减轻司法案件中认知偏见影响的实用方法。

Q1 Social Sciences
Carolina Rojas Alfaro , Diego Ureña Mora , Mauricio Chacón Hernández , Adele Quigley-McBride
{"title":"减轻司法案件中认知偏见影响的实用方法。","authors":"Carolina Rojas Alfaro ,&nbsp;Diego Ureña Mora ,&nbsp;Mauricio Chacón Hernández ,&nbsp;Adele Quigley-McBride","doi":"10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Historically, forensic science results have been admitted in court, with minimal scrutiny regarding their scientific validity. However, following the National Academy of Sciences (NAS, 2009) report, the forensic community has undergone a significant transformation. This shift has demonstrated that forensic scientists and laboratories want to ensure the scientific rigor and quality of their results, but that they are often uncertain where to begin when addressing concerns about error and bias. In response to these challenges, the Department of Forensic Sciences in Costa Rica designed and began a pilot program within the Questioned Documents Section of the laboratory. This program incorporates various existing research-based tools, including Linear Sequential Unmasking-Expanded, Blind Verifications, case managers, and other important mitigation strategies to enhance the reliability of and reduce subjectivity in forensic evaluations. This article discusses the journey from initial planning through to implementation and the impact of the strategies that were adopted. The article describes how the Department systematically addressed key barriers to implementation and maintenance after implementation, providing a model to other laboratories for prioritizing resource allocation. This successful pilot program demonstrates that there are feasible and effective changes that can mitigate bias, and this article presents evidence that existing recommendations in the literature can be used within laboratory systems to reduce error and bias in practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36925,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","volume":"10 ","pages":"Article 100569"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11720873/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A practical approach to mitigating cognitive bias effects in forensic casework\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Rojas Alfaro ,&nbsp;Diego Ureña Mora ,&nbsp;Mauricio Chacón Hernández ,&nbsp;Adele Quigley-McBride\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Historically, forensic science results have been admitted in court, with minimal scrutiny regarding their scientific validity. However, following the National Academy of Sciences (NAS, 2009) report, the forensic community has undergone a significant transformation. This shift has demonstrated that forensic scientists and laboratories want to ensure the scientific rigor and quality of their results, but that they are often uncertain where to begin when addressing concerns about error and bias. In response to these challenges, the Department of Forensic Sciences in Costa Rica designed and began a pilot program within the Questioned Documents Section of the laboratory. This program incorporates various existing research-based tools, including Linear Sequential Unmasking-Expanded, Blind Verifications, case managers, and other important mitigation strategies to enhance the reliability of and reduce subjectivity in forensic evaluations. This article discusses the journey from initial planning through to implementation and the impact of the strategies that were adopted. The article describes how the Department systematically addressed key barriers to implementation and maintenance after implementation, providing a model to other laboratories for prioritizing resource allocation. This successful pilot program demonstrates that there are feasible and effective changes that can mitigate bias, and this article presents evidence that existing recommendations in the literature can be used within laboratory systems to reduce error and bias in practice.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36925,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic Science International: Synergy\",\"volume\":\"10 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100569\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11720873/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic Science International: Synergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X24001165\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X24001165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从历史上看,法医科学结果在法庭上被承认,对其科学有效性的审查很少。然而,根据美国国家科学院(NAS, 2009)的报告,法医学界经历了重大转变。这种转变表明,法医科学家和实验室希望确保其结果的科学严谨性和质量,但在解决对错误和偏见的担忧时,他们往往不确定从哪里开始。为了应对这些挑战,哥斯达黎加法医科学部在该实验室的问题文件科内设计并开始了一项试点方案。该方案结合了各种现有的基于研究的工具,包括线性顺序解掩膜扩展、盲验证、案例管理器和其他重要的缓解策略,以提高法医评估的可靠性并减少主观性。本文讨论了从最初的规划到实施的过程,以及所采用的策略的影响。本文描述了该部门如何系统地解决实施和实施后维护的关键障碍,为其他实验室优先分配资源提供了一个模型。这一成功的试点项目表明,有可行和有效的改变可以减轻偏见,本文提供的证据表明,文献中现有的建议可以在实验室系统中使用,以减少实践中的错误和偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A practical approach to mitigating cognitive bias effects in forensic casework
Historically, forensic science results have been admitted in court, with minimal scrutiny regarding their scientific validity. However, following the National Academy of Sciences (NAS, 2009) report, the forensic community has undergone a significant transformation. This shift has demonstrated that forensic scientists and laboratories want to ensure the scientific rigor and quality of their results, but that they are often uncertain where to begin when addressing concerns about error and bias. In response to these challenges, the Department of Forensic Sciences in Costa Rica designed and began a pilot program within the Questioned Documents Section of the laboratory. This program incorporates various existing research-based tools, including Linear Sequential Unmasking-Expanded, Blind Verifications, case managers, and other important mitigation strategies to enhance the reliability of and reduce subjectivity in forensic evaluations. This article discusses the journey from initial planning through to implementation and the impact of the strategies that were adopted. The article describes how the Department systematically addressed key barriers to implementation and maintenance after implementation, providing a model to other laboratories for prioritizing resource allocation. This successful pilot program demonstrates that there are feasible and effective changes that can mitigate bias, and this article presents evidence that existing recommendations in the literature can be used within laboratory systems to reduce error and bias in practice.
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
75
审稿时长
90 days
×
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