Commentary on: Budowle B, Bottrell MC, Bunch SG, Fram R, Harrison D, Meagher S, Oien CT, Peterson PE, Seiger DP,Smith MB, Smrz MA, Soltis GL, Stacey RB. A perspective on errors, bias, and interpretation in the forensic sciences and direction for continuing advancement. J Forensic Sci 2009;54(4):798-809

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 273-274

  Krane, Dan E ^a   Ford, Simon ^b   Gilder, Jason R ^c   Inman, Keith ^d   Jamieson, Allan ^e   Koppl, Roger ^f   Kornfield, Irving L ^g   Michael Risinger, D ^h   Rudin, Norah ⁱ   Scott Taylor, Marc ^j   Thompson, William C ^a  

^a WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Lexigen Science and Law Consultants Inc   (United States)

^c Forensic Bioinformatics Inc   (United States)

^d Forensic Analytical Sciences Inc   (United States)

^e Forensic Institute   (United Kingdom)

^f FAIRLEIGH DICKINSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^h SETON HALL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

ⁱ Technical Associates Inc ^*

^j UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDEMIOLOGY; FORENSIC SCIENCE; HUMAN; LABORATORY; LETTER; QUALITY CONTROL; STANDARD;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); FORENSIC SCIENCES; HUMANS; LABORATORIES; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 74249085924     PISSN: 00221198     EISSN: 15564029     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01259.x     Document Type: Letter

References (11)

1. Budowle B, Bottrell MC, Bunch SG, Fram R, Harrison D, Meagher S, et al. A perspective on errors, bias, and interpretation in the forensic sciences and direction for continuing advancement. J Forensic Sci 2009 54 (4 798 809.
2. Krane DE, Ford S, Gilder JR, Inman K, Jamieson A, Koppl R, et al. Sequential unmasking: a means of minimizing observer effects in forensic DNA interpretation (letter). J Forensic Sci 2008 53 (4 1006 1007.
3. Krane DE, Ford S, Gilder JR, Inman K, Jamieson A, Koppl R, et al. Response to Wells JD. Commentary on: Sequential unmasking: a means of minimizing observer effects in forensic DNA interpretation. J Forensic Sci 2009 54 (2 501.
4. Krane DE, Ford S, Gilder JR, Inman K, Jamieson A, Koppl R, et al. Response to Ostrum B. Commentary on: Sequential unmasking: a means of minimizing observer effects in forensic DNA interpretation. J Forensic Sci 2009 54 (6 1500 1501.
5. Dror IE, Charlton D, Peron A. Contextual information renders experts vulnerable to making erroneous identifications. Forensic Sci Int 2006 156 : 74 8.
6. Dror IE, Charlton D. Why experts make errors. J Forens Identif 2006 56 (4 600 616.
7. Miller LS. Bias among professional document examiners: a need for procedural change. J Police Sci Adm 1984 12 : 407.
8. Miller LS. Procedural bias in forensic examination of hair. Law Hum Behav 1987 11 (2 157 163.
9. Wertheim K, Langenburg G, Moenssens A. Report of latent print examiner accuracy during comparison training exercises. J Forens Identif 2006 56 (1 55 127.
10. Zeppa J. The primary analyst. 94th Semi-annual Seminar of the California Association of Criminalists; 1999 Oct 14-16; Ontario, CA.
11. Inman K, Rudin N. How much should the analyst know? CAC News. Fall 1997 18 9.