Psychological Aspects of Forensic Identification Evidence

William C. Thompson · Simon A. Cole

33 citations0/0 files storedPsychology Press eBooks

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Legal processes and jurisprudence Deception detection and forensic psychology Jury Decision Making Processes

Abstract

Forensic scientists are often asked to compare two items of evidence to determine whether they have (or might have) a common source. Testimony about such comparisons is called forensic identification evidence. This type of evidence frequently plays a crucial role in criminal trials by helping to link the defendant to the crime. This chapter focuses on expert testimony that purports to make a 'source attribution', that is, a determination that two physical items have (or might have) a common source. Forensic scientists distinguish two types of matches: those in which the items share class characteristics, features that place them in the same category or class; and those in which the items share individual characteristics, a unique combination of features. The standards promulgated by latent print and toolmark examiners, which require experts to express conclusions with absolute certainty, are excellent examples of the disconnect that can arise between standards and science.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 33 citations exist upstream.

References

1982Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980 1992The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence 1971Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment 1977Behavioral Decision Theory 1994The psychology of judgment and decision making 2000Communicating Statistical Information 1995The Evidential Foundations of Probabilistic Reasoning.1987Interpretation of statistical evidence in criminal trials: The prosecutor's fallacy and the defense attorney's fallacy.

Cited by

2019Crime reconstruction and the role of trace materials from crime scene to court 2008Explaining the Tension between the Supreme Court's Embrace of Validity as the Touchstone of Admissibility of Expert Testimony and Lower Courts' (Seeming) Rejection of Same 2006Statistical inference and forensic evidence: Evaluating a bullet lead match.

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.