THE NEED FOR A RESEARCH CULTURE IN THE FORENSIC SCIENCES

• Published in: UCLA law review Vol. 58; no. 3; p. 725
• Main Authors: Mnookin, Jennifer L, Cole, Simon A, Dror, Itiel E, Fisher, Barry A J, Houck, Max M, Inman, Keith, Kaye, David H, Koehler, Jonathan J, Langenburg, Glenn, Risinger, D Michael, Rudin, Norah, Siegel, Jay, Stoney, David A
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law 01.02.2011
• Subjects: Evidence; Forensic sciences; United States > US
• ISSN: 0041-5650; 1943-1724

The methods, techniques, and reliability of the forensic sciences in general, and the pattern identification disciplines in particular, have faced significant scrutiny in recent years. Critics have attacked the scientific basis for the assumptions and claims made by forensic scientists both in and out of the courtroom. Defenders have emphasized courts' longstanding acceptance of forensic science evidence, the relative dearth of known errors, and practitioners' skill and experience. This article reflects an effort made by a diverse group of participants in these debates, including law professors, academics from several disciplines, and practicing forensic scientists, to find and explore common ground. The forensic science disciplines need to substantially increase their commitment to evidence from empirical research as the basis for their conclusions. Sound research, rather than experience, training, and longstanding use, must become the central method by which assertions are justified. This article describes the underdeveloped research culture in the non-DNA forensic sciences, offers suggestions for how it might be improved, and explains why it matters.