Conceptualising, evaluating and communicating uncertainty in forensic science: Identifying commonly used tools through an interdisciplinary configurative review

Abstract

This study provides a set of tools for conceptualising, evaluating and communicating uncertainty in forensic science. Given that the concept of uncertainty is one that transcends disciplinary boundaries, an interdisciplinary configurative review was carried out incorporating the disciplines of medicine, environmental science and economics, in order to identify common themes which could have valuable applications to the discipline of forensic science. Critical Interpretive Synthesis was used to develop sub-synthetic and synthetic constructs which interpreted and synthesised the underlying evidence and codes. This study provides three toolkits, one each for conceptualisation, evaluation and communication. The study identified an underlying theme concerning the obstacles that would need to be overcome for the effective application of these toolkits and achieving effective conceptualisation, evaluation and communication of uncertainty in forensic science to lay-stakeholders. These toolkits offer a starting point for developing the conversation for achieving greater transparency in the communication of uncertainty. They also have the potential to offer stakeholders enhanced understanding of the nuances and limitations of forensic science evidence and enable more transparent evaluation and scrutiny of the reliability, relevance and probative value of forensic materials in a crime reconstruction.

Using Eye-Tracking Technology to Quantify the Effect of Experience and Education on Forensic Anthropological Analyses

“…How experts make decisions, process visual cues, and interpret evidence is influenced by intrinsic and extrinsic factors (55). To understand these factors we can apply modern technologies like eye-tracking capabilities.…”

Unpacking Workplace Stress and Forensic Expert Decision-Making: From Theory to Practice

“…Decision contexts vary in their levels of (un)certainty (Levy et al, 2010;Morgado et al, 2015): Sometimes the consequence of a decision is clear (e.g., paying $5 for a sandwich will result in having a sandwich), but other times the consequence is difficult or impossible to predict (e.g., gambling $5 in a casino which could result in a win or loss). Many forensic decisions are made under conditions of uncertainty (Georgiou et al, 2020) insofar as 'ground truth' (e.g., what actually happened at a scene, whether two fingermarks/cartridges actually belong to the same person/gun) is typically unknown. External sources of stress and uncertainty may therefore interact to affect decisionmaking.…”

Regaining creativity in science: insights from conversation

“…In broader societal settings too, science is often perceived as being an orderly, logical, methodical approach that offers clarity. When science is used in advertising or policy making to back up a specific understanding of a situation or messages about an issue or a product, inherent limitations or levels of uncertainty are not clearly incorporated into that messaging [ 31 ]. In some contexts, the attributes of variability, uncertainty and the evolution of understanding that are all intrinsic to science in its broadest terms are neglected in favour of a perception of science that offers more definitive and clear insights.…”