Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep 29:7:100437.
doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2023.100437. eCollection 2023.

The interpretation of forensic conclusions by professionals and students: Does experience matter?

Elmarije K van Straalen  1   2 , Christianne J de Poot  1   2   3 , Marijke Malsch  4   5 , Henk Elffers  4
Affiliations

The interpretation of forensic conclusions by professionals and students: Does experience matter?

Elmarije K van Straalen et al. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. .

Abstract

Are professionals better at assessing the evidential strength of different types of forensic conclusions compared to students? In an online questionnaire 96 crime investigation and law students, and 269 crime investigation and legal professionals assessed three fingerprint examination reports. All reports were similar, except for the conclusion part which was stated in a categorical (CAT), verbal likelihood ratio (VLR) or numerical likelihood ratio (NLR) conclusion with high or low evidential strength. The results showed no significant difference between the groups of students and professionals in their assessment of the conclusions. They all overestimated the strength of the strong CAT conclusion compared to the other conclusion types and underestimated the strength of the weak CAT conclusion. Their background (legal vs. crime investigation) did have a significant effect on their understanding. Whereas the legal professionals performed better compared to the crime investigators, the legal students performed worse compared to crime investigation students.

Keywords: Communicating uncertainty; Criminal justice professionals; Evidence interpretation; Forensic conclusions; Influence of experience.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Survey design for Students in Study I and Professionals in Study II.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Average number of correct answers (out of nine questions) about actual understanding per report, per conclusion type and per conclusion strength.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Average number of correct answers (out of nine questions) about actual understanding per report.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Keijser J.W., de, Elffers H. Understanding of forensic expert reports by judges, defense lawyers and forensic professionals. Psychol. Crime Law. 2012;18(2):191–207. doi: 10.1080/10683161003736744. - DOI
    1. Keijser J.W., de, Elffers H., Kok R.M., Sjerps M.J. Boom Juridische uitgevers; Den Haag: 2009. Bijkans begrepen: Feitelijk en vermeend begrip van forensische deskundigenrapportages onder rechters, advocaten en deskundigen.
    1. Keijser J.W., de, Malsch M., Luining E.T., Weulen Kranenbarg M., Lenssen D.J. Differential reporting of mixed DNA profiles and its impact on jurists' evaluation of evidence. An international analysis. Forensic Sci. Int.: Genet. 2016;23:71–82. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.03.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Straalen E.K., van, Poot C.J., de, Malsch M., Elffers H. The interpretation of forensic conclusions by criminal justice professionals: the same evidence interpreted differently. Forensic Sci. Int. 2020;313 doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110331. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Thompson W.C., Hofstein Grady R., Lai E., Stern H.S. Perceived strength of forensic scientists' reporting statements about source conclusions. Law Probab. Risk. 2018;17(2):133–155. doi: 10.1093/lpr/mgy012. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources