A hierarchy of expert performance.
Abstract
Expert performance can be quantified by examining reliability and biasability between and within experts, and teasing apart their observations from their conclusions. I utilize these parameters to develop a Hierarchy of Expert Performance (HEP) that includes eight distinct levels. Using this hierarchy I evaluate and quantify the performance of forensic experts, a highly specialized domain that plays a critical role in the criminal justice system. Evaluating expert performance within HEP enables the identification of weaknesses in expert performance, and enables the comparison of experts across domains. HEP also provides theoretical and applied insights into expertise.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Procedures can be instituted through policy to improve the flow of information to officers and to selectively blind them to irrelevant and potentially biasing information.
“However, procedures can be instituted through policy to improve the flow of information to officers and selectively blind them to irrelevant and potentially biasing information (Dror 2016).”
From Wrongful Convictions (2020) · cites this paper as Dror 2016
Cites
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward
Council, N. R. (2009) · CrimRxiv · doi:10.21428/cb6ab371.b2d683d2 · Cited by 1,461 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Curley, L. J., Munro, J., & Dror, I. E. (2022) · Medicine, Science and the Law · doi:10.1177/00258024221080655 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Self-citationGarrett, B. L. (2020) · Annual Review of Criminology · doi:10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024739 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Huang, C.-Y., & Bull, R. (2021) · Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · doi:10.1080/13218719.2020.1770634 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dror, I. E.
- Corresponding author
- Dror, Itiel E.
- ORCID
- Dror, Itiel E.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
- Published
- 2016-06
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 121-127
- ISSN
- 2211-3681 (ISSN-L)
- 2211-369X
- OpenAlex
- W2316386820
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 11.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Keywords
- expert performance, reliability statistics, forensic experts, expert evaluation, expertise, criminal justice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
