关于法医人类学认知偏差的态度和观点的全球调查

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Kiu Nga Leung, Sherry Nakhaeizadeh, Ruth M. Morgan
{"title":"关于法医人类学认知偏差的态度和观点的全球调查","authors":"Kiu Nga Leung,&nbsp;Sherry Nakhaeizadeh,&nbsp;Ruth M. Morgan","doi":"10.1016/j.scijus.2024.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>It is now well established that decision making can be susceptible to cognitive bias in a broad range of fields, with forensic science being no exception. Previously published research has revealed a bias blind spot in forensic science where examiners do not recognise bias within their own domain. A survey of 101 forensic anthropology practitioners (n = 52) and students (n = 38) was undertaken to assess their level of awareness of cognitive bias and investigate their attitudes towards cognitive bias within forensic anthropology. The results revealed that the forensic anthropology community (∼90%) had a high level of awareness of cognitive bias. Overall ∼89% expressed concerns about cognitive bias in the broad discipline of forensic science, their own domain of forensic anthropology, and in the evaluative judgments they made in reconstruction activities, identifying a significant reduction in the bias blind spot. However, more than half of the participants believed that bias can be reduced by sheer force of will, and there was a lack of consensus about implementing blinding procedures or context management. These findings highlight the need to investigate empirically the feasibility of proposed mitigating strategies within the workflow of forensic anthropologists and their capabilities for increasing the transparency in decision making.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49565,"journal":{"name":"Science & Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000303/pdfft?md5=f3804c5d9a6179ca05fa6803d1540604&pid=1-s2.0-S1355030624000303-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A global survey of the attitudes and perspectives of cognitive bias in forensic anthropology\",\"authors\":\"Kiu Nga Leung,&nbsp;Sherry Nakhaeizadeh,&nbsp;Ruth M. Morgan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.scijus.2024.04.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>It is now well established that decision making can be susceptible to cognitive bias in a broad range of fields, with forensic science being no exception. Previously published research has revealed a bias blind spot in forensic science where examiners do not recognise bias within their own domain. A survey of 101 forensic anthropology practitioners (n = 52) and students (n = 38) was undertaken to assess their level of awareness of cognitive bias and investigate their attitudes towards cognitive bias within forensic anthropology. The results revealed that the forensic anthropology community (∼90%) had a high level of awareness of cognitive bias. Overall ∼89% expressed concerns about cognitive bias in the broad discipline of forensic science, their own domain of forensic anthropology, and in the evaluative judgments they made in reconstruction activities, identifying a significant reduction in the bias blind spot. However, more than half of the participants believed that bias can be reduced by sheer force of will, and there was a lack of consensus about implementing blinding procedures or context management. These findings highlight the need to investigate empirically the feasibility of proposed mitigating strategies within the workflow of forensic anthropologists and their capabilities for increasing the transparency in decision making.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science & Justice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000303/pdfft?md5=f3804c5d9a6179ca05fa6803d1540604&pid=1-s2.0-S1355030624000303-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science & Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000303\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Justice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000303","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现在,人们已经清楚地认识到,在许多领域,决策都可能受到认知偏差的影响,法医学也不例外。之前发表的研究揭示了法医学中的偏见盲点,即检验人员无法识别自己领域中的偏见。我们对 101 名法医人类学从业人员(52 人)和学生(38 人)进行了调查,以评估他们对认知偏差的认识水平,并调查他们对法医人类学认知偏差的态度。结果显示,法医人类学界(∼90%)对认知偏差的认知水平较高。总体而言,89%的人对法医学这门广泛的学科、他们自己的法医人类学领域以及他们在重建活动中所做的评估判断中的认知偏差表示担忧,这表明偏差盲点显著减少。然而,半数以上的参与者认为可以通过意志力来减少偏见,而且在实施盲法程序或情境管理方面缺乏共识。这些发现突出表明,有必要在法医人类学家的工作流程中对所建议的减少偏差策略的可行性及其提高决策透明度的能力进行实证调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A global survey of the attitudes and perspectives of cognitive bias in forensic anthropology

It is now well established that decision making can be susceptible to cognitive bias in a broad range of fields, with forensic science being no exception. Previously published research has revealed a bias blind spot in forensic science where examiners do not recognise bias within their own domain. A survey of 101 forensic anthropology practitioners (n = 52) and students (n = 38) was undertaken to assess their level of awareness of cognitive bias and investigate their attitudes towards cognitive bias within forensic anthropology. The results revealed that the forensic anthropology community (∼90%) had a high level of awareness of cognitive bias. Overall ∼89% expressed concerns about cognitive bias in the broad discipline of forensic science, their own domain of forensic anthropology, and in the evaluative judgments they made in reconstruction activities, identifying a significant reduction in the bias blind spot. However, more than half of the participants believed that bias can be reduced by sheer force of will, and there was a lack of consensus about implementing blinding procedures or context management. These findings highlight the need to investigate empirically the feasibility of proposed mitigating strategies within the workflow of forensic anthropologists and their capabilities for increasing the transparency in decision making.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Science & Justice
Science & Justice 医学-病理学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
15.80%
发文量
98
审稿时长
81 days
期刊介绍: Science & Justice provides a forum to promote communication and publication of original articles, reviews and correspondence on subjects that spark debates within the Forensic Science Community and the criminal justice sector. The journal provides a medium whereby all aspects of applying science to legal proceedings can be debated and progressed. Science & Justice is published six times a year, and will be of interest primarily to practising forensic scientists and their colleagues in related fields. It is chiefly concerned with the publication of formal scientific papers, in keeping with its international learned status, but will not accept any article describing experimentation on animals which does not meet strict ethical standards. Promote communication and informed debate within the Forensic Science Community and the criminal justice sector. To promote the publication of learned and original research findings from all areas of the forensic sciences and by so doing to advance the profession. To promote the publication of case based material by way of case reviews. To promote the publication of conference proceedings which are of interest to the forensic science community. To provide a medium whereby all aspects of applying science to legal proceedings can be debated and progressed. To appeal to all those with an interest in the forensic sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信