The interpretation of forensic conclusions by professionals and students: Does experience matter?

Are professionals better at assessing the evidential strength of different types of forensic conclusions compared to students? In an online questionnaire 96 crime investigation and law students, and 269 crime investigation and legal professionals assessed three fingerprint examination reports. All reports were similar, except for the conclusion part which was stated in a categorical (CAT), verbal likelihood ratio (VLR) or numerical likelihood ratio (NLR) conclusion with high or low evidential strength. The results showed no significant difference between the groups of students and professionals in their assessment of the conclusions. They all overestimated the strength of the strong CAT conclusion compared to the other conclusion types and underestimated the strength of the weak CAT conclusion. Their background (legal vs. crime investigation) did have a significant effect on their understanding. Whereas the legal professionals performed better compared to the crime investigators, the legal students performed worse compared to crime investigation students.

The interpretation of forensic conclusions by criminal justice professionals: The same evidence interpreted differently.

Forensic reports use various types of conclusions, such as a categorical (CAT) conclusion or a likelihood ratio (LR). In order to correctly assess the evidence, users of forensic reports need to understand the conclusion and its evidential strength. The aim of this paper is to study the interpretation of the evidential strength of forensic conclusions by criminal justice professionals. In an online questionnaire 269 professionals assessed 768 reports on fingerprint examination and answered questions that measured self-proclaimed and actual understanding of the reports and conclusions. The reports entailed CAT, verbal LR and numerical LR conclusions with low or high evidential strength and were assessed by crime scene investigators, police detectives, public prosecutors, criminal lawyers, and judges. The results show that about a quarter of all questions measuring actual understanding of the reports were answered incorrectly. The CAT conclusion was best understood for the weak conclusions, the three strong conclusions were all assessed similarly. The weak CAT conclusion correctly emphasizes the uncertainty of any conclusion type used. However, most participants underestimated the strength of this weak CAT conclusion compared to the other weak conclusion types. Looking at the self-proclaimed understanding of all professionals, they in general overestimated their actual understanding of all conclusion types.

Booze, Bars, and Bystander Behavior: People Who Consumed Alcohol Help Faster in the Presence of Others.

People help each other less often and less quickly when bystanders are present. In this paper, we propose that alcohol consumption could attenuate or reverse this so-called bystander effect. Alcohol impairs people cognitively and perceptually, leading them to think less about the presence of others and behave less inhibited. Moreover, alcohol makes people more prone to see the benefits of helping and not the costs. To provide an initial test of these lines of reasoning, we invited visitors of bars in Amsterdam to join our study at a secluded spot at the bar. We manipulated bystander presence, and at the end of the study, we measured alcohol consumption. When participants took their seats, the experimenter dropped some items. We measured how many items were picked up and how quickly participants engaged in helping. Results revealed that alcohol did not influence the bystander effect in terms of the amount of help given. But importantly, it did influence the bystander effect in terms of response times: people who consumed alcohol actually came to aid faster in the presence of others.

The Influence of New Technologies on the Visual Attention of CSIs Performing a Crime Scene Investigation.

Currently, a series of promising new tools are under development that will enable crime scene investigators (CSIs) to analyze traces in situ during the crime scene investigation or enable them to detect blood and provide information on the age of blood. An experiment is conducted with thirty CSIs investigating a violent robbery at a mock crime scene to study the influence of such technologies on the perception and interpretation of traces during the first phase of the investigation. Results show that in their search for traces, CSIs are not directed by the availability of technologies, which is a reassuring finding. Qualitative findings suggest that CSIs are generally more focused on analyzing perpetrator traces than on reconstructing the event. A focus on perpetrator traces might become a risk when other crime-related traces are overlooked, and when analyzed traces are in fact not crime-related and in consequence lead to the identification of innocent suspects.

Nonresponse bias in randomized controlled experiments in criminology: Putting the Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET) under a microscope.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this article is to examine whether or not the results of the Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET)-a randomized controlled trial that tested the impact of procedural justice policing on citizen attitudes toward police-were affected by different types of nonresponse bias. METHOD: We use two methods (Cochrane and Elffers methods) to explore nonresponse bias: First, we assess the impact of the low response rate by examining the effects of nonresponse group differences between the experimental and control conditions and pooled variance under different scenarios. Second, we assess the degree to which item response rates are influenced by the control and experimental conditions. RESULTS: Our analysis of the QCET data suggests that our substantive findings are not influenced by the low response rate in the trial. The results are robust even under extreme conditions, and statistical significance of the results would only be compromised in cases where the pooled variance was much larger for the nonresponse group and the difference between experimental and control conditions was greatly diminished. We also find that there were no biases in the item response rates across the experimental and control conditions. CONCLUSION: RCTs that involve field survey responses-like QCET-are potentially compromised by low response rates and how item response rates might be influenced by the control or experimental conditions. Our results show that the QCET results were not sensitive to the overall low response rate across the experimental and control conditions and the item response rates were not significantly different across the experimental and control groups. Overall, our analysis suggests that the results of QCET are robust and any biases in the survey responses do not significantly influence the main experimental findings.

The development of a method to measure speed adaptation to traffic complexity: identifying novice, unsafe, and overconfident drivers.

To monitor novice driver performance in the first years of solo driving, a test aimed at assessing speed adaptation to the traffic situation was developed and evaluated. The Adaptation Test consisted of 18 traffic scenes presented in two (almost) identical photographs, which differed in one single detail, increasing the situation's complexity. As the pictures were presented randomly and participants could not return to previous pictures, participants were kept unaware of the complexity differences in the pictures. The difference in reported speed between the two pictures was used as an indication of drivers' inclination to adapt their speed to the complexity of the traffic situation. Results showed that novice drivers (n=434) performed worse on the Adaptation Test (i.e. less often reported a lower speed in the more complex situation) than experienced drivers (n=173). In addition, unsafe drivers and overconfident drivers, as identified in an on-road driving assessment, performed worse on the Adaptation Test. This indicates that the Adaptation Test is effective at measuring adaptation of driving speed to the complexity of the situation; and that incorrect self-assessment, and overestimating driving skills in particular, may have a negative effect on speed adaptation.

Explaining capital punishment support in an abolitionist country: the case of The Netherlands.

A substantial minority (35%) of the Dutch population is in favor of capital punishment. In this paper, it is argued that in a staunchly abolitionist country such as The Netherlands, the existence and perseverance of such support can be better understood and explained by conceiving of capital punishment support in attitudinal terms as part of a law and order syndrome. Death penalty attitudes are analyzed by means of hierarchic logistic regression analysis. It is shown that support can be modeled quite well, partly in terms of general attitudes to criminal justice, partly in terms of political and sociodemographic parameters. Within the criminal justice attitudes complex, more support is found among those endorsing harsh treatment of offenders, those willing to grant far-reaching powers to justice authorities, those believing that the government is not delivering on the topic of crime fighting, and those who are concerned about the level of crime. Within the political context, more support is enlisted among people who abstain from voting and those who vote at either extreme of the political spectrum as opposed to central parties' supporters. In sociodemographic segments it is the younger and poorly educated who are the strongest supporters of capital punishment. It is suggested that endorsing capital punishment can be better understood as an expressive act, displaying dissatisfaction with judicial and political elites in the country.