Author
Stephanie Hartley
Bio: Stephanie Hartley is an academic researcher from University of West Florida. The author has contributed to research in topics: Metric (unit) & Forensic anthropology. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 3 publications receiving 4 citations.
Papers
More filters
01 Jan 2021
TL;DR: In this paper, the AAFS vision, mission, and values statements are reviewed and revised, with the goal of "engaging with issues of diversity and equity in forensic science".
Abstract: •We call for revisions to the current AAFS vision, mission, and values statements.•Truly aspirational statements will provide guiding principles for forensic scientists.•Revisions should meaningfully engage with issues of diversity and equity.•Our goal of pursuing justice should also extend to our practitioner community.•We envision AAFS committees of diverse membership making positive changes to the statements.
7 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, a systematic review of the forensic anthropological literature was conducted, including papers published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, forensic anthropology, Forensic Anthropology, Forensic Science International, and the Journal of Forensic Sciences and Anthropology Section abstracts which matched keywords such as "forensic anthropology," "bias," "reliability," "cognition", "cognitive," or "error."
Abstract: Due to their medicolegal repercussions, forensic anthropology conclusions must be reliable, consistent, and minimally compromised by bias. Yet, a synthetic analysis of the reliability and biasability of the discipline's methods has not yet been conducted. To do so, this study utilized Dror's (2016) hierarchy of expert performance (HEP), an eight-level model aimed at examining intra- and inter-expert reliability and biasability (the potential for cognitive bias) within the literature of forensic science disciplines. A systematic review of the forensic anthropology literature was conducted (1972-present), including papers published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Forensic Anthropology, Forensic Science International, and the Journal of Forensic Sciences and Anthropology Section abstracts published in the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the AAFS which matched keywords such as "forensic anthropology," "bias," "reliability," "cognition," "cognitive," or "error." The resulting forensic anthropology HEP showcases areas that have ample research and areas where more research can be conducted. Specifically, statistically significant increases in reliability (p < 0.001) and biasability (p < 0.001) publications were found since 2009 (publication of the NAS report). Extensive research examined the reliability of forensic anthropological observations and conclusions (n = 744 publications). However, minimal research investigated the biasability of forensic anthropological observations and conclusions (n = 20 publications). Notably, while several studies demonstrated the biasing effect of extraneous information on anthropological morphological assessments, there was no research into these effects on anthropological metric assessments. The findings revealed by the forensic anthropology HEP can help to guide future research, ultimately informing the development and refinement of best-practice standards for the discipline.
6 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors conducted a pilot study in which 52 experienced osteologists measured a difficult-to-classify human femur, with or without additional contextual information, using a metric sectioning-point sex-estimation method.
Abstract: Subjective decisions make human cognitive processes more susceptible to bias and error. Specifically, research indicates that additional context biases forensic anthropologists' morphological analyses. To address whether metric analyses are also subject to bias, we conducted a pilot study in which 52 experienced osteologists measured a difficult-to-classify human femur, with or without additional contextual information. Using a metric sectioning-point sex-estimation method, participants provided a sex estimate for individual skeletal element(s) and, when given multiple elements, the combined skeletal assemblage. Control group participants (n = 24) measured only the femur. In addition to the femur, bias group participants (n = 28) either measured a female humerus and viewed a female-biasing photograph (n = 14) or measured a male humerus and viewed a male-biasing photograph (n = 14). We explored whether the experts in the different groups would differ in: (1) femoral measurements; (2) femoral sex-estimation conclusions; and (3) final sex-estimation conclusions for the skeletal assemblage. Although the femoral measurements and femoral sex estimates were comparable across groups, the overall sex estimates in the female-biased group were impacted by contextual information-differing from both the control and male-biased groups (p < 0.001). Our results demonstrate that cognitive bias can occur even in metric sex-estimation conclusions. Specifically, this occurred when the metric data and single-element sex estimates were synthesized into an overall estimate. Thus, our results suggest that metric methods are most vulnerable to bias when data are synthesized into an overall conclusion, highlighting the need for bias countermeasures and comprehensive statistical frameworks for synthesizing metric data to mitigate the effects of cognitive bias.
5 citations
Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2021
TL;DR: In this paper, the AAFS vision, mission, and values statements are reviewed and revised, with the goal of "engaging with issues of diversity and equity in forensic science".
Abstract: •We call for revisions to the current AAFS vision, mission, and values statements.•Truly aspirational statements will provide guiding principles for forensic scientists.•Revisions should meaningfully engage with issues of diversity and equity.•Our goal of pursuing justice should also extend to our practitioner community.•We envision AAFS committees of diverse membership making positive changes to the statements.
7 citations
TL;DR: Tallman et al. as mentioned in this paper discuss redefining ethical considerations in forensic anthropology and present a discussion on the need to redefine ethical considerations for forensic anthropologists in forensic science.
Abstract: American AnthropologistVolume 124, Issue 3 p. 597-612 VITAL TOPICS FORUM A conversation on redefining ethical considerations in forensic anthropology Donovan M. Adams, Donovan M. Adams orcid.org/0000-0003-4202-1849 University of Central FloridaSearch for more papers by this authorJustin Z. Goldstein, Justin Z. Goldstein orcid.org/0000-0003-2070-6345 Texas State University, San MarcosSearch for more papers by this authorMari Isa, Mari Isa orcid.org/0000-0001-8442-7623 Texas Tech UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorJaymelee Kim, Jaymelee Kim orcid.org/0000-0001-9171-9966 University of FindlaySearch for more papers by this authorMegan K. Moore, Megan K. Moore orcid.org/0000-0003-3814-5072 Eastern Michigan UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorMarin A. Pilloud, Marin A. Pilloud orcid.org/0000-0002-1704-3707 University of Nevada, RenoSearch for more papers by this authorSean D. Tallman, Corresponding Author Sean D. Tallman sean.tallman@gmail.com orcid.org/0000-0002-0940-279X Boston University Correspondence Sean D. Tallman, Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, 72 E. Concord St. L1004, Boston, MA 02118. Email: sean.tallman@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this authorAllysha P. Winburn, Allysha P. Winburn orcid.org/0000-0002-8498-5753 University of West FloridaSearch for more papers by this author Donovan M. Adams, Donovan M. Adams orcid.org/0000-0003-4202-1849 University of Central FloridaSearch for more papers by this authorJustin Z. Goldstein, Justin Z. Goldstein orcid.org/0000-0003-2070-6345 Texas State University, San MarcosSearch for more papers by this authorMari Isa, Mari Isa orcid.org/0000-0001-8442-7623 Texas Tech UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorJaymelee Kim, Jaymelee Kim orcid.org/0000-0001-9171-9966 University of FindlaySearch for more papers by this authorMegan K. Moore, Megan K. Moore orcid.org/0000-0003-3814-5072 Eastern Michigan UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorMarin A. Pilloud, Marin A. Pilloud orcid.org/0000-0002-1704-3707 University of Nevada, RenoSearch for more papers by this authorSean D. Tallman, Corresponding Author Sean D. Tallman sean.tallman@gmail.com orcid.org/0000-0002-0940-279X Boston University Correspondence Sean D. Tallman, Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, 72 E. Concord St. L1004, Boston, MA 02118. Email: sean.tallman@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this authorAllysha P. Winburn, Allysha P. Winburn orcid.org/0000-0002-8498-5753 University of West FloridaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 05 July 2022 https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13753 All authors contributed equally Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume124, Issue3September 2022Pages 597-612 RelatedInformation
5 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors conducted a pilot study in which 52 experienced osteologists measured a difficult-to-classify human femur, with or without additional contextual information, using a metric sectioning-point sex-estimation method.
Abstract: Subjective decisions make human cognitive processes more susceptible to bias and error. Specifically, research indicates that additional context biases forensic anthropologists' morphological analyses. To address whether metric analyses are also subject to bias, we conducted a pilot study in which 52 experienced osteologists measured a difficult-to-classify human femur, with or without additional contextual information. Using a metric sectioning-point sex-estimation method, participants provided a sex estimate for individual skeletal element(s) and, when given multiple elements, the combined skeletal assemblage. Control group participants (n = 24) measured only the femur. In addition to the femur, bias group participants (n = 28) either measured a female humerus and viewed a female-biasing photograph (n = 14) or measured a male humerus and viewed a male-biasing photograph (n = 14). We explored whether the experts in the different groups would differ in: (1) femoral measurements; (2) femoral sex-estimation conclusions; and (3) final sex-estimation conclusions for the skeletal assemblage. Although the femoral measurements and femoral sex estimates were comparable across groups, the overall sex estimates in the female-biased group were impacted by contextual information-differing from both the control and male-biased groups (p < 0.001). Our results demonstrate that cognitive bias can occur even in metric sex-estimation conclusions. Specifically, this occurred when the metric data and single-element sex estimates were synthesized into an overall estimate. Thus, our results suggest that metric methods are most vulnerable to bias when data are synthesized into an overall conclusion, highlighting the need for bias countermeasures and comprehensive statistical frameworks for synthesizing metric data to mitigate the effects of cognitive bias.
5 citations
TL;DR: Tallman et al. as mentioned in this paper discussed barriers to entry and success in forensic anthropology and proposed a framework for forensic anthropologists to apply forensic science to the field of forensic science.
Abstract: American AnthropologistVolume 124, Issue 3 p. 580-596 VITAL TOPICS FORUM Barriers to entry and success in forensic anthropology Sean D. Tallman, Corresponding Author Sean D. Tallman sean.tallman@gmail.com orcid.org/0000-0002-0940-279X Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 02118 Department of Anthropology, Boston University, Boston, MA, 02215 Correspondence Sean D. Tallman, Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, 72 E. Concord St. L1004, Boston, MA 02118. Email: sean.tallman@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this authorRebecca L. George, Rebecca L. George orcid.org/0000-0002-3901-1677 Department of Anthropology & Sociology, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC, 28723Search for more papers by this authorA. Ja'net Baide, A. Ja'net Baide Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112Search for more papers by this authorFatimah A. Bouderdaben, Fatimah A. Bouderdaben Department of Anthropology, Texas State University San Marcos, San Marcos, TX, 78666Search for more papers by this authorAlba E. Craig, Alba E. Craig Department of Human Biology, University of Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, 46227Search for more papers by this authorSydney S. Garcia, Sydney S. Garcia orcid.org/0000-0001-5264-5124 SNA International, supporting the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickman, HI, 96853Search for more papers by this authorMatthew C. Go, Matthew C. Go orcid.org/0000-0002-7246-2875 SNA International, supporting the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI, 96853Search for more papers by this authorJesse R. Goliath, Jesse R. Goliath orcid.org/0000-0002-8078-7450 Department of Anthropology and Middle Eastern Cultures, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, 39762Search for more papers by this authorElizabeth Miller, Elizabeth Miller Department of Anthropology, California State University, Los Angeles, CA, 90032Search for more papers by this authorMarin A. Pilloud, Marin A. Pilloud orcid.org/0000-0002-1704-3707 Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, 89557Search for more papers by this author Sean D. Tallman, Corresponding Author Sean D. Tallman sean.tallman@gmail.com orcid.org/0000-0002-0940-279X Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 02118 Department of Anthropology, Boston University, Boston, MA, 02215 Correspondence Sean D. Tallman, Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, 72 E. Concord St. L1004, Boston, MA 02118. Email: sean.tallman@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this authorRebecca L. George, Rebecca L. George orcid.org/0000-0002-3901-1677 Department of Anthropology & Sociology, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC, 28723Search for more papers by this authorA. Ja'net Baide, A. Ja'net Baide Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112Search for more papers by this authorFatimah A. Bouderdaben, Fatimah A. Bouderdaben Department of Anthropology, Texas State University San Marcos, San Marcos, TX, 78666Search for more papers by this authorAlba E. Craig, Alba E. Craig Department of Human Biology, University of Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, 46227Search for more papers by this authorSydney S. Garcia, Sydney S. Garcia orcid.org/0000-0001-5264-5124 SNA International, supporting the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickman, HI, 96853Search for more papers by this authorMatthew C. Go, Matthew C. Go orcid.org/0000-0002-7246-2875 SNA International, supporting the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI, 96853Search for more papers by this authorJesse R. Goliath, Jesse R. Goliath orcid.org/0000-0002-8078-7450 Department of Anthropology and Middle Eastern Cultures, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, 39762Search for more papers by this authorElizabeth Miller, Elizabeth Miller Department of Anthropology, California State University, Los Angeles, CA, 90032Search for more papers by this authorMarin A. Pilloud, Marin A. Pilloud orcid.org/0000-0002-1704-3707 Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, 89557Search for more papers by this author First published: 05 July 2022 https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13752Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume124, Issue3September 2022Pages 580-596 RelatedInformation
4 citations