Document Type

Article

Publication Version

Accepted Manuscript

Publication Date

6-1-2018

Journal or Book Title

Law, Probability & Risk

Volume

17

Issue

2

First Page

133

Last Page

155

DOI

10.1093/lpr/mgy012

Abstract

Three studies investigated lay people’s perceptions of the relative strength of various conclusions that a forensic scientist might present about whether two items (fingerprints, biological samples) have a common source. Lay participants made a series of judgments about which of two conclusions seemed stronger for proving the items had a common source. The data were fitted to Thurstone–Mosteller paired comparison models to obtain rank-ordered lists of the various statements and an indication of the perceived differences among them. The results reveal the perceived strength of several types of statements, relative to one another, including verbal statements regarding strength of support (e.g. ‘extremely strong support for same source’), source probability statements (e.g. ‘highly probable same source’), random match probabilities (e.g. RMP = 1 in 100 000), likelihood ratios, and categorical statements (e.g. ‘identification’). These comparisons in turn provide insight into whether particular statements about the strength of forensic evidence convey the intended meaning and will be interpreted in a manner that is justifiable and appropriate.

Comments

This is a manuscript of an article published as Thompson, William C., Rebecca Hofstein Grady, Eric Lai, and Hal S. Stern. "Perceived strength of forensic scientists’ reporting statements about source conclusions." Law, Probability and Risk 17, no. 2 (2018): 133-155. Posted with permission of CSAFE.

Copyright Owner

The Authors

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Published Version

Share

COinS