References
- H Martin, Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: how noisy information processing can bias human decision making, Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), Mar 2012, 211–237.
- M Mahoney, Publication prejudices: an experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1 (2), June 1977, 161–175.
- MJ Saks, DM Risinger, R Rosenthal, and WC Thompson, Context effects in forensic science: a review and application of the science of science to crime laboratory practice in the United States, Sci. Justice, 2003, Apr-Jun;43(2): 77–90.
- JA Lewis,
Forensic Document Examination Fundamentals and Current Trends , Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 2014. - S Srihari, S Cha, H Arora, and S Lee, Individuality of handwriting, J. For. Sci., 2002, 47 (4), 856–872.
- M Kam, J Wetstein, and R Conn, Proficiency of professional document examiners in writer identification, J. For. Sci. 1994, 39 (1) 5–14.
- M Durina, Caligiuri, M., The determination of authorship from a homogenous group of writers, J. Am. Soc. Questioned Document Examiners, 2009, 12 (2), 1–14.
- D Parrett, G Szabo, Lineup: the reliability of examinations involving multiple writers, J. Am. Soc. Questioned Document Examiners, 2003, 6(2), 82–84.
- G Langenburg, F Bochet, and S Ford, A report on statistics from latent print casework, For. Sci. Policy & Management, 2014, 5 (1–2), 15–37.
- JL Pind, Figure and ground at 100, The Psychologist, Jan. 2012, 25 (1) 90–91.
- E Balcetis, and D Dunning, See what you want to see: motivational influences on visual perception. J. of Personality and Social Psychology 2006, 91, 612–625.
- LS Miller, Bias among forensic document examiners: a need for procedural changes, J. Police Sci. and Administration, 1984, 12 (4) 407–411.
- SWGDOC
http://www.swgdoc.org/ visited September 2, 2015. - R Stoel, IE Dror and LS Miller, Bias among forensic document examiners: still a need for procedural changes, Australian J. of For. Sciences, 2013, 46:1, 91–97, DOI: 10.1080/00450618.2013.797026.
- A Sulner, Handwriting: cognitive bias, Wiley Encyclopedia of Forensic Science, 2014, 1–15.
- B Found and J Ganas, The management of domain irrelevant context information in forensic handwriting examination casework, Science and Justice, 2013, 53, 154–158.
- ML Merlino, TM Freeman, V Springer, V Dahir, D Hammond, AD Dyer, BJ Found, L Smith, & I Duvall,
Final report for the National Institute of Justice grant titled “Validity, reliabilty, accuracy, and bias in forensic signature identification.” 2014, Submitted to Gerry LaPorte, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC. - Acknowledgement of Expert’s Duty form
https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/english/OtherForms/otherforms.html - SM Kassin, IE Dror, and J Kukucka, The forensic confirmation bias: problems, perspectives, and proposed solutions, J. of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2013, (2) 42–52.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.69525/jasqde.230 | Journal eISSN: 1524-7287
Language: English
Page range: 33 - 36
Published on: Jun 1, 2016
Published by: American Society of Questioned Document Examiners
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
© 2016 Jane A. Lewis, published by American Society of Questioned Document Examiners
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.