Addressing Threats to Objectivity

At the Forensic Clinic, our faculty are leaders in researching and addressing the factors that threaten to undermine the objectivity of forensic evaluations throughout our field.

Understanding Cognitive Bias

Cognitive biases are universal, automatic mental processes that can lead to errors. Authorities increasingly emphasize that cognitive biases may undermine well-established forensic science procedures, such as fingerprint and DNA analysis. Because biases operate covertly, usually outside of conscious awareness, they cannot be eliminated by good intentions alone.

Groundbreaking Research on Adversarial Allegiance

Adversarial allegiance is a form of cognitive bias in which expert opinions drift—more than case details warrant—towards supporting the party who retained the expert. In studies of real cases and in a rigorous experiment funded by the National Science Foundation, ILPPP faculty were the first to document this phenomenon in forensic mental health evaluations.

Key Finding: We found that adversarial arrangements led many (though not all) experts to form opinions that drifted toward the side that retained them.

Our Innovative Referral Strategies

We have developed and piloted interventions to minimize adversarial allegiance and other threats to objectivity in forensic evaluations.

👁️

Blind Evaluations

Blinding is one of the most effective countermeasures to cognitive bias. Just as “double blind studies” are essential in medical research, we apply similar procedures by blinding the evaluator to the referral source.


Benefits:

  • Reduces likelihood of opinion drift toward retaining party
  • Enhances objectivity of forensic evaluations
  • Recent research suggests jurors consider blinded experts more credible

Available for: Competence to stand trial, risk assessments, sentencing evaluations, and other standard referral questions.

🤝

Joint Referrals

We routinely complete evaluations at the joint request of defense and prosecution, offering a collaborative approach that benefits all parties.


Advantages:

  • Both parties can ask questions and provide collateral data
  • Saves time, money, and resources
  • Eliminates need for separate “opposing” evaluations
  • Limits adversarial allegiance by removing single-party alignment

Commonly used for: Competence to stand trial evaluations and presentencing evaluations.