血迹分类方法:批判性回顾与未来展望

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Emma Hook , Sarah Fieldhouse , David Flatman-Fairs , Graham Williams
{"title":"血迹分类方法:批判性回顾与未来展望","authors":"Emma Hook ,&nbsp;Sarah Fieldhouse ,&nbsp;David Flatman-Fairs ,&nbsp;Graham Williams","doi":"10.1016/j.scijus.2024.06.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Classifying bloodstains is an essential part of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. Various experts have developed methods. Each method considers the same basic bloodstain pattern types. These use either terminology based on the observable characteristics or the mechanistic cause of the bloodstain patterns as part of the classification process. This review paper considers ten classification methods from fourteen sources, which are used to classify bloodstain patterns. There are fundamental differences in how the patterns are classified, how differentiated the classification is, and whether the classification process uses clear, unambiguous criteria, and is susceptible to contextual bias. Experts have also reported issues with classifying bloodstains that have indistinguishable features. These differences expose key limitations with current classification methods: mechanistic terminology is too heavily relied on, and the classification process is susceptible to contextual bias. The development of an unambiguous classification method, based on directly observable characteristics within bloodstain patterns is recommended for future work.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49565,"journal":{"name":"Science & Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000546/pdfft?md5=fba6a9f3a73875090285c86567e64aa1&pid=1-s2.0-S1355030624000546-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bloodstain classification methods: A critical review and a look to the future\",\"authors\":\"Emma Hook ,&nbsp;Sarah Fieldhouse ,&nbsp;David Flatman-Fairs ,&nbsp;Graham Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.scijus.2024.06.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Classifying bloodstains is an essential part of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. Various experts have developed methods. Each method considers the same basic bloodstain pattern types. These use either terminology based on the observable characteristics or the mechanistic cause of the bloodstain patterns as part of the classification process. This review paper considers ten classification methods from fourteen sources, which are used to classify bloodstain patterns. There are fundamental differences in how the patterns are classified, how differentiated the classification is, and whether the classification process uses clear, unambiguous criteria, and is susceptible to contextual bias. Experts have also reported issues with classifying bloodstains that have indistinguishable features. These differences expose key limitations with current classification methods: mechanistic terminology is too heavily relied on, and the classification process is susceptible to contextual bias. The development of an unambiguous classification method, based on directly observable characteristics within bloodstain patterns is recommended for future work.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science & Justice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000546/pdfft?md5=fba6a9f3a73875090285c86567e64aa1&pid=1-s2.0-S1355030624000546-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science & Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624000546\",\"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/S1355030624000546","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

血迹分类是血迹模式分析的重要组成部分。不同的专家制定了不同的方法。每种方法都考虑了相同的基本血迹模式类型。在分类过程中,这些方法或使用基于可观察特征的术语,或使用血迹模式的机理原因。本综述文件探讨了 14 个来源的 10 种分类方法,这些方法用于对血迹模式进行分类。这些方法在如何对血迹模式进行分类、分类的区分度、分类过程是否使用清晰明确的标准以及是否容易受到上下文的影响等方面存在根本性的差异。专家们还报告了对无法区分特征的血迹进行分类的问题。这些差异暴露了当前分类方法的主要局限性:过于依赖机械术语,分类过程容易受到上下文的影响。建议在今后的工作中,根据血迹模式中可直接观察到的特征,开发一种明确的分类方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bloodstain classification methods: A critical review and a look to the future

Classifying bloodstains is an essential part of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. Various experts have developed methods. Each method considers the same basic bloodstain pattern types. These use either terminology based on the observable characteristics or the mechanistic cause of the bloodstain patterns as part of the classification process. This review paper considers ten classification methods from fourteen sources, which are used to classify bloodstain patterns. There are fundamental differences in how the patterns are classified, how differentiated the classification is, and whether the classification process uses clear, unambiguous criteria, and is susceptible to contextual bias. Experts have also reported issues with classifying bloodstains that have indistinguishable features. These differences expose key limitations with current classification methods: mechanistic terminology is too heavily relied on, and the classification process is susceptible to contextual bias. The development of an unambiguous classification method, based on directly observable characteristics within bloodstain patterns is recommended for future work.

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