Resolving latent conflict: What happens when latent print examiners enter the cage?

Latent print examination traditionally follows the ACE-V process, in which latent prints are first analyzed to determine whether they are suitable for comparison, and then compared to an exemplar and evaluated for similarities and differences. Despite standard operating procedures and quality controls designed, in part, to mitigate differences between examiners, latent print processing and review are inherently subjective. The ACE-V process addresses subjectivity, and the possibility of error, in the verification stage in which a second examiner repeats the analysis, comparison, and evaluation steps in a given case. Other procedures outside the ACE-V framework, such as consultation and conflict resolution, provide further opportunity to understand how differences between latent print examiners emerge. Despite the growing body of research on latent print examination, questions have emerged about how these procedures work in practice. This study reviews case processing data for two years of casework at the Houston Forensic Science Center (HFSC). We describe these data as cases proceed through each step of the ACE-V process, with a particular focus on verification, consultation, and conflict resolution. We discuss trends in these processes regarding modal types of disagreements, modal outcomes, and roles of the examiners involved. Results reveal implications for improving the practice of latent print examination

Addressing relative criteria for Miranda waivers: a comparison of juvenile justice youths’ and adult offenders’ understanding and appreciation of the rights to silence and legal counsel during police interrogations

Concerns about juveniles' abilities to understand and appreciate their Miranda rights, as well as empirical evidence about juveniles' deficits in Miranda comprehension, are well documented in the legal and psychological literature. However, it has been over 30 years since juveniles' abilities relative to adults have been evaluated. In this study, juveniles' (n = 183) and adults' (n = 103) performance on the Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI) were compared, and the relationship between age and Miranda comprehension was evaluated across both samples. Results revealed that juveniles scored significantly lower than adults on all MRCI subtests and that age and Miranda comprehension had a meaningful, but not perfectly linear relationship. With respect to Miranda understanding, significant differences were observed between younger and older adolescents, with tapering improvement into adulthood. Significant improvements were observed on Miranda vocabulary and appreciation well into adulthood. Results are discussed in the context of neurological development and adolescents' developmental immaturity, specifically in terms of implications for greater Miranda waiver protections for juveniles and young adults during custodial interrogations.Ph.D., Psychology -- Drexel University, 201

Do evidence submission forms expose latent print examiners to task-irrelevant information?

Emerging research documents the ways in which task-irrelevant contextual information may influence the opinions and decisions that forensic analysts reach regarding evidence (e.g., Dror and Cole, 2010; National Academy of Sciences, 2009; President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2016). Consequently, authorities have called for forensic analysts to rely solely on task-relevant information—and to actively avoid task-irrelevant information—when conducting analyses (National Commission on Forensic Science, 2015). In this study, we examined 97 evidence submission forms, used by 148 accredited crime laboratories across the United States, to determine what types of information laboratories solicit when performing latent print analyses. Results indicate that many laboratories request information with no direct relevance to the specific task of latent print comparison. More concerning, approximately one in six forms (16.5%) request information that appears to have a high potential for bias without any discernible relevance to latent print comparison. Solicitations for task-irrelevant information may carry meaningful consequences and current findings inform strategies to reduce the potential for cognitive bias

Archeota, Spring/Summer 2022

Archeota is a platform for SJSU iSchool students to contribute to the archival conversation. It is written BY students, FOR students. It provides substantive content on archival concerns and issues and promotes professional development in the field of archival studies. Archeota upholds the core values of the archival profession. Contents: From Ashes to Archive: Photojournalist Elizabeth Sunflower’s Body of Work By Laura Darlington Accessibility in Archival Spaces: Breaking Down Barriers for Archival Workers with Disabilities By Kate Goodwin Queer Zine Archive Project: Building a Community Archive of Living History By Alice Wynne Brewster Kahle’s Vision for the Future of Libraries Interview with the Founder of the Internet Archive By Claire Kelley Text, Prose & RocknRoll Podcast: Preserving the Diverse History of Popular Music By Sharon Kosach Farewell to Our Spring 2022 Graduates Interviews With SAA Student Chapter Leaders A Jew in a Catholic Domain: Internship at Schools of the Sacred Heart San Francisco By Max Rosen Summer Reading Recommendations Time to Curl Up With a Good Book! Past Event Archive SJSU SAA Student Chapter events AY 2021-2022https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/saasc_archeota/1015/thumbnail.jp

Latent print comparison and examiner conclusions: A field analysis of case processing in one crime laboratory

Scholarship on the latent print comparison process has expanded in recent years, responsive to the call for rigorous research by scholarly groups (e.g., National Academy of Sciences, 2009; President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2016). Important to the task of ultimately improving accuracy, consistency, and efficiency in the field is understanding different workflows and case outcomes. The current study describes the casework completed by a latent print unit in a large laboratory during one calendar year (2018), including a unique workflow that involves Preliminary AFIS Associations reported out as investigative leads. Approximately 45% of all examined prints were deemed to be of sufficient quality to enter into AFIS, and 22% of AFIS entries resulted in potential identifications. But examiner conclusions and AFIS outcomes (across three AFIS databases) varied according to case details, print source, and AFIS database. Moreover, examiners differed in case processing, sufficiency determinations, and AFIS conclusions. Results are discussed with respect to implications for future research (e.g., comparing these data to case processing data for other laboratories) and ultimately improving the practice of latent print examination

Hysterectomy Pathway as the Global Engine of Practice Change: Implications for Value in Care

Introduction: In 2012, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) introduced a hysterectomy clinical pathway to reduce the number of total abdominal hysterectomies performed for benign gynecological indications. This study focused on exploring physician and patient factors impacting the utilization of hysterectomy clinical pathways.Methods: An online survey with 24 questions was implemented to explore physicians’ attitudes and perceived barriers toward implementing the pathway. A survey consisting of 27 questions was developed for patients to determine the utility of a pathway-based educational tool for making surgery decisions and to measure satisfaction with the information provided.  Descriptive statistics were used to describe survey results, while thematic analysis was performed on verbal feedback submitted by respondents. Results: Physician respondents found the clinical pathway to be practical, beneficial to patients, and up-to-date with the latest evidence-based literature. Key barriers to the use of the pathway that were identified by physicians included perceived waste of time, inappropriateness for some of the patient groups, improper incentive structure, and excessive bureaucracy surrounding the process.  Overall, patient respondents were satisfied with the tool and found it to be helpful with the decision-making process of choosing a hysterectomy route. Conclusions: Physicians and patients found the developed tools to be practical and beneficial. Findings of this study will help to use pathways as a unifying framework to shape future care of patients needing hysterectomy and add value to their care

Perceptions and estimates of error rates in forensic science: A survey of forensic analysts

Every scientific technique features some error, and legal standards for the admissibility of scientific evidence (e.g., Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1993; Kumho Tire Co v. Carmichael, 1999) guide trial courts to consider known error rates. However, recent reviews of forensic science conclude that error rates for some common techniques are not well-documented or even established (e.g., NAS, 2009; PCAST, 2016). Furthermore, many forensic analysts have historically denied the presence of error in their field. Therefore, it is important to establish what forensic scientists actually know or believe about errors rates in their disciplines. We surveyed 183 practicing forensic analysts to examine what they think and estimate about error rates in their various disciplines. Results revealed that analysts perceive all types of errors to be rare, with false positive errors even more rare than false negatives. Likewise, analysts typically reported that they prefer to minimize the risk of false positives over false negatives. Most analysts could not specify where error rates for their discipline were documented or published. Their estimates of error in their fields were widely divergent – with some estimates unrealistically low