Skip to content

Juror appraisals of forensic evidence: Effects of blind proficiency and cross-examination

Journal: Forensic Science International
Published: 2020
Primary Author: William E. Crozier
Secondary Authors: Jeff Kukucka, Brandon L. Garrett

Forensic testimony plays a crucial role in many criminal cases, with requests to crime laboratories steadily increasing. As part of efforts to improve the reliability of forensic evidence, scientific and policy groups increasingly recommend routine and blind proficiency tests of practitioners. What is not known is how doing so affects how lay jurors assess testimony by forensic practitioners in court. In Study 1, we recruited 1398 lay participants, recruited online using Qualtrics to create a sample representative of the U.S. population with respect to age, gender, income, race/ethnicity, and geographic region. Each read a mock criminal trial transcript in which a forensic examiner presented the central evidence. The low-proficiency forensic examiner elicited a lower conviction rate and less favorable impressions than the control, an examiner for which no proficiency information was disclosed. However, the high-proficiency examiner did not correspondingly elicit a higher conviction rate or more favorable impressions than the control. In Study 2, 1420 participants, similarly recruited using Qualtrics, received the same testimony, but for some conditions the examiner was cross-examined by a defense attorney. We find cross-examination significantly reduced guilty votes and examiner ratings for low-proficiency examiners. These results suggest that disclosing results of blind proficiency testing can inform jury decision-making, and further, that defense lawyering can make proficiency information particularly salient at a criminal trial.

Related Resources

The Contribution of Forensic and Expert Evidence to DNA Exoneration Cases: An Interim Report

The Contribution of Forensic and Expert Evidence to DNA Exoneration Cases: An Interim Report

This report is from Simon A. Cole, Vanessa Meterko, Sarah Chu, Glinda Cooper, Jessica Weinstock Paredes, Maurice Possley, and Ken Otterbourg (2022), The Contribution of Forensic and Expert Evidence to…
CSAFE Project Update & ASCLD FRC Collaboration

CSAFE Project Update & ASCLD FRC Collaboration

This presentation highlighted CSAFE’s collaboration with the ASCLD FRC Collaboration Hub.
Understanding forensic decision-making with Item Response Theory: Using a NFI firearms study

Understanding forensic decision-making with Item Response Theory: Using a NFI firearms study

This presentation is from the Forensic Big Data Colloquium at the Netherlands Forensic Institute, November 2022. Posted with permission of CSAFE.
An Ounce of Prevention: A Simple and Practical Tool for Mitigating Cognitive Bias in Forensic Decisions.

An Ounce of Prevention: A Simple and Practical Tool for Mitigating Cognitive Bias in Forensic Decisions.

Learning Overview: The free information management toolkit described in this presentation will be introduced and attendees will learn to use this toolkit as a training tool and as a practical…