Literature DB >> 22137054

Subjectivity and bias in forensic DNA mixture interpretation.

Itiel E Dror1, Greg Hampikian.   

Abstract

The objectivity of forensic science decision making has received increased attention and scrutiny. However, there are only a few published studies experimentally addressing the potential for contextual bias. Because of the esteem of DNA evidence, it is important to study and assess the impact of subjectivity and bias on DNA mixture interpretation. The study reported here presents empirical data suggesting that DNA mixture interpretation is subjective. When 17 North American expert DNA examiners were asked for their interpretation of data from an adjudicated criminal case in that jurisdiction, they produced inconsistent interpretations. Furthermore, the majority of 'context free' experts disagreed with the laboratory's pre-trial conclusions, suggesting that the extraneous context of the criminal case may have influenced the interpretation of the DNA evidence, thereby showing a biasing effect of contextual information in DNA mixture interpretation.
Copyright © 2011 Forensic Science Society. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22137054     DOI: 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Justice        ISSN: 1355-0306            Impact factor:   2.124


  14 in total

1.  Challenges in implementing best practice DVI guidelines in low resource settings: lessons learnt from the Meethotamulla garbage dump mass disaster.

Authors:  Sameera A Gunawardena; Ravindra Samaranayake; Vianney Dias; Selliah Pranavan; Asela Mendis; Jean Perera
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 2.007

2.  A novel forensic panel of 186-plex SNPs and 123-plex STR loci based on massively parallel sequencing.

Authors:  Xinyao Miao; Yuesheng Shen; Xiaojuan Gong; Huiyun Yu; Bowen Li; Liao Chang; Yinan Wang; Jingna Fan; Zuhuan Liang; Bowen Tan; Shengbin Li; Bao Zhang
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 2.686

3.  The forensic value of X-linked markers in mixed-male DNA analysis.

Authors:  HaiJun He; Lagabaiyila Zha; JinHong Cai; Jian Huang
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 2.686

Review 4.  Cognitive neuroscience in forensic science: understanding and utilizing the human element.

Authors:  Itiel E Dror
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 5.  The National DNA Data Bank of Canada: a Quebecer perspective.

Authors:  Emmanuel Milot; Marie M J Lecomte; Hugo Germain; Frank Crispino
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.599

6.  Testing the reliability of hands and ears as biometrics: the importance of viewpoint.

Authors:  Sarah V Stevenage; Catherine Walpole; Greg J Neil; Sue M Black
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-11-20

7.  Evaluation of forensic DNA mixture evidence: protocol for evaluation, interpretation, and statistical calculations using the combined probability of inclusion.

Authors:  Frederick R Bieber; John S Buckleton; Bruce Budowle; John M Butler; Michael D Coble
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 2.797

8.  TrueAllele casework on Virginia DNA mixture evidence: computer and manual interpretation in 72 reported criminal cases.

Authors:  Mark W Perlin; Kiersten Dormer; Jennifer Hornyak; Lisa Schiermeier-Wood; Susan Greenspoon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  New York State TrueAllele ® casework validation study.

Authors:  Mark W Perlin; Jamie L Belrose; Barry W Duceman
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 1.832

10.  Inclusion probability for DNA mixtures is a subjective one-sided match statistic unrelated to identification information.

Authors:  Mark William Perlin
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2015-10-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.