Journal
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Volume 119, Issue 38, Pages -Publisher
NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2206567119
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- Conrad T. Prebys Endowed Chair in Vision Science at The Salk Institute for Biological Studies
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Much of forensic practice today involves human decisions about patterned sensory evidence. The high costs of failure in forensic pattern comparison disciplines have led to calls for caution and improvement. The scientific community studying human information processing offers valuable perspectives to enhance forensic practices.
Much of forensic practice today involves human decisions about the origins of patterned sensory evidence, such as tool marks and fingerprints discovered at a crime scene. These decisions are made by trained observers who compare the evidential pattern to an exemplar pattern produced by the suspected source of the evidence. The decision consists of a determination as to whether the two patterns are similar enough to have come from the same source. Although forensic pattern comparison disciplines have for decades played a valued role in criminal investigation and prosecution, the extremely high personal and societal costs of failure-the conviction of innocent people-has elicited calls for caution and for the development of better practices. These calls have been heard by the scientific community involved in the study of human information processing, which has begun to offer much-needed perspectives on sensory measurement, discrimination, and classification in a forensic context. Here I draw from a well-established theoretical and empirical approach in sensory science to illustrate the vulnerabilities of contemporary pattern comparison disciplines and to suggest specific strategies for improvement.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available