ISO Standards Addressing Issues of Bias and Impartiality in Forensic Work

Self Cite

Establishing error rates is crucial for knowing how well one is performing, determining whether improvement is needed, measuring whether interventions are effective, as well as for providing transparency. However, the flurry of activities in establishing error rates for the forensic sciences has largely overlooked some fundamental issues that make error rates a problematic construct and limit the ability to obtain a meaningful error rate. These include knowing the ground truth, establishing appropriate databases, determining what counts as an error, characterizing what is an acceptable error rate, ecological validity, and transparency within the adversarial legal system. Without addressing these practical and theoretical challenges, the very notion of a meaningful error rate is limited.

Section: Provide Transparency To Users or Consumersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ecological Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Error in “Error Rate”: Why Error Rates Are So Needed, Yet So Elusive

Dror

2020

Self Cite

“…There are numerous benefits of blind proficiency testing, which substantiate its advantage over open proficiency testing, for both management and the individual analyst. From a management perspective, blind testing is a more accurate check of the laboratory system and therefore allows for a better understanding of the whole system as well as discrete aspects of it, such as the analysis method, standard operating procedure, and review process (10). For example, if the wrong result is obtained, then the analysis method, data collected, instruments involved, and staff who carried out the procedures should be reviewed.…”

Section: Benefits To Users Of Blind Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Implementation of an Effective Blind Proficiency Testing Program

Pierce

Cook

2020

Self Cite

Blind proficiency testing is ideal for testing crime laboratory personnel because the elements of analyst bias and anticipation are removed. However, sending proficiency tests through the laboratory system as real casework is difficult. The substantial challenges with preparing and administering blind tests may prevent laboratory managers from initiating blind testing. In 2015, the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences committed to improving its crime laboratory's proficiency testing program by adding blind tests. The goal was to test the whole system, from evidence receipt to report release. With careful planning, trial-and-error, and ongoing assessment of available resources, not only was the program proven to be feasible, but there was also clear understanding of how to optimize our program. In this article, we share our experiences, lessons learned, and program details to assist other forensic service providers with developing their own blind testing programs, which would ultimately lead to improved quality assurance.

“…Feedback is a critical factor in its own right that can impact well-being and performance (24), as it can have implications for the motivation, expectations, and the decision-making of forensic examiners (e.g., questions 8 and 9 in [25]). Therefore, understanding the ways feedback given to forensic examiners and how it may affect the decision-making of forensic examiners is important for understanding the context in which decisions are made (18,26). This has the potential to impact the entire crime reconstruction process (27).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During casework, forensic examiners communicate and receive feedback from a variety of sources, which can be categorized into five domains: forensic services, investigative, legal, public (26), and regulatory (18) domains (see Fig. 1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational and Human Factors Affecting Forensic Decision‐Making: Workplace Stress and Feedback

Almazrouei

Dror

Morgan

2020

Self Cite

Although forensic examiners operate in a stressful environment, there is a lack of understanding about workplace stress and feedback. These organizational and human factors can potentially impact forensic science judgments. In this study, 150 practicing forensic examiners from one laboratory were surveyed about their experiences of workplace stress, and the explicit and implicit feedback they receive. Forensic examiners reported that their high stress levels originated more from workplace-related factors (management and/or supervision, backlogs, and the pressure to do many cases) than from personal related factors (family, medical, and/or financial). The findings showed that a few (8%) of the forensic examiners sometimes felt strong implicit feedback about what conclusions were expected from them and that some (14%) also strongly felt that they were more appreciated when they helped to solve a case (e.g., by reaching a "match" as opposed to an "inconclusive" conclusion). Differences were found when comparing workplace stress and feedback levels across three core forensic science fields (forensic biology, chemistry, and latent prints) and across career stages (early, mid, and late). Gaining insights into the stress factors within a workplace and explicit and implicit feedback has implications for developing policies to improve the well-being, motivation, and performance of forensic examiners.