-b927-770a70a35c71
Fraser-Mackenzie, Peter A.F., Bucht, Rebecca E. and Dror, Itiel E.
(2013)
Forensic judgment and decision making.
In,
Comparative Decision Making.
Oxford, GB.
Oxford University Press, .
(doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199856800.003.0038).
Record type:
Book Section
Abstract
This chapter describes the decision making process by forensic experts. Forensic testimony is generally considered more reliable than most other forms of evidence and plays a key role in establishing guilt or innocence. Despite exaggerations in the media, automated, computerized methods are of limited capability and require experts to make judgment calls at various steps. Abductive reasoning is often required, perhaps inviting confirmation bias, particularly with decision making often based on reaching weight-of-evidence thresholds. Forensic scientists are expected to help find a conclusive outcome rather than the probabilistic one more compatible with scientific reasoning, and the need for rapid closure can lead to decisions based on incomplete data. Yet the interpretation of bottom-up information based on top-down information may lead to distortions, as in any type of data-driven decision making. Many of the same biases and difficulties that undermine human reasoning in other contexts reappear here too.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 2013
Keywords:
forensic testimony, decision making, judgment calls, abductive reasoning, confirmation bias, distortion
Organisations:
Southampton Business School
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 374601
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/374601
ISBN: 9780199856800
PURE UUID: ed5de8f0-4561-4576-86d3-0322d50d54f8
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 24 Feb 2015 11:11
Last modified: 12 Sep 2024 17:10
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Peter A.F. Fraser-Mackenzie
Author:
Rebecca E. Bucht
Author:
Itiel E. Dror
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics