Criminal Topic 2- Hall and Player

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

This was conducted in response to Dror’s research and to the suggestion that fingerprint experts are affected by cognitive bias.

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

To test if context had an effect on fingerprint identification from experts.
Does the written report affect and experts interpretation of a poor quality mark?
Are the experts emotionally affected by the circumstance of the case?

Question 3

Method

Answer 3

Lab

Question 4

Design

Answer 4

Independent measures

Question 5

Sample

Answer 5

Volunteer sample of 70 fingerprint experts

Question 6

Procedure

Answer 6

In groups of 8 and were asked to treat the experiment as a traditional day and spoke among themselves.
Low context group (35)- given an examination report relating to an allegation of forgery as this is a victimless and low sentence crime.
High context group (35)- given a report of allegations of murder.
There was researcher with each group to answer any questions
They were given a fingerprint and asked to consider if it was a match or not, insufficient details for a comparison or if there were some detail in agreement.
They were then given a feedback sheet

Question 7

Findings

Answer 7

57 participants indicated they had read the report before looking at the prints. 30 of these were in the high context group. 52% of the 30 felt they were affected by the scenario compared to the 6% who felt like this in the low context group. This suggests there is a relationship between the context and the perception from the experts.
The final decisions were very similar when comparing the context groups.