An experimental study of blind proficiency tests in forensic science

Abstract

Forensic science, Experimental economics, Proficiency test, Blind proficiency test, Epistemics, Experts, D02, D03, D73, C92, K14,

Using organizational economics to engage cultural key masters in creating change in forensic science administration to minimize bias and errors

“…A recent series of proposals provides insights on how to minimize these errors including: the basics of ‘competitive self-regulation’ with key changes including rivalrous redundancy of laboratories (Koppl, 2005), forensic experts for defense (Koppl and Cowan, 2010) and prosecution alike, ‘sequential unmasking’ (Krane et al ., 2008) effected through a neutral ‘evidence control officer’ (Risinger et al ., 2002) or ‘case manager’ (Krane et al ., 2008), independent laboratory selection (Giannelli, 1997), a quality-control feedback loop and blind proficiency tests (Whitman and Koppl, 2010). (For a more complete review of these proposed reforms, see Koppl, 2005, 2007.)…”

“…Bias and the potential for latent errors are built into this infrastructure and await combinations of actions that will cause the system to fail, i.e. convict an individual who is in fact innocent (Reason, 1990; Koppl and Cowan, 2010).…”

“…Potential outcomes of the modified mechanism design would include: (1) modifying the educational focus for forensic science to that of science; (2) screening the scientist from police and prosecution and defense (Risinger et al ., 2002); (3) having the forensic scientist witness for the evidence rather than the prosecution or defense (i.e. testifying before a court of law); (4) modifying the focus of professional societies associated with forensic science and creating a modified and more comprehensive set of ethics for forensic science (Koppl and Cowan, 2010); (5) recognizing professional work; (6) tying promotions in the laboratory or in the professional society to scientific advancement; and (7) tying remuneration to error reduction.…”

Implementation of a Blind Quality Control Program in a Forensic Laboratory

“…This recommendation states that forensic laboratories should conduct blind proficiency tests as a more precise test of an individual’s accuracy. In support of this recommendation, recent analysis of proficiency testing suggests that blind testing reduces error rates by as much as 46%, depending on the level of bias and potential for penalties received by the test taker . For penalties received by the test taker, the rate is reduced as much as 46% .…”

“…In support of this recommendation, recent analysis of proficiency testing suggests that blind testing reduces error rates by as much as 46%, depending on the level of bias and potential for penalties received by the test taker . For penalties received by the test taker, the rate is reduced as much as 46% . Blind testing also capitalizes on the Hawthorne effect , the tendency for people to alter their behaviors when they know they are being monitored, by providing a scenario in which potential bias associated with proficiency tests is controlled and reduced.…”