Orange gear surrounded by two circular arrows, symbolizing process, settings, or automation.

Journal: Applied Cognitive Psychology

Published: 2021

Primary Author: Gregory Mitchell

Secondary Authors: Brandon L. Garrett

The present study examined whether a defense rebuttal expert can effectively educate jurors on the risk that the prosecution’s fingerprint expert made an error. Using a sample of 1716 jury-eligible adults, we examined the impact of three types of rebuttal testimony in a mock trial: (a) a methodological rebuttal explaining the general risk of error in the fingerprint-comparison process; (b) a new-evidence rebuttal concluding the latent fingerprint recovered in this case was not suitable for use in a comparison; and (c) a new-evidence rebuttal excluding the defendant as the source of the latent fingerprint. All three rebuttals significantly altered perceptions of the prosecution’s fingerprint evidence, but new-evidence rebuttals proved most effective. The effectiveness of the rebuttals depended, however, on whether jurors were more concerned about false acquittals or false convictions.


Related Resources

A thick gray wavy line forming an abstract, looping shape on a light gray background.

An Introduction to the Forensic Handwriting Analysis Software handwriter

July 18, 2025

Blue shoeprint with a tread pattern on a white background.

Forensic Footwear: A Retrospective of the Development of the MANTIS Shoe Scanning System

July 10, 2025

There currently are no shoe-scanning devices developed in the United States that can operate in a real-world, variable-weather environment in …

A green fingerprint icon on a light gray background.

Examiner consistency in perceptions of fingerprint minutia rarity

July 10, 2025

Friction ridge examiners (FREs) identify distinctive features (minutiae) in fingerprints and consider how rare these observed minutiae are in their …