Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
Aim: In the two-part study, the article from Science about Itiel Dror's work is summarized, and then in this second part, his studies related to forensic pathology are studied in detail, with commentaries. All of the results are compared to other scientific papers.
Methodology: After summarizing the second half of the Science article, the study performs a synthesis of numerous commentaries and other international papers. The authors' points of view are summarised at the end of the study.
Findings: The cognitive bias of forensic experts can have a serious impact on the jurisdiction, yet detailed research on the topic had only started after the infamous mistaken identifications around the turn of the millennium. Itiel Dror's role in this is pioneering and undoubted, although this paper clarifies some of his statements, and discusses them in agreement with other authors. We also consider the unilateral presentation of bias to be dangerous. Bias cannot be eliminated or excluded, but with certain techniques, the forensic practitioner can try to reduce the danger.
Value: The study provides a comprehensive picture of the problem of expert bias through the work of Itiel Dror, and also offers useful solutions to mitigate it.
References
Angyal M. (2019). A kriminalisztikai gondolkodás – újratöltve. Belügyi Szemle, 67(3), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.38146/BSZ.2019.3.2
Baechler, S., Morelato, M., Gittelson, S., Walsh, S., Margot, P., Roux, C., & Ribaux, O. (2020). Breaking the barriers between intelligence, investigation and evaluation: A continuous approach to define the contribution and scope of forensic science. Forensic Science International, 309, 110213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110213
Byrd, J. S. (2006). Confirmation bias, ethics, and mistakes in forensics. Journal of Forensic Identification, 56(4), 511–525.
Champod, C. (2014). Research focused mainly on bias will paralyse forensic science. Science and Justice, 54(2), 107–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.004
Cooper, G. S. & Meterko, V. (2019). Cognitive bias research in forensic science: A systematic review. Forensic Science International, 297, 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.016
Curley, L. J., Munro, J., Lages, M., MacLean, R., & Murray, J. (2020). Assessing cognitive bias in forensic decisions: A review and outlook. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 65(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14220
Downs, J. C. U. & Swienton, A. R. (2012). Ethics in forensic science. Academic Press of Elsevier.
Dror, I. E. (2020). Cognitive and human factors in expert decision making: Six fallacies and the eight sources of bias. Analytical Chemistry, 92(12), 7998–8004. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c00704
Dror, I. E. & Kukucka, J. (2021). Linear Sequential Unmasking–Expanded (LSU-E): A general approach for improving decision making as well as minimizing noise and bias. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 3, 100161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100161
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021a). Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(5), 1751–1757. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14697
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021b). Authors’ response to Peterson et al. Commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2545–2548. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14856
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021c). Authors’ response to Gill et al. commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2573–2574. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14850
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021d). Authors’ response to Oliver commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2575–2576. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14853
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021e). Authors’ response to Tse et al. commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2569–2570. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14854
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021f). Authors’ response to Speth et al. commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2571–2572. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14845
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021g). Authors’ response to Duflou commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2575–2576. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14852
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021h). Authors’ response to Young commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2573–2574. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14851
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021i). Authors’ response to Graber commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2571–2572. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14848
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021j). Authors’ response to Obenson commentary. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2569–2570. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14847
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021k). Authors’ response to Peterson et al. response. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2545–2548. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14842
Dror, I. E., Melinek, J., Arden, J. L., Kukucka, J., Hawkins, S., Carter, J., & Atherton, D. S. (2021l). Authors’ response to Gill et al. response. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2555–2556. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14846
Duflou, J. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2577–2579. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14836
Gill, P., Brenner, C. H., Buckleton, J. S., Carracedo, A., Krawczak, M., Mayr, W. R., Morling, N., Prinz, M., Schneider, P. M., & Weir, B. S. (2006). DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures. Forensic Science International, 160(2–3), 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.04.009
Gill, P., Hicks, T., Butler, J. M., Connolly, E., Gusmão, L., Kokshoorn, B., Morling, N., van Oorschot, R. A. H., Parson, W., Prinz, M., Schneider, P. M., Sijen, T., & Taylor, D. (2020). DNA commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics: Assessing the value of forensic biological evidence—Guidelines highlighting the importance of propositions. Part II: Evaluation of biological traces considering activity level propositions. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 44, 102186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.102186
Gill, J., Pinneri, K., Denton, J., & Aiken, S. (2021a). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2554. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14838
Gill, J., Pinneri, K., Denton, J., & Aiken, S. (2021b). Response to authors’ response. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2557–2558. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14840
Graber, M. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2580–2581. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14857
Kukucka, J., Kassin, S. M., Zapf, P. A., & Dror, I. E. (2017). Cognitive bias and blindness: A global survey of forensic science examiners. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 452–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.09.001
Lesnikova, I., Leone, L., & Gilliland, M. (2018). Manner of death certification after significant emotional stress: An inter-rater variability study and review of the literature. Academic Forensic Pathology, 8(3), 692–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/1925362118797741
Lontai, M. & Kosztya, S. (2023). Az intézményi szakértés kihívásai a technológiai fejlődés tükrében. Ügyészek Lapja, 30(5–6), 75–90.
Lyman, D. (1856). The moral sayings of Publius Syrus, a Roman slave: From the Latin. L. E. Bernard & Company.
Mackay, C. (1852). Extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds. L. C. Page & Company. https://supernovae.in2p3.fr/~llg/Textes/Extraordinary-Popular-Delusions-Mackay.pdf
Obenson, K. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2571–2572. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14855
Oliver, W. R. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2549–2550. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14841
Peterson, B. L., Avedschmidt, S., Bell, M., Burton, S., Cina, S. J., Cohle, S. D., Gill, J. R., Hansma, P. A., Hanzlick, R. L., Jentzen, J. M., & Oliver, W. R. (2021a). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2549–2552. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14843
Peterson, B. L., Gill, J. R., & Oliver, W. R. (2021b). Response to authors’ response. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2553. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14849
Speth, P. A., Avedschmidt, S., Cohle, S. D., Corey, T. S., Fierro, M. F., Fowler, D. R., Gill, J. R., Hansma, P. A., Hanzlick, R. L., Jentzen, J. M., & Oliver, W. R. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2551–2552. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14835
Starr, D. (2022). The bias hunter: Itiel Dror is determined to reveal the role of bias in forensics, even if it sparks outrage. Science, 376(6594), 686–690. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adc9480
Tangen, J. M., Kent, K. M., & Searston, R. A. (2020). Collective intelligence in fingerprint analysis. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5, Article 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00223-8
Thompson, W. C. (2020). Commentary on: Curley LJ, Munro J, Lages M, MacLean R, Murray J. Assessing cognitive bias in forensic decisions: A review and outlook. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 65(2), 666–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14272
Tse, R., Glenn, C., Kesha, K., Morrow, P., & Stables, S. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2554–2555. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14839
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
Young, T. (2021). Commentary on: Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(6), 2556–2557. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14837
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Academic Journal of Internal Affairs