Objectivity is a myth that harms the practice and diversity of forensic science

Abstract

Highlights Forensic science data are theory laden; pure scientific objectivity is a myth. Upholding this myth marginalizes forensic scientists with subjective positionalities Objectivity rhetoric is exclusive; ethical forensic science needs diverse perspectives. Espousing objectivity prevents us from supporting the communities we serve. Mitigated objectivity acknowledges implicit bias, constraining it via quality control.

Implementing an antiracist framework in forensic anthropology: Our responsibility in professional organizations and as scientists

“…The other argument presented by leading voices in the AAFS includes the claim that an antiracist framework compromises scientific objectivity and endangers the integrity of forensic anthropologists’ expert testimony. The stance that science (i.e., the systematic approach to generating knowledge) is objective, neutral, and impartial is one of the greatest myths of our time (Clemmons and Winburn 2021; Edmond 2003; Osler 1980; Winburn and Clemmons 2021). Scientific discourse is shaped by societal values and the dogmas and experiences of those who practice science, and this includes forensic anthropology (Clemmons and Winburn 2021).…”

Human and machine similarity judgments in forensic firearm comparisons

“…But subjective methods do have strengths (e.g., [ 18 , 19 ]). There is evidence that humans perform better than algorithms in a variety of tasks [ 20 ].…”

Response to letter to the editor of FSI: Synergy regarding Objectivity is a myth that harms the practice and diversity of forensic science

“…We certainly appreciate the importance of the technical standards and analytical procedures referenced by the author as vital bias-mitigation techniques, as this is a body of work which we detail not only in our Perspective [ 5 ] but also in our related research (e.g., Refs. [ 4 , 6 ].…”

“…Finally, we wish to address the critique that several of our statements “may just be interpreted as political opinions.” As we state in our Perspective [ 5 ]:3), “we must reject the dangerous assumption that adopting a humanistic stance on social issues undermines a forensic scientist's ‘objectivity’ with ‘political’ advocacy. Supporting historically marginalized groups is not a political issue; it is a human rights issue.…”