Are Forensic Experts Biased by the Side That Retained Them?

How objective are forensic experts when they are retained by one of the opposing sides in an adversarial legal proceeding? Despite long-standing concerns from within the legal system, little is known about whether experts can provide opinions unbiased by the side that retained them. In this experime...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:

Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:	Psychological science Ročník 24; číslo 10; s. 1889 - 1897
Hlavní autoři:	Murrie, Daniel C., Boccaccini, Marcus T., Guarnera, Lucy A., Rufino, Katrina A.
Médium:	Journal Article
Jazyk:	angličtina
Vydáno:	Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.10.2013 Sage Publications SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Témata:	Allegiance Attitudes Bias Biological and medical sciences Court hearings & proceedings Expert Testimony - standards Expert witness testimony Experts Female Forensic psychiatry Forensic Psychiatry - standards Forensic psychologists Forensic psychology Forensic science Forensic sciences Forensic Sciences - standards Humans Legal system Legal systems Litigation Male Measures Medical sciences Offenders Prosecutions Psychiatrists Psychologists Psychology - standards Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychopathology. Psychiatry Risk Risk Assessment Risk theory Sex Offenses - psychology Trials forensic science risk assessment adversarial allegiance forensic psychology bias forensic assessment Human Expert Risk factor Forensic psychology Objectivity subjectivity Experimental study Judgment
ISSN:	0956-7976, 1467-9280, 1467-9280
On-line přístup:	Získat plný text
Tagy:	Přidat tag Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!

Popis
Shrnutí:	How objective are forensic experts when they are retained by one of the opposing sides in an adversarial legal proceeding? Despite long-standing concerns from within the legal system, little is known about whether experts can provide opinions unbiased by the side that retained them. In this experiment, we paid 108 forensic psychologists and psychiatrists to review the same offender case files, but deceived some to believe that they were consulting for the defense and some to believe that they were consulting for the prosecution. Participants scored each offender on two commonly used, well-researched risk-assessment instruments. Those who believed they were working for the prosecution tended to assign higher risk scores to offenders, whereas those who believed they were working for the defense tended to assign lower risk scores to the same offenders; the effect sizes (d) ranged up to 0.85. The results provide strong evidence of an allegiance effect among some forensic experts in adversarial legal proceedings.
Bibliografie:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-2 ObjectType-Feature-1
ISSN:	0956-7976 1467-9280 1467-9280
DOI:	10.1177/0956797613481812