Premium
A Perspective on Errors, Bias, and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences and Direction for Continuing Advancement *
Author(s) -
Budowle Bruce,
Bottrell Maureen C.,
Bunch Stephen G.,
Fram Robert,
Harrison Diana,
Meagher Stephen,
Oien Cary T.,
Peterson Peter E.,
Seiger Danielle P.,
Smith Michael B.,
Smrz Melissa A.,
Soltis Greg L.,
Stacey Robert B.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of forensic sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.715
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1556-4029
pISSN - 0022-1198
DOI - 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01081.x
Subject(s) - clarity , documentation , accreditation , interpretation (philosophy) , quality (philosophy) , human error , engineering ethics , data science , computer science , psychology , medical education , engineering , medicine , risk analysis (engineering) , epistemology , biochemistry , chemistry , philosophy , programming language
The forensic sciences are under review more so than ever before. Such review is necessary and healthy and should be a continuous process. It identifies areas for improvement in quality practices and services. The issues surrounding error, i.e., measurement error, human error, contextual bias, and confirmatory bias, and interpretation are discussed. Infrastructure is already in place to support reliability. However, more definition and clarity of terms and interpretation would facilitate communication and understanding. Material improvement across the disciplines should be sought through national programs in education and training, focused on science, the scientific method, statistics, and ethics. To provide direction for advancing the forensic sciences a list of recommendations ranging from further documentation to new research and validation to education and to accreditation is provided for consideration. The list is a starting point for discussion that could foster further thought and input in developing an overarching strategic plan for enhancing the forensic sciences.