Cognitive Bias and Forensic Science

这个关于认知偏见和法医科学的研讨会汇集了大约24位领先的心理学家，法医科学家和其他人，探讨心理因素可能影响法医科学家得出的结论的方式。第二届世界妇女大会将于2002年9月10日在北京举行。23 - 24，2010年在伊利诺伊州芝加哥西北法学院塞尔中心。讲习班开始将先作一系列背景介绍。这些演讲将探讨在法医科学中使用的方法，各种心理因素可能在法医模式识别中发挥的作用，并审查最近国家科学院关于法医科学现状的报告的部分内容。在研讨会的第一天下午，参与者将分成小组讨论判断偏见可能影响法医科学家所看到的方式，他们采取的行动，以及他们对调查中发现的证据物品来源的最终判断。所讨论的偏见来源将包括各种各样的来源，如法医任务的性质、做出法医判断的环境、法医科学家预先存在的期望、情感偏见和有偏见的决策策略（例如，寻找证据来证实一个想法，而不是寻找证据来否定它）。将鼓励团体将一般理论和可验证的假设转化为具体的研究建议，以促进我们对社会和认知对判断和决策的影响的理解，并着眼于使用新的理解来确定法医学改革的潜在领域。在研讨会的第二天，每个小组将向研讨会的全体与会者介绍他们的想法。 将留出时间进行讨论，以完善这些想法。讲习班最后将举行一次会议，汇集讲习班的贡献，并确定进一步研究的具体议程。这个研讨会的知识价值包括发展理论和实证项目的可能性，这些理论和实证项目促进了我们对人类法医判断中的偏见和错误的理解。目前的证据表明，认知和语境因素确实会影响法医判断，但这方面的研究还处于起步阶段。 通过将不同的参与者聚集在一起，这个研讨会将鼓励一个交叉施肥的过程，其中法医研究人员考虑在未来的工作中使用行为理论和发现的新方法，心理学家考虑使用法医科学作为他们的社会和认知研究的平台。更广泛的影响讲习班的更广泛的影响还来自于将具有许多共同点但通常彼此关系不大的学科的人员聚集在一起所产生的协同作用。如果这次研讨会能够改善法医科学家的培训及其分析结果，刑事司法系统将受益于相应提高法医科学证词和审判中出示的证据的准确性。同样，法医学也可以通过与主流科学和科学机构更加紧密地联系在一起而获益。

Project Description This workshop on Cognitive Bias and Forensic Science brings together about two dozen leading psychologists, forensic scientists and others to explore the ways in which psychological factors may affect the conclusions that forensic scientists reach. It will be held on Sept. 23-24, 2010 at the Searle Center at Northwestern Law School in Chicago, IL. The workshop will begin with a series of background presentations. These presentations will explore the methods used in the forensic sciences, the roles that various psychological factors may play in forensic pattern recognition, and review portions of a recent National Academy of Sciences report on the current state of the forensic sciences. In the afternoon of the first workshop day, participants will break into small groups to discuss ways in which judgmental bias may affect what forensic scientists see, the actions that they take, and their final judgments about who or what is the source of evidentiary items recovered from an investigation. The sources of bias discussed will include such diverse sources as the nature of a forensic task, the environment in which the forensic judgment is made, pre-existing expectations of the forensic scientist, emotional biases, and biased decision-making strategies (e.g., looking for evidence to confirm an idea rather than looking for evidence to disconfirm it). Groups will be encouraged to convert general theories and testable hypotheses into concrete research proposals that advance our understanding of social and cognitive effects on judgment and decision making with an eye toward using that new understanding to identify potential areas for reform in the forensic sciences. On the second day of the workshop, each group will present their ideas to the complete set of workshop participants. Time will be left for discussion to refine those ideas. The workshop will end with a session designed to pull together workshop contributions and to identify a concrete agenda for further research. The intellectual merits of this workshop include the possibility of developing theories and empirical projects that advance our understanding of bias and error in human forensic judgment. Current evidence suggests that cognitive and contextual factors do affect forensic judgment, but such research is in its infancy. By bringing together a diverse group of participants, this workshop will encourage a process of cross-fertilization wherein the forensic researchers think about new ways to employ behavioral theories and findings in their future work, and the psychologists think about using the forensic sciences as a platform for their social and cognitive research. Broader ImpactsThe broader impact of the workshop also stems from the synergy that will result from bringing together personnel in disciplines that have much in common but ordinarily have little to do with one another. If this workshop leads to improvements in the training of forensic scientists and the output of their analyses, the criminal justice system will benefit from the corresponding increase the accuracy of forensic science testimony and evidence presented at trial. Similarly, the forensic sciences may reap benefits by becoming more intertwined with mainstream science and scientific institutions.