Case Review

Is it possible that the forensic evidence in your client’s case is vulnerable to cognitive bias or error?

Review for Cognitive Bias

My process includes:

  • Assessment of Contextual Information: I carefully evaluate what contextual information was available to the forensic scientist, identifying whether unnecessary or potentially biasing details were provided.

  • Analytical Pathway Examination: I review the decision-making pathways to see if interpretations could have been influenced by cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias, anchoring, or expectation bias.

  • Procedural Safeguards Review: I check if appropriate contextual information management procedures were followed to minimize bias.

  • Reporting Practices Evaluation: I scrutinize forensic reports to determine if opinions, and the reasons behind them, were transparently documented in the case file and report.

  • Comparison to Consensus Standards: I compare methods applied to best practice guidelines and consensus standards such as those produced by the Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC).

  • Testimony Review: I review statements made during testimony to identify if they accurately reflect those presented in the report.


Review for Error

My process for reviewing vulnerabilities to error is grounded in an understanding of error rates and reliability derived from validation and empirical studies where ground truth is known.