Error vs. accuracy rates: Evaluating forensic expert credibility
Date
2020
Authors
Koodrin, Jonica
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Thesis
Citation
Statement of Responsibility
Conference Name
Abstract
In a criminal trial, judges and jurors need to be able to quickly, easily, and confidently interpret
forensic expert data. It is also important for them to determine the credibility of forensic experts
in order to properly evaluate their opinion on legal evidence. Communicating forensic experts’
opinions on legal evidence has been in the spotlight for researchers. More recently, focus has
begun to shift towards the importance of understanding and communicating forensic expert
performance data. In a 2 x 2 x 2 fully between-subjects design three fictitious expert reports
(extracted from Martire, et al., 2020) were used to communicate forensic expert performance
data to mock jurors (N = 143). The framing of the data - (error rates vs. accuracy rates),
presentation format (data presented as a mean value vs. individual data points on a scatterplot)
and colour of the data (colour vs. greyscale) - were manipulated. To measure judgements of
credibility in forensic experts the traits ‘reliable’, ‘accurate’, and ‘trustworthy’ were used.
Negatively framed forensic expert performance data (i.e. error rates) lead to lower credibility
ratings compared to positively framed forensic expert performance data (i.e. accuracy rates).
Presentation format had no significant effect on participants’ credibility ratings. Finally,
participants’ ratings of expert credibility were significantly greater when data was presented in
colour compared with greyscale. The outcome of this study extends research on message
framing to a legal decision making context looking at the communication of forensic data.
School/Discipline
School of Psychology
Dissertation Note
Thesis (B.PsychSc(Hons)) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2020
Provenance
This electronic version is made publicly available by the University of Adelaide in accordance with its open access policy for student theses.
Copyright in this thesis remains with the author. This thesis may incorporate third party material which has been used by the author pursuant to Fair Dealing exceptions. If you are the author of this thesis and do not wish it to be made publicly available, or you are the owner of any included third party copyright material you wish to be removed from this electronic version, please complete the take down form located at: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/legals
Description
This item is only available electronically.