第一印象很重要:在指纹分析中进行概率报告的法医设备面临的世俗障碍。

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Simon A Cole,Justin L Sola
{"title":"第一印象很重要:在指纹分析中进行概率报告的法医设备面临的世俗障碍。","authors":"Simon A Cole,Justin L Sola","doi":"10.1177/03063127251333074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates why statistical reasoning has had little impact on the practice of friction ridge (or 'fingerprint') examination, despite both interest and some modest scientific progress toward this goal. Previous research has attributed this lack of results to practitioner resistance and legal apathy. This article seeks to complement those explanations through interviews with experts with a variety of perspectives on contemporary fingerprint practice about practical and mundane obstacles to the belated statistical revolution in fingerprinting. Based on these interviews, we argue that a 'forensic device' is required to incorporate statistical reasoning into fingerprint practice. This device would consist of a robust statistical model fronted by accessible, usable software. These components, in turn, require other components, such as large research data sets, markets, early adopters, government clients, education, and training. We conclude that the statistical revolution has been delayed not just by grand debates over the probabilistic nature of fingerprint evidence, but also by the seemingly mundane problems posed by developing and maintaining the kind of forensic device that would make such a revolution possible and practical.","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"73 1","pages":"3063127251333074"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"First impressions matter: Mundane obstacles to a forensic device for probabilistic reporting in fingerprint analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Simon A Cole,Justin L Sola\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03063127251333074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article investigates why statistical reasoning has had little impact on the practice of friction ridge (or 'fingerprint') examination, despite both interest and some modest scientific progress toward this goal. Previous research has attributed this lack of results to practitioner resistance and legal apathy. This article seeks to complement those explanations through interviews with experts with a variety of perspectives on contemporary fingerprint practice about practical and mundane obstacles to the belated statistical revolution in fingerprinting. Based on these interviews, we argue that a 'forensic device' is required to incorporate statistical reasoning into fingerprint practice. This device would consist of a robust statistical model fronted by accessible, usable software. These components, in turn, require other components, such as large research data sets, markets, early adopters, government clients, education, and training. We conclude that the statistical revolution has been delayed not just by grand debates over the probabilistic nature of fingerprint evidence, but also by the seemingly mundane problems posed by developing and maintaining the kind of forensic device that would make such a revolution possible and practical.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"3063127251333074\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127251333074\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127251333074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文调查了为什么统计推理对摩擦脊(或“指纹”)检查的实践几乎没有影响,尽管对这一目标既有兴趣,也有一些适度的科学进展。先前的研究将这种缺乏结果归因于从业者的抵制和法律冷漠。本文试图通过对专家的采访来补充这些解释,这些专家对当代指纹实践的各种观点,关于指纹识别中迟来的统计革命的实际和世俗障碍。基于这些访谈,我们认为需要一种“法医设备”来将统计推理纳入指纹实践。该设备将由一个健壮的统计模型组成,前端是可访问的、可用的软件。这些组成部分反过来又需要其他组成部分,如大型研究数据集、市场、早期采用者、政府客户、教育和培训。我们得出的结论是,统计革命之所以被推迟,不仅是因为对指纹证据的概率性进行了激烈的辩论,而且还因为开发和维护一种法医设备所带来的看似平凡的问题,而这种设备将使这种革命成为可能和实用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
First impressions matter: Mundane obstacles to a forensic device for probabilistic reporting in fingerprint analysis.
This article investigates why statistical reasoning has had little impact on the practice of friction ridge (or 'fingerprint') examination, despite both interest and some modest scientific progress toward this goal. Previous research has attributed this lack of results to practitioner resistance and legal apathy. This article seeks to complement those explanations through interviews with experts with a variety of perspectives on contemporary fingerprint practice about practical and mundane obstacles to the belated statistical revolution in fingerprinting. Based on these interviews, we argue that a 'forensic device' is required to incorporate statistical reasoning into fingerprint practice. This device would consist of a robust statistical model fronted by accessible, usable software. These components, in turn, require other components, such as large research data sets, markets, early adopters, government clients, education, and training. We conclude that the statistical revolution has been delayed not just by grand debates over the probabilistic nature of fingerprint evidence, but also by the seemingly mundane problems posed by developing and maintaining the kind of forensic device that would make such a revolution possible and practical.
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
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
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